iamyourhuckleberry

Todd,

Dude, you are the one that said "forced", not me. I simply stated you are bound and determined to have others hunt only in the way you do via your belittlements and spectulative inferences. If you would like for me to point them out again,I will.

Spectulation...again, you haven't a clue.

I know exactly who I am, and I do not need to admit anything. I'm a person who isn't afraid to let others hunt the way they want; hunting is not a competition for me. I'm not worried about whether or not somebody else is "cheating", or if their buck is bigger than mine. I seriously doubt you could say the same.

I know for a fact I will never hunt like you, at least my motives won't be the same...and I doubt I'll lose any sleep over it. I pretty much accept people for who they are and for what they legally do.

Again, you used a poor choice of words. If you would have said, I and many, many others just don't consider it sporting, I would have agreed. By definition, it is still hunting.

You haven't pissed me off. I'm actually intrigued
by the notion and individual thought processes involving “hunting” as a competition. I'd love to sit down with you someday and gather information for a book. I'll split the royalities with you. And please, do not worry about my ego, you have enough on your competitive plate.

By definition, if you actively pursue a cow to kill it for food or sport, then it is hunting (if you desire to just kill it, it might be called a poor business decision.Then again, it might not). I certainly wouldn't call it sporting though. Nor would I care one way or another if you endeavored to do such a thing. It's your life...live it as you legally desire.

No

No

Speculation...

Seriously Todd?

Topgun,

Really? Connect the dots.

Would you like to try that sentence again? I'm unclear as to what you are trying to say.

I'll extrapolate the best I can:

I'm not too worried about my post count, but thank you for the kind words.

It does matter what anyone posts on this thread. When the post is thoroughly convincing and well thought out, I congratulate the poster with a "I respect your opinion". Please do re-visit the post I made to SJAdventures. By the way, Terasec, your post was awesome as well.

And let me tell you, that took a lot of nerve!

NO, no they are not per se. You are partially right! The scenarios I presented were, to me, situations involving "canned shooting", or at least "unsportman like conduct" as described. They are/were tactics I would never employ as a hunter (again, connect the dots). On the other side of the coin, I am not going lay waste to the hunters who uses these tactic. Who am I to question? I do not wear their shoes....and there are way too many variables to consider.

I can effectively teach any person off the street to proficiently shoot a rifle in a matter of hours. In the first scenario I presented, a proficient shooter would leave zero room for a deer to escape. Where's the hunting aspect? If it's not hunting, then it's merely shooting. If the animal has no possiblity to escape (proficient shooter), then it's canned shooting.

I truly hope you make the leap.

Actually Topgun, the original poster made no reference to "an escape proof pen". He mentioned a high fenced operation that he believed was a section in size (that's 640 acres, by the way). He also asked for our opinions on the matter, which I gladly gave. Some of us said live and let live, some of us asked for more information and others belittled based upon aesthetic differences. I asked individuals to draw the line-make definitions. I was given a single subjective response, 'I know it when I see it' and a whole heap of speculation. As far as as intent and focus, I haven't veered. I am still giving my opinion...on high fence hunters

Who died and left you in charge?

Personally, I think the same could be said for the "outside the fence" supposed "fair chase hunters". I think it would be to all our best interest if we keep the videos (all videos showing the demise of animals) out of the public's eye. I also think it would be wise to drop the competitiveness of hunting maintained by so many. But hey, that's just me...Mr. Intentionally Obtuse.

So is 30,000 where you draw the line? A little heads up, they still won't be able to escape...nor will they be able to come and go where they please. Just saying...

And just for you Todd,

Complete spectulation!

ipscshooter

I think Huck is trying to get additional definition of what some of you guys are discussing. 30,000 acres, some claim as "sure not canned hunting." Other guys seem to think that, regardless of size, it's a "pen." I think we can all agree that if the landowner ties a 200" buck to a tree and then opens it up to high bidders, that is different than 30,000 acres inside a high fence. The problem is, where do we draw lines, and should we draw lines, at points in between? What factors should be considered? Just acres? Terrain and available cover? Hunting style?

