Author Topic: BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO  (Read 6654 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GBO MGMT

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 182
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #30 on: October 05, 2004, 01:21:18 PM »
What a crock of BS.

He claims ALL of his hunts are fair chase and yet here has admitted when he hunts with BVO he hunts inside a high fence. Wonder what his definition of fair chase is? Wonder if he has any of the elk or other critters killed inside the high fences listed in B&C or P&Y record books? If so, he sure had to lie to them as they don't consider fenced operations fair chase for their books.

Yup I'd agree it seems there is more to this than meets the eye. His denial makes me even more suspicious of it than before. Seems to me he speak with forked tongue as the Indians used to say of the white man.

Offline cam69conv

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #31 on: October 05, 2004, 03:49:11 PM »
Cam thinks Bill hit nail on head...Cam need say no more on subject..Cam say thankyou Bill for enlightend remarks...Cam go night night now for deer hunting is again tommorrow...NIGHT NIGHT
You want a divorce if I go hunting today??? Well sorry ta see ya go...Was nice knowin ya..Dont let tha door hit ya where tha good lord split ya :D

Offline Mohawk

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1958
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #32 on: October 05, 2004, 04:47:39 PM »
Say, Cam......... :gulp:  Slow down there, partner :)

Offline cam69conv

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #33 on: October 05, 2004, 05:33:07 PM »
Cam say NOto Mohawk...Cam likeums  :drink4: Night Night again :lol:
You want a divorce if I go hunting today??? Well sorry ta see ya go...Was nice knowin ya..Dont let tha door hit ya where tha good lord split ya :D

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
huh?
« Reply #34 on: October 06, 2004, 10:14:25 AM »
Get real!   Donahue is a  problem, not Keith Warren.

Look, there are lots of definitions of fair chase and people use the words lightly, without being technical.  B&C fair chase is different than P&Y fair chase, which is different than SCI fair chase, and that is different than TGR fair chase.    TGR has a definition that could apply to a high fence ranch.   The animals can hide and if found can escape, that's a pretty simple one.   Chuck Adams has high fence whitetail still in P&Y.   Its only since 2000 that they stopped taking those, but they kept those prior to that, when they judged it ranch by ranch.  Its in his biography, if you want to read about it.   Fair chase definitions have changed over time, they are different for different species, and in different regions and for different record book systems.   When a person uses the words, its most likely a personal definition that they are using, unless they specify the detail for the definition somehow.

As I understand it, Keith Warren got people, including Donahue, a $1000 discount for those 4 animals at that place, making the price $8900.   Keith has stated his hunting conditions were not like Donahue's.  He saved Donahue $1000, that's it.   Donahue investigated the offer, made the reservation, sent the deposit, hunted there over 1 year later, chose what to hunt, where to hunt, how to hunt, and what to shoot.   He can't hold Keith Warren responsible for all of those decisions, they were his decisions.   That's what Keith is saying, I think.  

Keith Warren has made hunting and fishing shows for years, hunted lots of different game all over the place.    He is a supporter of hunting and youth hunting, he is a positive force for hunting.   Donahue is not, he has complaints about his own choices, sides with the humane society, and that is about as anti-hunting an organization as exists in the US.

Offline markc

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1922
Well
« Reply #35 on: October 11, 2004, 04:58:16 AM »
I agree that Mr. Donahue made some poor choices and complained about them later.  I am however quite disappointed in Keith Warren, if in fact that response was from Keith Warren.    :?

I won't go so far as to compare him to another once famous outdoorsman making hunting videos (Noel Feather), but his admitting that he hunted those high fenced enclosures sure disappoints me a great deal.    Now to add that Chuck Adams has high fenced whitetail in the record books makes me scratch my head as well.  No matter what a person says, a game animal taken on a low fence or no fence operation is, to me atleast, the real trophey.  
markc
markc

Offline TimWieneke

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
    • http://pub53.ezboard.com/bprimalfires
Disappointing
« Reply #36 on: October 11, 2004, 09:46:16 AM »
I agree with Mark and GB,
This is very, very dissapointing and I have lost interest in Keith Warren.  Did anyone catch what Ketih Warren said in his response?

He said this:  "By law, non-residents that would like to hunt elk in Saskatchewan can not do so unless they hunt in one of these enclosures. The elk in Canada (Manitoban species) are the largest in the world in both antlers and body size. It is because of their sheer size that many non-residents travel to Canada to hunt them. Myself included."

