Understanding The Term "High Fenced Hunting"

[375Fox]

I have hunted Axis deer and Scimitar Oryx in Texas on large ranches (15K acres or more) and really enjoyed it. These were self sustaining populations and you can’t hunt them in their native home range. The wire was there, but it didn’t hinder the animals movement or hinder their ability to escape. Boy were they good at escaping. Was it the same as hunting free range animals in their native habitat? No. I think theres a place for both.

It would be very expensive but you can hunt axis deer in Pakistan. I agree the experience in Texas is very good for axis deer though.

 

[gizmo]

Have you ever hunted a wild area or only private land in Namibia or South Africa? I don’t understand why you continue writing about something you have no knowledge about? These wild areas definitely do still exist and aren’t very very few in number as you describe. You keep trying to compare wild areas to a fenced area because fenced hunting is your business. There is a difference. This would be a better thread if you only wrote what you knew about fenced areas instead of what you don’t about wild areas. My comments on this thread started and continue that I’m opposed to non-sustainable practices that can occur behind a high fence.

First off you assume a hell of a lot. Yes I have indeed hunted wild areas and your foolish and wrong if you think neither country has any. You assume you know what my knowledge level is. The difference is I know the business on both sides of the pond as I have been doing it in some form or another from the business side for almost 20 years now. You also are only reading into what you want and are clearly missing the points I am making. Furthermore, I have no intentions of trying to change you mind in anything. I am stating an opposing view and I could really give a damn less if you agree with it or not. You are taking a position of superiority and self righteousness due to your beliefs that differ from mine. At the end of the day I don’t care what you believe or what you do.
In point of fact though you are dead ass wrong if you think that high Fence ranches play no role in conservation however, that was not the poi t I was trying to make.
I can explain all of it again for you but I can’t understand it for you. Look I don’t harbor any anger or make any judgements against your character, I would imagine that the two of us could easily sit down and drink a cold beer together and enjoy conversation but…. I would warn against positions of absolute and superiority, the whole seldom in doubt but often mistaken stance serves no purpose.
I am not saying that I am absolutely right and you are absolutely wrong nor am I saying the inverse of that. I am saying that there are two sides to every coin and the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I completely believe that there are certain practices I disagree with in use today. There are also practices that I agree with that you probably don’t. I support your right to your beliefs and opinions 100% but don’t think for one second that your beliefs are superior to anyone else’s. Furthermore we as a whole better stick together or our passions are doomed.
You don’t like something fine, don’t do it. Don’t tell me I’m wrong for doing what I want provided there is nothing illegal being done.
At the end of the day you have completely missed my points I was making about wild areas. That’s fine, I don’t have the time nor desire to go through it again. I get it. If you disagree with what I am saying great. You can always reread my posts to try and find clarification and I will do the same to yours but I am not arguing any further as I simply don’t have the time. My original post was directed specifically towards a comment made by the OP in his post. I let myself go down a few rabbit holes because if you haven’t noticed I’m pretty opinionated, as are you so it’s natural there will be some back and forth.
Tell ya what, if we ever have the chance to meet up I’ll buy you a cold beer and we can cuss and discuss this until the cows come home. Until then happy hunting buddy and best of luck!

 

[rookhawk]

Have you ever hunted a wild area or only private land in Namibia or South Africa? I don’t understand why you continue writing about something you have no knowledge about? These wild areas definitely do still exist and aren’t very very few in number as you describe. You keep trying to compare wild areas to a fenced area because fenced hunting is your business. There is a difference. This would be a better thread if you only wrote what you knew about fenced areas instead of what you don’t about wild areas. My comments on this thread started and continue that I’m opposed to non-sustainable practices that can occur behind a high fence.

I think you may be a bit harsh on @gizmo as we are talking about "purity". How pure is pure enough?

I'm a purist, also a frugalist (is that a word?), and have spent many months on "natural" safaris.

Let me set the stage with two anecdotes:

1.) I contracted to have access to a wilderness safari area that was a 10-mile radius. It's a pretty sizable area. Was it clean and pure? Well, no fences, for sure. No houses, for sure. No stocking, for sure. It was certainly a huge wild game migration corridor. That's 314 square miles. That's 1/4th the size of Rhode Island and it was wild and all for me. Deep in the bush on a stalk, I found the sole of a Nike tennis shoe. (modern) Of course, I also found dozens upon dozens of spent rifle cartridges, most of them kynoch or Martini-Henry from the 1880s - 1930s sitting on rocky ground exactly where they were ejected a century or more ago.

2.) In another wilderness area some 500 miles away from the former, 20 miles from camp, deep in the bush, 40 miles from the closest village, on the spoor of elephant, I found a US Food Aid corn-meal sack.