Here in Texas, the vast majority of deer hunting is done from box blinds stationed within a hundred yards or so of a feeder that operates on a solar powered battery and timer. That being the case, does it really change significantly if there is a high fence? Regardless, the "hunting" style is to sit and wait and hope that a "shooter buck" wanders into your field of view.

It seems that some here are speculating about what it's like behind a high fence. That's really all you can do if you have never done it. Speculate. So, you end up believing that it's a 100% guarantee. That the owners import genetics. That they hand feed the deer, and basically serve them up to the clients on a silver platter. That's not how it is in all cases, and I doubt that's the way it is in the vast majority of cases.

I've hunted both sides of the fence. As I said earlier, my first "deer hunt" was on a high fenced place in Central Texas that was part of a TPWD study prior to implementing antler restrictions in the contiguous 13 counties. I showed up on Friday afternoon, and we went for a drive around the ranch, roughly 500 acres of heavily wooded area, in the middle of what is known as the "Post Oak Savannah", with a few scattered food plots. We saw two deer, flags up, fleeing our Ford pickup truck. Next morning, we were in a blind, set up at the corner of a food plot (no timed feeders), and we waited. The deer eventually did what deer do. They left their bedding areas, came through the food plot, ate a little, and headed off toward a creek. The owner has been managing his place for the better part of 20 years, and has since taken a couple of 160-170 class deer off of it. No imported genetics. Age and food plots. And those deer act exactly like wild deer. They are not tame...

Since then, I've been hunting at a no-fence ranch in the Texas Hill Country. Essentially, the same scenario. Get in the blind early, sit and wait for deer to start wandering through the area. Hope that a big one comes through looking for food, or chasing a doe. Blinds and feeders is pretty much the only way to hunt on the 1500 acre ranch, with roughly 10-15 hunters every weekend... Too crowded for spot and stalk hunting. I suppose there are some who say that's not hunting either.

Nonetheless, it's hunting to me, and to most in Texas... And, I don't think that folks ought to be at each others' throats about it, suggesting that "my way of legal hunting is real hunting, and your way of legal hunting is really nothing more than going out and shooting a cow." To me, that reeks of being a pompous azz. What gives you the right to define hunting for anyone other than yourself?

To me, it's about getting out a 4 A.M., and seeing the stars, undiminished by the lights of the city. Listening to the birds as the sun breaks over the horizon. Watching the deer interact with each other. Does stomping, snorting, rearing on their hind legs and sparring each other. Young bucks, rapping their antlers together, practicing for fights over breeding rights. Getting your son into the woods to do something other than World of Warcraft. Shaking with anticipation after his shot at his first buck.

I suppose everyone is welcome to have their own opinion, but, if you haven't done it, it's nothing but speculation. You're relying on negative characterizations presented solely of the worst case scenario, presented by PETA, and/ or HSUS, the worst of the worst anti-hunting organizations. You're imagining what it's like, without any basis in reality. And, you are playing right into the anti's divide and conquer tactics... The pro-fence and anti-fence guys really ought to be allied, because to HSUS, it doesn't make ANY difference whether you're hunting 10 acres, 10,000 acres or a Million acres, with or without a fence. They want to stop it ALL. Anybody who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves...

Topgun 3006

Todd says he's just being intentionally obtuse!!! I like it and he is now back with a lot more BS addressed to both of us that I'm not going to touch, LOL!!! This is one of those guys that will get the last word in any way he can and then will figure he won the debate or whatever you want to call it when people get tired of responding!

iamyourhuckleberry

Now that's what I'm talking about. Nicely rationalized ipscshooter! Good on you lad!

For some reason I wouldn't expect anything less. Missed that jump, eh Top?

halfbakedi420

i saw on tv the other day, Smithsonian i think, a canned hunt investigation...
now i know we have em here in texas, but we also have fenced hunts that are over 250 thousand acres, and its a lil more fair chase as compared to this investigation...
the investigation concluded that they are basically people raised deer, that are tranquilized so they are slower to run..they had animals that didnt even flinch from gunfire 20 yards from them.. a guide would go grab the ram and drag it out in front of the investigators (im para-phrasing) so they could shoot it. i aint down with this at all....although i havnt ventured there, the 250,000 acres is still a hike and the animals can/do run from you in there..its 1/2 the size of rhode island per say, not 50 fenced acres...alot different in my opinion, but it is fenced, and its only 3 or 4 hundred sq acres, not really that much, like real open range hunting.
but to each his own...i aint judging anyone....ok maybe i am, but im keepin it to myself.

deerdust

"Hunting" Definition - the act of a person or animal that hunts.