So the reason for hunting these enclosures is antler and body size - not fair chase.  This is very disappointing.  If you're going to do this, you need to be flat out honest about it.  JJHack is honest and tells us about the fencing in Africa, but explains it.  This should have been explained upfront by Keith in his hunting shows.  I can't say definitively, but the way this was done makes it appear he chose sponsorship over hunting ethics.

As to Mr. Donahue:

1.  I should also say that I am personally disturbed by some of Mr. Donahue's choices on shot placement.  You shouldn't need 5 shots to the neck to figure out that a neck shot is not a good idea.

2.   I went to Mr. Donahue's home site.  It is a Christian Theology site and is dedicated to all forms of Christian scholarship.  Keith Warren has also expressed a belief in God.  Mr. Donahue, the Bible illustrates a procedure for dispute resolution between Believers.  The way you went about this does not follow that procedure.

Tim

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
info.
« Reply #37 on: October 11, 2004, 10:20:17 AM »
Keith also said it was a challenge and the conditions where he hunted were not what Donahue describes.   Keith said the animals could escape, that there was cover for them where he chose to hunt there.

I don't think it follows that the reason to hunt there does NOT include fair chase.   There are many different definitions for fair chase, they change over time over record book systems, over regions, and over species.  Often times, its a personal criterion, unless someone specifically names a fair chase definition, I realise the use of the term has many different interpretations.

The main idea is that the animals can hide and that the can escape if found by the hunter, that's about the bare miniumum to it, as I understand it.   What lettoff, what weapon, what electronic device, etc. are all details that have changed over time and are different for different record systems.

Offline TimWieneke

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
    • http://pub53.ezboard.com/bprimalfires
Fair Chase
« Reply #38 on: October 11, 2004, 01:49:02 PM »
Tom,
I hear what you're saying but if you are going to advertise yourself as a professional hunter who hunts solely "Fair Chase" and then hunts in a high-fence enclosure, you owe your hunting audience an explanation of why this particular enclosure is fair chase before they spend 9 grand to find out that it is an enclosure.  JJHack did that very thing explaining game preserves in Africa where the fences surround (if I remember correctly) hundreds of square miles and fair chase is presented quite plainly there.  It's the only ethical thing to do when you are the professional hunter getting money from a outfitter/sponsor and presenting it to your hunting audience.

I have nothing against enclosure hunting for exotic species that don't naturally occur in a given terrain or as required by law (matter of fact, I intend on doing a Texas slam and will have to hunt an enclosure for at least 1 species), but the whitetail deer hunting in Manitoba - in an enclosure.  We're talking Manitoba here, one of the legendary trophy wild deer areas like Sask. and Alberta.  It's like going on a barren ground caribou hunt in Alaska only to find you're going to be hunting caribou in an enclosure.  It's just downright deceitful.

Tim

Offline acearch72

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 172
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #39 on: October 11, 2004, 06:38:43 PM »
I have in the past hunted in fenced in areas in Texas for both exotics and whitetails.  None of these enclosues were less than 4500 acres, with others up to 70,000 acres.  I would venture to say that the deer in these enclosures had absolutely no idea that they were fenced in.  In fact, most of these hunts were signifigantly harder than public land hunts that I have been or, or on hunts on my own property.  

I feel that the landowner now have to consider the wildlife on their property as an income commodity, just like cattle ranching.  I dont' know many cattle ranchs that leave their cattle free roaming.  Nope, they close them up in fences.

I personally have absolutely no issue with hunting on a large tract of fenced in property.  However I would have an issue with putting 20 or 30 throphy animals in a 20 acre pen and just pick one out like a steak at Winn Dixie.  This is not hunting, it is shooting and it gives all legitimate hunters a bad name.

With respect to P&Y and B&C records taken in fenced in areas, I once hunted on a fenced in ranch of 28,000 acres.  The ranch was totally enclosed in a high fence except for a small area that was left open.  This technically reclassified the ranch as open and not fenced so throphies taken on this ranch were eligible for the record books.  Ethical or not, hunting a deer on 28,000 acres is not a cake walk.