Bottom line, purity is a matter of degree rather than a matter of Yes/No. This applies to fences, wildlife fair chase, natural breeding, natural migrations, and human encroachment.

I assume based upon Zimbabwe as an example (I've been to all but one of the Zimbabwean provinces/districts) that the rest of Africa is similar. No matter where you are, man has been there and left a mark. That mark has altered the landscape in some manner.

All of that being said, I do feel that there is a great desire to extol the virtues of fenced operations for one biased reason. That is the type of operation most operators can provide. They cannot provide a no-fence or wild operation. Whether via poaching, customer accommodation demands, security, protection of property, or economics, fences are what must occur. Knowing that is what the operator has to sell, of course they are going to attempt to convince the customer that its just as good or better than the product the operator cannot provide.

 

[Tanks]

...

I assume based upon Zimbabwe as an example (I've been to all but one of the Zimbabwean provinces/districts) that the rest of Africa is similar. No matter where you are, man has been there and left a mark. That mark has altered the landscape in some manner.

All of that being said, I do feel that there is a great desire to extol the virtues of fenced operations for one biased reason. That is the type of operation most operators can provide. They cannot provide a no-fence or wild operation. Whether via poaching, customer accommodation demands, security, protection of property, or economics, fences are what must occur. Knowing that is what the operator has to sell, of course they are going to attempt to convince the customer that its just as good or better than the product the operator cannot provide.

I disagree that fences are what must occur. Majority of hunting out of RSA is in wild areas. The operators there in co-operation with the natives and national park service do support it including anti-poaching patrols etc..

Wild area also does not mean man have not been there. To me it just means the animals are more or less in their natural habitat without bales of hay, feed lots etc..

Sometimes animals adjust to human encroachment as well. I am an elephant hunter more than anything else and have seen plenty of crop raiders coming out at night to feast.

 

[375Fox]

I think you may be a bit harsh on @gizmo as we are talking about "purity". How pure is pure enough?

I'm a purist, also a frugalist (is that a word?), and have spent many months on "natural" safaris.

Let me set the stage with two anecdotes:

1.) I contracted to have access to a wilderness safari area that was a 10-mile radius. It's a pretty sizable area. Was it clean and pure? Well, no fences, for sure. No houses, for sure. No stocking, for sure. It was certainly a huge wild game migration corridor. That's 314 square miles. That's 1/4th the size of Rhode Island and it was wild and all for me. Deep in the bush on a stalk, I found the sole of a Nike tennis shoe. (modern) Of course, I also found dozens upon dozens of spent rifle cartridges, most of them kynoch or Martini-Henry from the 1880s - 1930s sitting on rocky ground exactly where they were ejected a century or more ago.

2.) In another wilderness area some 500 miles away from the former, 20 miles from camp, deep in the bush, 40 miles from the closest village, on the spoor of elephant, I found a US Food Aid corn-meal sack.

Bottom line, purity is a matter of degree rather than a matter of Yes/No. This applies to fences, wildlife fair chase, natural breeding, natural migrations, and human encroachment.

I assume based upon Zimbabwe as an example (I've been to all but one of the Zimbabwean provinces/districts) that the rest of Africa is similar. No matter where you are, man has been there and left a mark. That mark has altered the landscape in some manner.

All of that being said, I do feel that there is a great desire to extol the virtues of fenced operations for one biased reason. That is the type of operation most operators can provide. They cannot provide a no-fence or wild operation. Whether via poaching, customer accommodation demands, security, protection of property, or economics, fences are what must occur. Knowing that is what the operator has to sell, of course they are going to attempt to convince the customer that its just as good or better than the product the operator cannot provide.

Maybe, but he’s drawn a lot of conclusions which I didn’t write and wrote multiple incorrect statements about wilderness areas attempting to make them more comparable to highly managed fenced areas. The was the last statement that caused me to write my last post “and nowhere has not been manipulated to the benefit of the hunter and demise of the animal.” Have wild areas changed because of presence of people and population growth definitely, but his statement just shows no experience hunting a wild area. Kaokoland in NW Namibia is as wild as it was 100 years ago. We hunted natural springs and had to cover vast areas to find game, there was no manipulations to benefit the hunter. The presence of lions changed the location of game every couple days. My most recent hunt in Zimbabwe, there was one permanent bore hole we hunted but there were 5 natural pans as well. His comparison that a sable in a fenced area and wild area are the same drew my attention too. I took a sable on my first trip to South Africa that was clearly ranched and released. The sable I took last month survived predators, poachers, and regularly crossed between Zimbabwe and Mozambique, so I cannot see a comparison. Fenced hunting is an emotional issue to him clearly. I will and have hunted high fence, low fence, and wild areas but see a clear difference between them. I am opposed to non-sustainable practices behind a high fence but he’s spun this into complete opposition to high fence areas by “elitists.” So yes, I may be being a bit harsh, but if we are going to present things as facts I think they should be factual.