I searched many dictionaries before posting this. Anything more than this definition is merely your personal conditioning, and opinion.

Throughout the world there are many different means of harvesting game. There are many reasons that people have chosen to hunt the way they do for the harvesting of their game. Does this make one wrong over another? No. If the hunter in Africa is legally sitting in a special seat outside the jeep as they speed along, trying to get a shot at game, does this make it wrong? No. If a person can legally put out feed, plots, or licks, and hunt over them, does this make it wrong? No. If I physically carry a handicapped person to a blind and place them in a chair, does this make it wrong for them to hunt? No. But if you think about it, they are a canned hunter. They do it because it is legal and it fits their situation. many people think that crossbow hunting shouldn't be allowed. In many states it is only legal for handicapped, and it gives them more time out in the woods doing what they love. I could go on for pages and pages, I am sure, Covering all the different means of hunting that one person over the next may like or dislike. To what avail? If it is legal, then it is an allowed means of hunting.

There are many things that may seem unethical to many of us that love to hunt. But the truth is, that if it is a legal means to hunt in that area, then it is considered hunting. Because your personal conditioning and opinion leads you to think that a particular way of hunting is unethical, does not make it any less of a way of hunting.

Todd1700

Well I was choosing between intentionally obtuse or completely oblivious. I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

Todd1700

But where is it written that I have to consider it hunting? The freedom to form your own opinion is really one of the only true freedoms you have. Think I'll hang on to mine.

If I or anybody else in this thread were advocating making this illegal then some of the counter points would be valid. But we aren't. So they are not.

And yank whatever Websters dictionary description of hunting out you want (it was probably written by a geeky bookworm that never hunted anyway). Furthermore there are numerous meanings to the word. I can hunt for a lost pen but I would hope we all understand that we are focusing on a specific use of the word here. I'd be willing to bet you, if asked, the vast majority of hunters in this country would not consider shooting a domesticated animal in a pen, hunting as the word applies to such endeavors.

To me the people who visit these places want a guaranteed outcome. And if you read the ads for them thats what most of them promise. And hell, I even understand the motivation of the people who run the places to try and make it a slam dunk easy kill. After all people who shell out thousands of dollars and go home empty handed often go home pissed and they typically don't come back. So it behooves the people who own these places to make sure horns go home in the back of every truck. But in real hunting there are no guaranteed outcomes. That's why they call it hunting. If the outcome were assured they would call it killing. Go down to the slaughter house and ask them what they are doing with the cows down there. See if anyone uses the word "hunting".

When you eliminate the posibility of failure, when you remove all the elements of chance, then how can you call it hunting with a straight face?

I once put a deer that had been hit by a car out of it's misery. It was busted all to hell and lying in the ditch unable to move but still alive. I took a pistol and shot it in the head. Was that a hunting trip? I guess by the rule espoused here that we can't say that "ANYTHING" involving a weapon and an animal isn't hunting I will have to henceforth refer to that event as a successful stalk hunt.

Lord have mercy.

ipscshooter

You are certainly welcome to have the opinion that you don't want to do it. But, under the Tenth Amendment, each State has the right to define "hunting" within its borders. If what I do is legal hunting within my State as defined by the state wildlife agency, then, you are required to consider it "hunting" and it is inappropriate for you to rant for pages about something you've never experienced and that you know about only via assumptions, speculation and biased information filtered by anti hunting groups.

To paraphrase your thought... Where is it written that you have the right to tell someone else that they are "not hunting"? You are telling them that they have no freedom to form their own opinion... "Obtuse" seems to be a two way street here...

Todd1700

The Bill of Rights I believe. About half way through amendment Number 1. Of course it's their right not to listen to what I'm saying if they so choose.