I personally have more problems with direct feeding that takes place in some areas, expecially Texas.  I have been to some places that when the feed goes off it's no more than a dinner bell for the deer.  I refuse to hunt under a corn feeder, no matter what's coming in to it.  I don't consider this fair chase, however many of the outdoor shows depect the hunter staring out at a corn feeder 100 yds. away.  Ever wonder what all those bucks that Ted Nugent is sticking are eating out there on that dusty area under his stand with absolutely NO natural food source.  Dare we say that some on put corn down there for the deer to come and eat.  This is not hunting for me.  So I take much more issue with this practice that I do high fences.

And as I ramble on here, I looked at the pictures from the initial post, and it certainly didn't seem fair chase from the pictures.  However the guy taking the picture determines what he wants the picture to include.  If he had left the fences out, his arguement would have held no level of conviction for his complaint.

Bottom line is that he should have checked and seen that the only way that he (US) could have taken an elk is in a game pasture.  That's very easily determined and very clearly stated in the Canadian hunting regulations.  A little bit of research would have proved this to be the fact to the guy complaining here.  

I had considered to going to one of these places a couple of years ago based on a hunt I saw on Northwest Hunter on the ODC.  After I spoke to the ranch manager he fully explained how the hunt was run and what I could expect.  Basically they had a very large elk herd with an 1800 acre or so hunting pen that would have a certain number of mature bulls in that pen.  There would be no cows, only bulls, and they would be chosen from the ranch herd and then placed in the hunting pen.  The selection for the hunting pen was based on the B&C gross scoring that the hunters wanted to harvest.  For example in in the initial paperwork phase, I let themknow that I wanted a 370 class bull they would make sure to have several of this class in the pen.  If someone else wanted a 400+ class bull they would have several in the pen.  The prices actually weren't bad for bulls of this class, however the hunt seemed a little like "Well, I've got these 3 bulls tied out back for you to chose from."  I wasn't comfortable with this and never inquired again or investigaed any further.  But that was my choice based on my analysis of the hunting situation.  If I had opted not to check it out and signed up a hunt, I would have come away with meat.  I'm very ethical about hunting, but if I screwed up this much I'm not gonna throw $8k or so away to prove a point.

So what I am trying to say that fair chase is really a personal issue.  Some say it's OK to hunt inside a fence but freely bait and feed deer to draw them to a specific spot so that hunter can take a 100 yd shot.  Others say that it's fair chase to hunt a large fenced in ranch but without timed feeders, relying only on food sources and natural methods of hunting.  

Each individual has a personal opinionon this.  For example, I have about 1200 acres of crop/standing timber land.  We sublet the row crop (about 600 acres)  to sweet potato farmers.  When they harvest, every potato but the #1 quality goes back into the fields.  This is literally millions of sweet potatos for the deer to eat, and they love them.  Some would probably say this is baiting and not ethical.  I see it as an agricultural byproduct that is present, and it's just my good luck that the deer like to eat sweet potatos.  The game & fish have no problem with this, but if I put up a corn feeder they would have a problem with that.  

So all of that said, its really an issue that is based on each individual's situation.  I also think that Keith Warren's excuse somewhat skirts the issues.  However he should either come out an say "hunting in an enclosre" or "hunting over a feeder" or hunting on public access land.  However I would guess that if he simply hunted public access land on this own, we wouldn't be watching Keith Warren's TV Shows.

Anyway, my $.02 on this subject.

Offline kevin.303

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Gender: Male
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #40 on: October 11, 2004, 07:02:08 PM »
that raises a good point i never thought of. from the looks of it BVO's pens where no larger than 5 or so acres. but if you where hunting an area that was say 5 miles by 5 miles and wasn't a flat clear field, i can't see having a problem with that.  as for baiting, i don't think any one would consider the sweet potaters bait because they wheren't planted for the purpose of lureing deer. it's the same up here with sugar beets. they're so intent on feeding you can almost walk right up to them before they spook.
" oh we didn't sink the bismarck, and we didn't fight at all, we spent our time in Norfolk and we really had a ball. chasing after women while our ship was overhauled, living it up on grapefruit juice and sick bay alcohol"

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
neat post.
« Reply #41 on: October 12, 2004, 10:02:25 AM »
That long post was very nice and well thought out and I agreed with it until you got to Keith Warren at the end.   I heard about, but did not see his show last weekend.  It was a public access archery hunt for pronghorns in Wyoming.   They got several of them.   He does all kinds of hunts, including public access hunts.   He seldom does them on his own as he is surrounded with cameras on some of them.