 

[gizmo]

Maybe, but he’s drawn a lot of conclusions which I didn’t write and wrote multiple incorrect statements about wilderness areas attempting to make them more comparable to highly managed fenced areas. The was the last statement that caused me to write my last post “and nowhere has not been manipulated to the benefit of the hunter and demise of the animal.” Have wild areas changed because of presence of people and population growth definitely, but his statement just shows no experience hunting a wild area. Kaokoland in NW Namibia is as wild as it was 100 years ago. We hunted natural springs and had to cover vast areas to find game, there was no manipulations to benefit the hunter. The presence of lions changed the location of game every couple days. My most recent hunt in Zimbabwe, there was one permanent bore hole we hunted but there were 5 natural pans as well. His comparison that a sable in a fenced area and wild area are the same drew my attention too. I took a sable on my first trip to South Africa that was clearly ranched and released. The sable I took last month survived predators, poachers, and regularly crossed between Zimbabwe and Mozambique, so I cannot see a comparison. Fenced hunting is an emotional issue to him clearly. I will and have hunted high fence, low fence, and wild areas but see a clear difference between them. I am opposed to non-sustainable practices behind a high fence but he’s spun this into complete opposition to high fence areas by “elitists.” So yes, I may be being a bit harsh, but if we are going to present things as facts I think they should be factual.

If a single road has been put through an area that in itself is a manipulation that’s has been made by man that makes it possible to not only make game access available but also speeds up the manner in which game or game areas are reached. Rookhawk obviously understood what I meant. Furthermore, again, you have no idea what my experience is and make a lot of assumptions, vocally I may add, in an attempt to discredit my rebuttal and you still have responded with nothing other than a “I’m more experienced than you and know more than you” tone.
You do you buddy, I don’t care. If you want to believe that chasing elephant wearing a loin cloth and a sling shot or shooting them from 150 yards from a high seat on a bakkie is the only true and ethical way to hunt, whatever. I may or may not agree with your belief but as long as you aren’t breaking the law I’m not going to force my opinion on you nor am I going to try and convince the world that my beliefs are the only valid ones.

 

[375Fox]

Furthermore, again, you have no idea what my experience is and make a lot of assumptions, vocally I may add, in an attempt to discredit my rebuttal and you still have responded with nothing other than a “I’m more experienced than you and know more than you” tone.
You do you buddy, I don’t care. If you want to believe that chasing elephant wearing a loin cloth and a sling shot or shooting them from 150 yards from a high seat on a bakkie is the only true and ethical way to hunt, whatever. I may or may not agree with your belief but as long as you aren’t breaking the law I’m not going to force my opinion on you nor am I going to try and convince the world that my beliefs are the only valid ones.

I will ask you directly again. Have you hunted areas in Africa that are not private land in Namibia or South Africa? You have tried hard to discredit my posts as well by calling me naive, self righteous, elitist, and more. I do however have hunting experience in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and Zambia in high fence, low fence, and wild areas as well as on other 3 other continents. I don’t doubt your highly experienced with high fences and management inside a high fence, but my assumptions come from the inaccuracies of your posts about wild areas. You are trying hard to say fenced areas and wild areas are the same, but it’s not coming from your experience. It is defending an important business practice to you. If you keep throwing jabs at me in your posts, I will keep replying. You and I have different experience and consider different things ethical, leave it at that.

 

[WilhelmM]

Since we keep referring to Tanzania in our posts I think it's good we actually have a proper discussion about it. I honestly think Tanzania gets an undeserved bad reputation both here on AH and among African hunters in general. Seeing as most complaints about the country is about the price I think it's good to discuss why the country is so pricey in the first place. I will admit that I've criticized Tanzania for being almost needlessly expensive and I'll probably never afford my own safari there.

Some of the most well-managed, pristine areas in Tanzania didn't get there without expense. It's extremely expensive and time-consuming to manage such vast areas when it comes to anti-poaching and mitigating human-wildlife conflict, especially in areas with large predators. That, and the Tanzanian government is very unforgiving when it comes to lackluster results with hunting operators, hence why so many have been given the boot. Those who have been able to impress the government, however, have been given an enormous amount of room and resources to continue managing their areas and the results are inspiring.

