ORIGINAL: hillbillyhunter1
Well there's the catch isn't it?? What once was legal--like pen-hunting in Iowa may no longer be, because of outcry from organizations of hunters like the IBA. The proposition of changing the law makes this argument valid, imo, and I think the proposition itself has much validity. It's one thing if you shoot the cow you bought in your barn, It's another if you fence in wild animals, that are owned by ALL of us, that can not escape, for your own bottom line. I agree that there is a broad spectrum of perception between individuals on what is right and wrong and, of course, you can't make everything right that is wrong. But you can pick and choose the fights in which you as an individual are willing to participate, and I think that this is a fight worth fighting .

ORIGINAL: Sylvan

So then you have no ethical or moral argument but have decided that what is right or wrong regarding this topic is simply what is the most popular position. If enough people hollar loud enough that they want something banned then that in your words makes the argument valid and the ban should go in to law. Will you remember that if peta finally convinces the majority that bow hunting is ethically wrong and should be banned? Or hunting from a tree stand or with a rifle or just hunting in general?

Fortunately we live in a country where law is based (or at least is supposed to be based) on principle rather than simply being the result of a popularity contest. IMO, in principle, the killing of animals that goes on in high fence hunting is on the same moral and ethical plane as other kinds of legal killing and I've previously given my reasoning. The fact that it is only a minority that does it is irrelevant. Again, in this country we protect the rights of the minority or at least we're supposed to.

IMO, in principle, the killing of animals that goes on in high fence hunting is on the same moral and ethical plane as other kinds of legal killing and I've previously given my reasoning. The fact that it is only a minority that does it is irrelevant.

Is there anything we can say or do to change your mind? Show you a bill of sale perhaps? Can we provide you with DNR regulations to the effect that all indigenous wildlife must be removed priorto installation of non-indigenous wildlife? What if the property is certified "indigenous free" by a representative of "we the people" at the landowners expense?Would that suffice? Would animals sold byour DNRs (it happens)carry the classification of"non-indigenous"?

What if you take the fence down??