I went on a group hunt out of his forum and met him.   He did everything on his own, basically, at that hunt.  He did the camera work, he interviewed other hunters at the ranch, he hunted on his own, just like everyone else.   He shot 3 hogs our of the 5 shot, I think, it was a south Texas hog hunt and he did it with a gun.  The day before at a different ranch, he shot a big mouflon.   The hog hunt is supposed to be a show next spring I think.   He goes with outfitters on a lot of hunts and fishing trips, but it takes lots of work still, to make a show.  

I heard they just did 40 hours of camera work for a 1/2 hour show.

I don't think he makes any excuses in his response.   He regrets that everyone can not be happy about everything and that he can't make it that way, but he still wanted to provide a response, because of all the negative speculation.   He said in his response, the only legal way to hunt an elk by a non-resident there in Sask. is in an inclosure.   He said the elk could hide and could escape.  He said it was not like what Donahue describes, where he chose to hunt.  As has been pointed out, going to hunt there, that would be one of the first things you find out, if you didn't already know it, you hunt elk in an enclosure, if you're a non Canadian resident.

I'm dissappointed people are so quick to jump on a celebrity, but I guess it comes with the exposure to some extent and is part of human nature for some reason.  

I'd like to see you sweet potatoe and beets guys try to walk around on some south Texas pastures.   They cut senderos, they put out feeders, because you need a machete to go through the cactus and brush.   I know a fellow who sat in his blind for 18 days last year to get a 150 class buck down there.   Its hunting, in my opinion.  

The TV shows, or the high dollar ranches, might not take that long, but its the same in hunts up north too.   I saw one show where the outfitter glassed mountain goats from camp down in the valley.  The next view, he and the hunter were calmly walking up the mountain to shoot the goat.   Next scene, the hunter shoots the goat.   Hunt over, piece of cake on TV or with a low pressure outfitter area, where the outfitter does most of the work.    Its hunting too though.

They don't put whether it was easy or hard in the record book.   People that want credit for hard hunts need to make up a point system that takes that into consideration.    I've heard of a guy shooting a B&C bear out of a fruit tree in someone's back yard.   I know, in the 70s, people could be flown into some animals in Alaska, step out and shoot them, then fly back.   Someone else could be paid to bring the animal back if they wanted to do it that way back then.   In the 80s is when they made the law in Alaska, you can't shoot the day you land.

Offline markc

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1922
Tom
« Reply #42 on: October 13, 2004, 07:34:10 AM »
Any time someone puts themselves in the limelight for any reason they know that they are going to be held to a higher standard than others.  Right or wrong, Keith Warren or the folks on Realtree Outdoors or Hunting University for that matter become celebrities.  They are in the end no different than movie stars or others like that.   I do think that folks in that business don't want to tick off those who sponsor their shows.  Also, as viewers, guys we need not to be niave in understanding that it is a business inthe end.  Tom, I am suprised that you are so defensive of Keith Warren after having met him.  he is a grown man and can defend himself right?

Happy hunting guys.
markc
markc

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
defence.
« Reply #43 on: October 13, 2004, 08:58:40 AM »
Mark,

I somewhat know how busy Keith Warren is.   They posted at his forum how he and his crew just spent 40 hours filming to get a 1/2 hour show.   I've heard him tell stories about watching a free ranging elk walk away, getting out to 400 yards plus, while he waits for the camera man to set up to get his shot on film.

He can defend himself for sure, but I don't think he will dip to the low levels and negative attitudes that other people have.   I'm just discussing his response and what I think of it, what I think it means.   If you don't want people to post their thoughts here, fine, I don't have to.

Tom

Offline markc

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1922
Tom,
« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2004, 03:10:24 AM »
by all means please continue to post your thought here.  I think this type of thread, if kept civil, is what makes forums like this work.  I was just suprised at how you came to Keith Warren's defense so quickly and with so much passion.  Thought maybe you were related to him or worked for him or something.  So, please continue to post here.

40 hours for a 1/2 hour show is alot of filming, but then again, how many of us would love to have that much time to spend hunting?  