The Maswa North concession in particular, under the management of 'Bushman Hunting Safaris', has transformed an area once rife with poaching into a thing of beauty. Big elephant bulls in the dozens are spotted daily (which says something for East Africa), huge black-maned lions along with gargantuan leopards are often spotted in broad daylight and the buffalo and plains game species have swelled exponentially. If anyone wants to see what I'm talking about, please check out Mike Fell's Instagram account 'Horn of the Hunter.' Please note this account is private and it can take a day or two for him to accept a follow invite, but his posts are well worth it IMO.

The leopard he's taken with hunters is probably what impressed me the most. They look more like jaguars than leopards.

 

[gizmo]

I will ask you directly again. Have you hunted areas in Africa that are not private land in Namibia or South Africa? You have tried hard to discredit my posts as well by calling me naive, self righteous, elitist, and more. I do however have hunting experience in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and Zambia in high fence, low fence, and wild areas as well as on other 3 other continents. I don’t doubt your highly experienced with high fences and management inside a high fence, but my assumptions come from the inaccuracies of your posts about wild areas. You are trying hard to say fenced areas and wild areas are the same, but it’s not coming from your experience. It is defending an important business practice to you. If you keep throwing jabs at me in your posts, I will keep replying. You and I have different experience and consider different things ethical, leave it at that.

So to answer you directly then I also have hunted and fished across 4 continents. I hunted the largest area I have ever hunted actually in Europe. It encompassed something like a million acres in the Carpathian Mountains, absolutely no fences whatsoever. I have also hunted on ranches in Namibia as well South Africa that incorporated 100’s of thousands of acres of free range wild area. Wild members of the big 5 were located on both and in some Instances electricity was via generator only as there was no electric ran anywhere near there, so I don’t know how much wilder you can get? If your asking if I’ve hunted a government concession in Zimbabwe, than no I have not, but since when has the defining factor of wildness that it has to be owned by the government? I guess the presence of animals such as wild leopards and cheetah isn’t enough? How about elephant or rhino? I mean I have pictures to submit for your approval of the areas across the world I have been. How about 1000’s of miles back into the Amazon Rain Forrest from any human population? I’ve done that twice. If you take a float plane ride about 3 hours up the Amazon River from Manaus I guarantee you will be in some of the wildest area left on earth. As in so wild it’s possible to still find yourself somewhere that no other human may have ever been. Like ever.
So I am not trying to hide crap but it appears we are about to have a debate over the definition of what wild is. Well a actually we aren’t because I have better things to do than keep arguing with a random person over the internet.
I’ll end with this, have you hunted more times and countries in Africa than I have? I don’t know, probably, I don’t care and it doesn’t matter nor does it somehow automatically make you right.
Oh please give me the whole, “well if you haven’t hunted where I have then I’m better than you and know more”. It’s absolute BS and you know it. It’s chest thumping.
We can go back and forth all day over who has spent the most time where, how many actual days in the field each of us spend a year, how many actual hunts we have been on across the world, and in and on. It will never end nor will it make either one of our opinions superior to each other’s. And yes, I don’t give a good damn how many days you’ve spent traipsing around anywhere as a client under someone else’s wing, it doesn’t mean you all the sudden have some superior knowledge base over what is ethical or what is wild. I know exactly what you are trying to say and I simply don’t agree with it. Just because I haven’t hunted the Selous in Tanz. or some government concession in another country doesn’t mean that I am oblivious to the size and scope of those places. I also understand and been to places where an animal may have never seen a human in its life.
What I can tell you is that I have been so blessed to have hunted and fished across 4 continents and seen and done some amazing things. I’ve also been guiding hunts of various types for almost 20 years now and at the peak of my personal guiding across the different species I guided for in a season that I have spent up to 200 days a year in the field.
So now that we apparently have to compare Willy sizes thump your chest buddy. I’m glad you have gotten to be a client and hunt some of the amazing places you’ve hunted that I haven’t. Hell I’m proud for you and hope I get to hunt some of those areas one day but it still doesn’t mean your knowledge and or ethics are superior to mine in some way.

 

[gizmo]

I will ask you directly again. Have you hunted areas in Africa that are not private land in Namibia or South Africa? You have tried hard to discredit my posts as well by calling me naive, self righteous, elitist, and more. I do however have hunting experience in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and Zambia in high fence, low fence, and wild areas as well as on other 3 other continents. I don’t doubt your highly experienced with high fences and management inside a high fence, but my assumptions come from the inaccuracies of your posts about wild areas. You are trying hard to say fenced areas and wild areas are the same, but it’s not coming from your experience. It is defending an important business practice to you. If you keep throwing jabs at me in your posts, I will keep replying. You and I have different experience and consider different things ethical, leave it at that.