I recall seeing Keith Warren on a moose hunt and he kept looking back and asking the camera man, "can you see the moose, do you have him"?  He ended up shooting the moose, but the only thing on film was Keith shooting.  The camera man kept saying, "I can't see him from here".  I thought it was kinda funny.
markc

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
the facts.
« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2004, 07:01:04 AM »
I'm trying to be more factual than passionate in my opinions here.   Keith Warren got the guy a $1000 discount.   The guy investigated the offer that he heard about from Keith's show, decided to go there, sent in a deposit, went there over 1 year later, decided where to hunt at the place, what to hunt, and how to hunt it.   He can't do the paperwork to get his meat out of the country.   He attacks Keith Warren for telling him about it.   Its a rediculous strategy for complaining.   Then, he joins forces with the Canadian humane society.   The US humane society is about as anti-hunting as it gets.

I don't work for Keith Warren and I'm not his relative.   I am a member of his forum and I have met him, on a group hunting and a group fishing trip that he and members from his forum went on.   I've also met and talked with him at the Trophy Game Records of the World annual meeting where he has done volunteer work for several years.   I've seen a few shows of his and even bought some of his videos.   He has a great personality, really promotes hunting and fishing, especially with youth, the future of hunting, as they say.

Where is Donahue, is he still active on any forum, anybody know?   He was supposed to inform people of what the Canadian authorities said in a meeting he had planned with them.    I would think, if he doesn't report that somewhere, it was not a productive meeting for his complaints about his decisions.   Anybody heard or read anything on that meeting?

Offline TimWieneke

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
    • http://pub53.ezboard.com/bprimalfires
Bill
« Reply #46 on: October 14, 2004, 02:20:57 PM »
"Where is Donahue, is he still active on any forum, anybody know?"

You can e-mail him.  I did and I voiced my disagreements personally to him (the same ones that I posted here) with his approach to certain things .  He was very cordial and intelligently offered his side without losing his temper.  He's just a regular, level-headed guy.

Tim

Offline TimWieneke

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
    • http://pub53.ezboard.com/bprimalfires
Outfitters
« Reply #47 on: October 14, 2004, 02:31:56 PM »
Can I make one more general point?

I keep hearing people talking about the hunter, who has hired an outfitter, being responsible for checking out all the laws and conditions of the area to see if the outfitter is truly putting together the kind of hunt he is advertising.  Huh?  Well... what the heck do you hire the outfitter for then?  It's like saying you can hire a CPA to do your taxes, but you better go back and refill out the tax forms yourself because it's not the CPA's responsibility to do them correctly.  Huh?

Tim

Offline cam69conv

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #48 on: October 14, 2004, 03:41:53 PM »
Well Guys Im am so glad I posted this topic here in Graybeards.. I am not Donahue but I do have faith in his story and I do believe every word of It..I had a friend do a little research and all that he has said is complete truth..It IS canned hunts and they DONT advertise it as such. With a little research and a little money you would be surprised what you can find out. To put some of the nay sayers to sleep about Keith Warren he DOES get a kickback from BVO in as such he get FREE hunts...Now you tell me,,Isnt that getting PAID?????? Concidering the cost of the hunts I would be HAPPY to get a 3 to 10 thousand dollar hunt for a weeks work,, wouldnt you??? Not a bad payday in my book..Now granted Keith has done alot of good things for the sport of hunting and I do commend him for that but to absolutely and blatently LIE about a fair chase hunt to me is just down right dispicable. Sorry if some of you people want to keep your eyes closed to the truth but it is ALL right there in Bill's site!!! Pictures dont lie!!! Now I can see if these fences covered a 1000 acre plot yes this would be fair chase as the animal would have all kinds of room to get the hell away from you but these animals are so fenced in and FED that they are HUMINISED (?spelling) Hell you can damn near walk up and friggin PET them..Does this seem fair to you???????? Bill was told SEVERAL times and ASSURED that it was FAIR CHASE...I see all these posts that say such as " he should of done his homework" and " he should have asked more questions"... Hell HE DID..He not only asked on the phone but thier own PUBLICATION stated fair chase...He was also told by Kieth Warren that it was...What the hell else can the man do??????? Say " Sorry I think you are lying and I need more proof than your word that its fair chase"??? Get real guys...All you little Kieth warren fans need to open your eyes..He is like most of these "professional" hunters on Tv,, Aint nothin but a joke. Just like Jackie Bushman..Hell he was a damn Tennis Coach till someone said "Hey your name would sound good on my hunting show".. I know a guide that Jackie was useing once and he sat there and told me of a little problem Jackie had with hitting a nice buck at 70 yards...He missed 7 times..Finnaly the "hit" shot that was shown on the show was My guide buddy shooting the damn deer at 150 yards...Sorry but most of the Tv personallities are just like that. They are actors gettin paid to do a job just like any other actor..Now I aint saying ALL of them are like that as I know several that are TRUE hunters and have met and hunted with a few in my days of shootin Pro 3d comps.. But some are just flat out actors gettin paid and paid well to placate us on a Tv show.. Bye the way..the way my friend found this out was to call them and act like he was interested in booking a hunt..He was going to Canada anyway to visit his sister and was just a couple of hours out of his way to drive by there and checked it out..He didnt see a fenceline that was more than 200 acres and THOSE were just a few...He walked up to one of the "trophy elk" fences and 6 of them walked up to the damn fence looking for food...Now you tell me...FAIR?????? Hell no...Believe what you want..It was proven to me..Now granted I do believe alot of the animal rites group stuff is compleat BS but I do believe that they do have some good points...This to me is the same as butchering cattle and should be classed as such..Like it or not thats how it is...Kieth Warren needs to take his medicine and own up to the damn truth..And all ya'll that want to side with him can continue to do so and hurt this wonderfull life we call hunting.
Lynn
You want a divorce if I go hunting today??? Well sorry ta see ya go...Was nice knowin ya..Dont let tha door hit ya where tha good lord split ya :D