Also I would like to note that not once have I ever made the statement nor have I lead on that I believed fenced vs non fenced are the same. YOU are putting those words in my mouth and have completely missed the points of what I have been trying to say. I’ve apparently ruffled your feathers and you are getting blinded by that to the point, that the point that what you are arguing and I am arguing aren’t even related in a few areas. Again I can explain it all day long but you simply aren’t understanding the vast majority of what I am saying.
I will agree that you and I have different experiences and we have opposing views on hunting ethics. That’s fine I have no problem. Where my beef is coming in is that you have ignored everything I’ve tried to say just to rant about how vastly superior your experience as a client across a few countries has made you over anything I could ever possibly know from my experience and that as such you are ethically and Hunting educationally (not sure that’s a word but here we are) superior to me. You also make assumptions that you know what I have and havent done And what my knowledge base is.
Ive been involved in the hunting industry for quite a while now. In ALL Hunting the reality of what you see as a client and what the operator knows to be actuality is two different things. I don’t care where the hell you are. My point is that it doesn’t matter how many jillion’s of acres you are on, there are always things that are done to put the advantage on the side of the hunter by design. Yes vast wild places are awesome but they aren’t the end all of hunting. This thread and my sole argument has been over the ethics of and many misconceptions of ranch hunting. I nor no one else has said this type of hunting is equal to any other type of hunting. I have made the points that in ALL modern hunting no matter what we as hunters and damn sure as operators stack the deck in favor of the hunters. This is apparent in the use of modern weapons, vehicles, airplanes to get to places, hunting water holes natural and man made, salt licks natural or man made, high fence, low fence, no fence, modern tented or permanent camps in game area’s, the simple knowledge of an experienced professional taking you, and on and on all play contributing factors. I have made it clear that the my “ethics are superior to your ethics” crowd I take issue to, I have gone out of my way to say multiple times that “no, Texas is not Africa”. This went down a rabbit hole because you have taken A stance of superiority due to your knowledge of hunting as a client and I’ve called bullshit on it. You have stated that I am intentionally stating falsehoods to somehow protect my interests and mislead people. That is a bullshit statement and untrue. So don’t play the whole I’m taking jabs at you alone. You have discarded 90% of everything I’ve said and have been just trying to discredit me as opposed to taking the time and try to understand the points I was making.
My final review of points to the entire argument is this,
It is not right for one person to look down upon another because that person disagrees with the manner in which the other person hunts when that person is doing nothing legally wrong. Nor is it right for one to advocate for the removal of another’s right to do so as well as ones right to run said operation just because one disagrees with it. If you don’t like it great, don’t do it but know one has the right to force others to conform with their belief system just because one disagrees with someone else’s beliefs.
All hunting no matter where, is conducted in a manner of which that gives the hunter an unfair advantage to the game hunted. The first person to throw a rock at a bird made this so. Now with modern weaponry it is damn sure this way. Unless one is going to hunt on foot completely naked and with their bare hands there is an unfair advantage. The argument starts as to what is too much of an unfair advantage and where that line is. That is a PERSONAL choice and no one has the right to force their beliefs on another as long as that person is not doing anything illegal.
Lastly, I have advocated for the protection of all hunters rights against those who want to take it from us and added a call of unity to all hunters. I have stated that it is the lack of our ability to do so that is what is going to bring it all down. This conversation is a great example of that. I simply stated that many out there are willing to cut off their noses in spite of their face and that a serious problem in the misled belief that certain peoples belief of self superiority as a result of their beliefs creates an elitist attitude that not only prevents our unity but also serves nothing but to divide us as a group and make us easier to conquer.
In the midst of that a shit slinging contest erupted and here we are.
Above is exactly what points I have been trying to make so don’t put words in my mouth.

 

[375Fox]