Offline kevin.303

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Gender: Male
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #49 on: October 14, 2004, 04:22:46 PM »
i'm kinda tempted myself to take a weekend and drive up to swan river to see this first hand.

cam69conv; i'm curious about your handle, you finish each post with lynn, so your name is probablynot cam. thew closest i could figure was you have a 1969 convertible camaro. am i dead on or way off?
" oh we didn't sink the bismarck, and we didn't fight at all, we spent our time in Norfolk and we really had a ball. chasing after women while our ship was overhauled, living it up on grapefruit juice and sick bay alcohol"

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
question.
« Reply #50 on: October 14, 2004, 04:39:45 PM »
I think I should call BVO myself.   See what they sound like to me.  If you drive up there, ask the see the elk enclosures that you hunt, not just look at the pens where they are on display or where they breed and are not hunted.

Offline kevin.303

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Gender: Male
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #51 on: October 14, 2004, 05:10:19 PM »
we actually have member from swan river, but he last visited over a year ago. i sent him a PM, cause sometimes people opt to be notifed with there email, so he might get it.
" oh we didn't sink the bismarck, and we didn't fight at all, we spent our time in Norfolk and we really had a ball. chasing after women while our ship was overhauled, living it up on grapefruit juice and sick bay alcohol"

Offline cam69conv

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #52 on: October 14, 2004, 07:29:28 PM »
Yup Kev you nailed it...Thats my 2 babies...Ones a convertable and the other a hardtop
You want a divorce if I go hunting today??? Well sorry ta see ya go...Was nice knowin ya..Dont let tha door hit ya where tha good lord split ya :D

Offline markc

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1922
?????
« Reply #53 on: October 18, 2004, 03:18:00 AM »
Cam got me to thinking which is not what I want to do this early on a Monday morning.  

Tom, you mentioned in your last post pens, and Elk enclosures.  Just the fact that BVO has both on the same hunting ranch should indicate what they are doing is releasing pen raised elk into an enclosure for folks who spend big dollars to shoot.  So no matter how big the enclosures are, they could be 5000 acres, they are still releasing pen raised elk out into a larger high fenced enclosure to shoot.  That isn't hunting, it is shooting.   Pen raised = tame elk.  Their natural fear of humans and flight instinct is gone.  Some people may feel fine with that.  I for one am not.  Just having a guarantee of 100% or near 100% success rate doesn't make it worth the money.  

Like I said, some folks like it that way which is why places like BVO stay in business.
markc

Offline TimWieneke

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
    • http://pub53.ezboard.com/bprimalfires
pens
« Reply #54 on: October 18, 2004, 04:01:15 PM »
"So no matter how big the enclosures are, they could be 5000 acres, they are still releasing pen raised elk out into a larger high fenced enclosure to shoot. That isn't hunting, it is shooting. Pen raised = tame elk. Their natural fear of humans and flight instinct is gone."