Also I would like to note that not once have I ever made the statement nor have I lead on that I believed fenced vs non fenced are the same. YOU are putting those words in my mouth and have completely missed the points of what I have been trying to say. I’ve apparently ruffled your feathers and you are getting blinded by that to the point, that the point that what you are arguing and I am arguing aren’t even related in a few areas. Again I can explain it all day long but you simply aren’t understanding the vast majority of what I am saying.
I will agree that you and I have different experiences and we have opposing views on hunting ethics. That’s fine I have no problem. Where my beef is coming in is that you have ignored everything I’ve tried to say just to rant about how vastly superior your experience as a client across a few countries has made you over anything I could ever possibly know from my experience and that as such you are ethically and Hunting educationally (not sure that’s a word but here we are) superior to me. You also make assumptions that you know what I have and havent done And what my knowledge base is.
Ive been involved in the hunting industry for quite a while now. In ALL Hunting the reality of what you see as a client and what the operator knows to be actuality is two different things. I don’t care where the hell you are. My point is that it doesn’t matter how many jillion’s of acres you are on, there are always things that are done to put the advantage on the side of the hunter by design. Yes vast wild places are awesome but they aren’t the end all of hunting. This thread and my sole argument has been over the ethics of and many misconceptions of ranch hunting. I nor no one else has said this type of hunting is equal to any other type of hunting. I have made the points that in ALL modern hunting no matter what we as hunters and damn sure as operators stack the deck in favor of the hunters. This is apparent in the use of modern weapons, vehicles, airplanes to get to places, hunting water holes natural and man made, salt licks natural or man made, high fence, low fence, no fence, modern tented or permanent camps in game area’s, the simple knowledge of an experienced professional taking you, and on and on all play contributing factors. I have made it clear that the my “ethics are superior to your ethics” crowd I take issue to, I have gone out of my way to say multiple times that “no, Texas is not Africa”. This went down a rabbit hole because you have taken A stance of superiority due to your knowledge of hunting as a client and I’ve called bullshit on it. You have stated that I am intentionally stating falsehoods to somehow protect my interests and mislead people. That is a bullshit statement and untrue. So don’t play the whole I’m taking jabs at you alone. You have discarded 90% of everything I’ve said and have been just trying to discredit me as opposed to taking the time and try to understand the points I was making.
My final review of points to the entire argument is this,
It is not right for one person to look down upon another because that person disagrees with the manner in which the other person hunts when that person is doing nothing legally wrong. Nor is it right for one to advocate for the removal of another’s right to do so as well as ones right to run said operation just because one disagrees with it. If you don’t like it great, don’t do it but know one has the right to force others to conform with their belief system just because one disagrees with someone else’s beliefs.
All hunting no matter where, is conducted in a manner of which that gives the hunter an unfair advantage to the game hunted. The first person to throw a rock at a bird made this so. Now with modern weaponry it is damn sure this way. Unless one is going to hunt on foot completely naked and with their bare hands there is an unfair advantage. The argument starts as to what is too much of an unfair advantage and where that line is. That is a PERSONAL choice and no one has the right to force their beliefs on another as long as that person is not doing anything illegal.
Lastly, I have advocated for the protection of all hunters rights against those who want to take it from us and added a call of unity to all hunters. I have stated that it is the lack of our ability to do so that is what is going to bring it all down. This conversation is a great example of that. I simply stated that many out there are willing to cut off their noses in spite of their face and that a serious problem in the misled belief that certain peoples belief of self superiority as a result of their beliefs creates an elitist attitude that not only prevents our unity but also serves nothing but to divide us as a group and make us easier to conquer.
In the midst of that a shit slinging contest erupted and here we are.
Above is exactly what points I have been trying to make so don’t put words in my mouth.

I’ve read all your posts quite clearly. My opinion is still the same I am opposed to put and take practices that can occur behind a high fence. You are trying hard to draw parallels between wild hunting and high fence practices in Africa with experience you admit you don’t have. You turned this argument into something it wasn’t because this is an emotional issue to you.

 

[Tanks]

I don’t care if you’ve got 1000 wildebeest on a place, the vast majority of those animals are cows, calves, and non trophy bulls. So if you have 30 clients a season after about two seasons guess what? You’re going to have to bring in more trophy bulls because you can’t grow them fast enough to keep up with demand. You also can’t tell clients wanting wildebeest that you aren’t going to shoot any of them because you don’t have any good wildebeest then they see 1000 wildebeest running around. The average client has no clue about how herd management has to work so they are going to get pissed and go somewhere else next time.

What you have stated above is the definition of put and take which is what @375Fox , myself and a few others oppose. I think as @KMG Hunting Safaris said below it the best in that if your herd can't be sustainable by itself then don't overbook the hunters.

That's called management. If you have 10 shooter bulls, you don't shoot 10 this year. You possibly take off 6 so that there are 15 mature bulls the following year so that we can hopefully take 10 the following year and so on. Once the quota has been filled, that's it for the year. Then we hunt the neighbors' place.
Have not had a single hunter "be pissed off" because I told him we had to hunt next door since our quota was done for the year.
This, ensures that we can put quality in front of our hunters year after year.

You kinda went off the rails all over the place trying to justify the above comment you made.

Additionally, even if PHs try to make it easy for you it is still not guaranteed in wild areas. @375Fox and I hunted the same areas in Zimbabwe a few weeks apart. In the 5 days I had for PG I saw no shootable animals. He shot 2 Kudu, a bushbuck, a hyena in addition to his main animals (roan, buffalo, sable).

Based on your advertisement at your web site, you do "put and take", so I can see why you would be upset of people's criticism of it.

Animals such as bongo, markhor, sambar, ect. are done on a price request basis. We can bring them in upon request.

If you have an animal in mind that is not listed and we can get it. For more information, contact us.

If that is your business model, own it. Don't try to deflect bringing up dirt roads in wild areas etc. etc..

 

[gizmo]

I’ve read all your posts quite clearly. My opinion is still the same I am opposed to put and take practices that can occur behind a high fence. You are trying hard to draw parallels between wild hunting and high fence practices in Africa with experience you admit you don’t have. You turned this argument into something it wasn’t because this is an emotional issue to you.

Well I guess we’ve finally reached the point where this ridiculous argument will end. You are wrong as to what my stance is and completely blind to anything I have have said and you sir are the one that is letting emotions, in your case one of perceived superiority, sway your stance in this particular discussion. I still don’t get where you are coming from taking shots at my “experience” level. You nor your experience amount to a drop of piss in the ocean in comparison to many on this forum. Sure you’ve had experiences that I haven’t but I can say the same in the inverse. You are blindly taking your stance from a position where you feel that you “know better” than I. The fact is neither of us would even remotely fall into the category of some “great white hunter” though clearly you fancy yourself to be one. Give me a break and get over yourself.

 

[gizmo]

What you have stated above is the definition of put and take which is what @375Fox , myself and a few others oppose. I think as @KMG Hunting Safaris said below it the best in that if your herd can't be sustainable by itself then don't overbook the hunters.


You kinda went off the rails all over the place trying to justify the above comment you made.

Additionally, even if PHs try to make it easy for you it is still not guaranteed in wild areas. @375Fox and I hunted the same areas in Zimbabwe a few weeks apart. In the 5 days I had for PG I saw no shootable animals. He shot 2 Kudu, a bushbuck, a hyena in addition to his main animals (roan, buffalo, sable).

Based on your advertisement at your web site, you do "put and take", so I can see why you would be upset of people's criticism of it.



If that is your business model, own it. Don't try to deflect bringing up dirt roads in wild areas etc. etc..

I never said nor tried to hide anything about anything and I absolutely own my stance and what I do. To your point I’ve had clients be unsuccessful both on high fence and low fence hunts but Ive never said hunting at my ranch is the same as hunting in Zambia, Zim, or anywhere else.
mad far as the wildebeest comment is concerned I didn’t go off the rails. I responded that I have personal experience and knowledge of areas that are advertised as “free range” being supplemented with animals. That’s a fact.
The comments I made about man’s impact on any hunting are made to bring up the fact that this notion of fairytale hunting areas where man has had no impact is BS. I realize that it’s not even necessarily a great comparison but that was my intent to point out the ridiculousness of some of these talking points. People sometimes act as if one doesn’t hunt certain areas then they are oblivious to reality in other places and even if they do somehow there is some purity that puts man and beast on an even keel. It’s ridiculous, everything is done on every guided hunt to stack the deck in the odds of the client.
More than anything I’m pointing out the ridiculousness of people trying to force their beliefs on others to the detriment of the industry and hunters as a whole.

 

[gizmo]

Look I’m not trying to start a shit slinging match or create hard feeling towards anyone or thing. My #1 point more than anything is that just because one disagrees with something doesn’t give them the right to chastise someone else because they believe differently. This convo has been beat to absolute death for decades. This is the reason that hunters as a whole can’t muster up the fortitude to unite despite disagreements on details. I will not force my beliefs on others and will 100% support everyone’s right to hunt no matter how they choose to do it as long as they are doing things legally.
Example. Personally, I take serious ethical issue to hunting DG such as elephant and rhino with archery and hand guns. That being said in those areas where it is legal to do so I will fight to the bitter end to protect the rights of those who choose to do so. That’s 1 example of many that I find very unethical in regards to the welfare of the animal to be hunted but I will support people’s right to do it. You give these antis an inch and they will take ten miles. I will not give one inch of ground on protecting hunting rights or gun rights for that matter.

 

[WilhelmM]

Though I both agree and disagree with the points made by all the gentlemen above, I think @gizmo made a very good point right at the end about hunter unity. It's very easy to judge someone for a practice that they don't understand and it's especially prevalent today. Many hunters outside of Africa will have no problem with any bans in Africa but also don't expect anything to happen to them.

Of course, it's unlikely hunting will ever be banned despite dramatic changes in the industry, but the anti-hunters will use any underhanded argument they can to get their way when it comes to the banning of certain practices in hunting. They're that petty. I honestly think we as hunters have shown that there are a lot more of our kind than people make out. California recently tried to ban black bear hunting and the defiant response from hunters was completely unexpected. We can make a big difference by standing together rather than picking out certain undesirable practices.