You know Mark, I didn't even think of that.  I did a hog hunt a year ago where I just couldn't figure out why the "free-range, fair chase" hogs were acting like they were in a pen.  Never put two and two together till you said that.

Tim

Offline Tom

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
huh?
« Reply #55 on: October 19, 2004, 11:27:14 AM »
No matter how big, its bad and not hunting, is not good thinking.   Like, for example, we're all stuck here on this earth.   Some animals are stuck on islands, etc.  

People do high fence type hunting all over the world, Alaska, Africa, and in lots of states.   They did it in Mideavil times too, like 900 ad, I read in a book.  

That's not a problem.   In fact, its a managment tool, that's the way I think of it.

Offline TimWieneke

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
    • http://pub53.ezboard.com/bprimalfires
fences
« Reply #56 on: October 19, 2004, 03:47:14 PM »
"Some animals are stuck on islands, etc."

Natural boundaries.

"People do high fence type hunting all over the world, Alaska, Africa, and in lots of states."

Not the same thing Tom....

"They did it in Mideavil times too, like 900 ad, I read in a book."

I'm pretty sure what you're talking about is a practice called "holding hunts".  Look for an artist's depiction of one.  You will see just how ridiculously unethical the practice was.

"That's not a problem. In fact, its a managment tool, that's the way I think of it."

If I understand you to mean it as a game management tool, then if it were truly a management tool it would only be used solely for native game.  Now I don't have a problem with fenced exotic species but let's be honest - exotics cost money and the fence protects the investment.  In this case it's an investment tool.  Be that as it may, the "fair chase" is incumbent upon the game ranch operator.

Tim

P.S.  Is anyone here a game rancher?  What's your take on this?

Offline acearch72

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 172
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #57 on: October 19, 2004, 06:13:23 PM »
A high fence accompolishes several things:

1)  Keeps your game on your property.

2)  Keeps other game off of your property,

3)  Allows for proper game management to improve the resident herd,

and most important

4)  It keeps poachers off your property.

I think that it is a personal thing what anyone wants to do with respect to game fences.  If you don't believe that it's fair chase inside of a large enclosure, that's fine.  If you do, then that's fine also.

I will say that quite a few years ago when I was attending Mississippi State University, we had a very good Animal Science Department.  Part of department that was a whitetail deer research project.  This project studied many things about deer such as habits, nourishment, heridity and genes, etc.  There was a 40 acre high fenced pen where the deer were kept.  This pen was not open, but was enclosed timber land.  I don't remember how many deer that were in the pen, but I do remember that the pen was highly populated.  I also remember several things about their research.  

One thing of interest was that a 1st horn spike turned into a 170+ class 12 pointer at 6 yrs age.

Another thing was that when the rut kicked in that if you walked into the 40 acre pen and tried to find any mature buck, that it was virtually impossible to do so.

So if you can't find any mature buck on 40 acres when it is highly populated and you know exactly what is in there, then imo it is hard to say that hunting within a very large enclosure (1000+ acres) is not fair chase.

My company has 2 ranches, one about 4000 acres (1200 under fence) in La and one 30,000+ in south Texas all under fence.  If you get past the exotics in the 1200 acre pen over feeders, both of these, imo, are definately fair chase, or at least VERY HARD chase, at least for a quality mature buck when not hunting under feeders.

my $.02 worth.

Online Graybeard

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (69)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27099
  • Gender: Male
BAD OUTFITTER DONT GO
« Reply #58 on: October 19, 2004, 07:12:51 PM »
Quote
No matter how big, its bad and not hunting, is not good thinking.


That wasn't the quote Tom. You intentionally left out part of what Mark said assuming it is Mark you were attempting to quote. What he said was:

Quote
So no matter how big the enclosures are, they could be 5000 acres, they are still releasing pen raised elk out into a larger high fenced enclosure to shoot. That isn't hunting, it is shooting. Pen raised = tame elk.


Totally different concept.

But I do agree with you in what you are trying to get across. Just because the area is fenced does not in and of itself mean the chase isn't difficult or fair. It can be both or neither.