 

[Tanks]

...I responded that I have personal experience and knowledge of areas that are advertised as “free range” being supplemented with animals. That’s a fact.
...

My viewpoint is that if it is on a game ranch it really is NOT a "wild area" per se. Just to be clear "wild area" and "free range" are not synonymous. "Free range" is basically marketing term used by game ranches trying to delineate themselves from "put and take" operations due to the negative connotations associated with them.

As far as the client is concerned no one looking at the trophy hanging on someone's wall can tell whether it was taken at a Texas game ranch over a weekend or on a 21 day Safari in the wilds of Botswana.

 

[gizmo]

My viewpoint is that if it is on a game ranch it really is NOT a "wild area" per se. Just to be clear "wild area" and "free range" are not synonymous. "Free range" is basically marketing term used by game ranches trying to delineate themselves from "put and take" operations due to the negative connotations associated with them.

As far as the client is concerned no one looking at the trophy hanging on someone's wall can tell whether it was taken at a Texas game ranch over a weekend or on a 21 day Safari in the wilds of Botswana.

I agree 100% with what you are saying and that’s the point I was trying to make. There was a rebuttal about only shooting x # of animals then going to the neighbors place. While I agree with that statement completely I was pointing out that, that is absolutely not what happens in the vast majority of RSA ranches that are set up that way. Animals are absolutely supplemented on the majority of those ranches. That’s all I was saying. I however disagree that free range hunts that have animals supplemented are some how inferior to other hunts. We can debate the points of that which is fine, I doubt we’ll agree on that either but big picture wise I’m saying we all need to unite.

 

[Tanks]

... I however disagree that free range hunts that have animals supplemented are some how inferior to other hunts. ...

Now, we are comparing game ranches to wild hunts of Zimbabwe, Botswana, Tanzania etc.. I'd submit that those are completely different experiences than game ranch experiences.

I have nothing against game ranches (well, except for DG hunts). They fill a niche and help people get some experience of Africa without breaking the bank. An introductory multiple species hunt in RSA is less expensive than a guided Elk hunt in Montana and that is a good thing. Not to mention the US game ranches can not compete with Africa with the level of service due to higher labor costs.

 

[gizmo]

Now, we are comparing game ranches to wild hunts of Zimbabwe, Botswana, Tanzania etc.. I'd submit that those are completely different experiences than game ranch experiences.

I have nothing against game ranches (well, except for DG hunts). They fill a niche and help people get some experience of Africa without breaking the bank. An introductory multiple species hunt in RSA is less expensive than a guided Elk hunt in Montana and that is a good thing. Not to mention the US game ranches can not compete with Africa with the level of service due to higher labor costs.

Now I agree with much of that. But, it’s interesting that you mention “except dangerous game”. Why in your opinion do DG animals not fall in as well provided the hunt is conducted ethically and what does PG animals have that excerpts them from this? Apples to apples is a kudu’s life less meaningful than a buffalo?
Hunting DG on ranches of sufficient size also fills a niche in allowing hunters the experience of hunting said animals yet in an affordable manner. It also takes much needed pressure off of certain species that struggle in the wild. I have hunted both lion and Cape buffalo in RSA. The ranches were enormous. Neither hunts were conducted on bait or at bait stations. Just to make a point, and understand I am not trying to make out like the great white hunter here, but my lion hunt was done by tracking and spot and stalk on the ground. I was 20 yards or so when I took my first shot. I was able to get the lion without assistance from my PH but I can assure you that it was damned dangerous and I almost ended up as cat crap. So my argument would be that my hunt was a much more ethical (meaning common sporting standards) than all wild area lion hunts that are conducted off of bait as is a extremely common practice. There is very minimal danger in shooting a lion from a blind over a bait animal. The animal also has no idea you are there and no fighting chance of escape. I consider my experience much more of a pure experience than any bait hunt conducted in any country on any wild area.
please don’t misunderstand, I’m not taking a stance if I’m better than anyone I’m just asking a question and sharing a different view point. It is a fact that, at least in my experience, hunting a lion on a large RSA game farm is a hellava dangerous adventure and the manner in which proper hunts are conducted are much more of a pure hunt than a baited wild area hunt simply in my opinion.
Now I will wholly agree that the practice of what I consider “canned hunts” is absolutely wrong. Throwing a lion in a small pen just to be shot I disagree with and furthermore is and has always been illegal. There are regulations on DG lion hunts and have always been. Crap, I had to go through a ton of paperwork and the rules associated with lion hunts is RSA and sign an agreement that the hunt would be conducted in a fair chase manner.