Certainly game inside a 50,000-60,000 acre or larger fenced area hardly is aware of the fence. So if you aren't hunting in a manner to pinch them against the fence but are well out in the area hunting it is just as fair chase in my mind as if the fence didn't exist. I fully agree that no matter where on earth we are there are finite limits to how far game can go.

I certainly have no problems hunting exotics inside fenced areas. I've done this on areas as small as 200 acres and as large as thousands of acres. It really mattered more the "wildness" of game and the weapon used than the size of enclosure.

In the 200 acre area I used an iron sighted handgun. There were some mouflon on the place I think I could have hunted all week and not shot with that handgun. With a scoped rifle I could have had them in ten minutes. Most of the game except those mouflon, one ibex and a couple of addax were so tame you could literrally walk up and slap them on the rump. That wasn't a hunt and I didn't shoot and insisted on going elsewhere.

Mark's point was that if you pen raise game and they become used to close proximity to humans and even equate humans with food then it is impossible to call it hunting and I agree. Some examples from my person experience.

1. I stayed at Thompson's Little Creek Lodge in '91 not too long after he himself had moved out I believe. There were some really ratty looking rams with muflon looking horns but nothing else about their appearance said muflon. They were so tame they did in fact eat corn from my hand. The tried to follow us out the gate as we left and I had a problem shooing them back in.

2. All the critters at the Smith Goat Ranch mentioned above, the 200 acre enclosure.

3. We went back to hunt with Thompson again in '93 in the fall and stayed at the Duderstad Ranch. It had three pastures of 200, 400 and I think 600 acres in size.  My wife was on her first hunt. We were after corsican rams. We were taken to the 400 acre pasture where some of the "coupon" rams from the 200 acre pasture had escaped to. Those rascals were as wild as I've ever seen a corsican ram. We just couldn't get her a new shooter and on her first hunt in range for a proper shot. I could have easily taken them. For her it really was too much hunt but for me wouldn't have been all that much of a hunt.

Later Thompson brought in two 18 wheeler loads of rams for restocking the 200 acre pasture and to take over to the Little Creek Lodge area where he had some SCI muzzle loader guys hunting. We took my wife in there on the second day and they were just laying around everywhere tame as could be. We drove past them until I saw some that seemed a bit less tame before letting her shoot her second ram.

It's all relative really. Black buck, relatively pure muflon and aoudad are usually pretty wild and given cover seem to make a fair hunt of it. Still if the ground is open and you have a scoped rifle they can't make it very sporting even if they are wild.

White tail in thick cover do darn well even in small areas unless they become tame from knowing humans are the only source of food. I was once in a 110 acre area that held white tail, fallow, axis and blackbuck. While out and about in the area I never saw a blackbuck. The fallow were about as wary as the white tail but the axis were the more wary of the three deer. But all really had way too much human contact in that area.


Bill aka the Graybeard
President, Graybeard Outdoor Enterprises
256-435-1125

I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life anyone who believes in Him will have everlasting life!

Offline markc

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1922
Ford vs Chevy
« Reply #59 on: October 20, 2004, 01:26:25 AM »
Guys this has been a good thread but has become the Ford vs Chevy debate.   Some will just never change opinions as to which truck is best, lasts longer etc..   I have hunted a high fenced place myself, 640 acres for exotic sheep.  This place had 7 major canyons on it with heavy cover.   Around the camp house were tame animals and a few folks had no problem shooting them, I did and preferred hiking down into the back canyon to look for the much more wild sheep.   I prefer to handgun hunt that ranch.

Then there were the high $ paying clients who complained about how hard it was to find a gold medal ram, so a smaller very steep and mountanious pasture was fenced in and the GM rams were placed in there.  Some hunters/shooters sit up by the water bucket and wait for the evening drink and then shoot.  Some prefer to hike/climb around that pasture and atleast make it a challange.

I was hunting with a handgun there and on one particular trip was told that if I would sit near the water bucket and shoot a ram that evening it would easily make the exotic record book.  Seemed a bit like shooting someones 4H show sheep to me, so I declined.  I ended up taking a #3 handgun Billie on that same hunt but not in the small enclosure.

To each his own, if it is legal, and your personal ethics allow it, then have at it, and good luck to you in the process.  God bless ya' and happy hunting.
markc
markc