Understanding The Term "High Fenced Hunting"

[Wishfulthinker580]

It’s bale

 

[Tanks]

...

As for my previous comment re: no free range areas packed with game... If I didn't say that they exist but are rare and getting rarer by the day, then that is what I should have said. The fact of the matter is that if even half of the hunters abandoned the high fence areas and only did those true free range areas then I'd say that those areas would be shot out in a few years and there are not enough days in a hunting season nor quality outfitters in those areas to meet the demand.
...

I doubt they'd be shot out as there are quotas. For example on my recent hunt when looking for leopard bait I was not allowed to shoot any female impalas as the quota for them had been exhausted. I will agree that if there were no game farms the demand on hunting would not be met.

Also, free range areas keep shrinking due to human encroachment as time passes. In the picture below the terrain was a forest as far as the eye could see, teeming with wild life as recent as 10 years ago. There is nothing there now.

My issue with fenced areas is same as @Red Leg

For me, the unacceptable are the small put and take operations and the truly artificial hunting situations (i.e. shooting a cape buffalo off a bail of hay at a waterhole, or a croc or hippo released into a ranch tank).

 

[gizmo]

Tanks you bring up a valid point. The true free range animals would be on quota. I mention this as it brings up a point I made earlier so I’m not directing the comment at you.
Yes they are on quota which would force 1 of 2 things to happen and possibly both over time. So demand could not keep up with supply given the amount of hunters which would drive the cost up to the point only the super wealthy could afford it. 2 as revenue shrinks quotas would be relaxed and game numbers would suffer. Additionally because the areas no longer paid for themselves habitat loss due to human encroachment would start further driving game numbers down.
Here is the fact folks. The hay day of hunting is now. Why? Because as a whole, game management across NA and Africa has been done extremely well. There is excess habitat and animals in those areas in which hunting is allowed and supported by the government’s and people’s of the areas. It’s obvious as game numbers are up and costs are reasonable in those areas. In many areas surrounding those areas wildlife has become a nuisance to the people around. Think of neighborhoods in the states where deer are a constant problem. Some of that is due to human encroachment but the facts are game numbers are higher now that they have ever been. Texas alone has a whitetail herd of over 1 million deer. That doesn’t count other species such as mule deer and pronghorn etc…. You pull the rug out from underneath places like Southern Africa, Texas, Florida, and the like and you can say good by to all of the rare species and bulk of the wildlife in general. There are more scimitar oryx in Texas than everywhere on else on earth combined including Africa. Same for Blackbuck, Pierre David Deer, Dybowski Sika, Arabian Oryx, Axis, barasinga, and a 100 others. I’d bet there are more Sable in RSA than any other two African countries combined.
Sure there are bad apples in every barrel but the fact is clients, the market, and controlling agencies weed them out. As with anything, there will always be another to jump up and take the place.
also the animals in feed or introduced thing. As a wildlife manager you have to ensure those animals you have can physically survive. That often means supplemental feed as the sticking rate of a particular property cannot always allow for a herd size of overall animals much less one species to be economically viable. Fine if one doesn’t like it, don’t do it. It’s not unethical nor is it illegal. If it’s unethical then no hunter should be allowed to hunt an animal over any agricultural fields of any nature, as they are also artificially introduced, nor should one be allowed to hunt a water hole where a windmill or any other man made improvement has been made. Nor should it be allowed to hunt a road cut through the bush as it opens up an area to see tracks you otherwise wouldn’t have seen, or a man made lake or impoundment. Everything I just meantime’s attracts wild animals by the droves and gives sportsman jillion’s of opportunities they would have otherwise never had. That is a fact. I also do not have a problem with introduced animals as long as good judgement and taste is used in the manner of which the hunt is conducted. If that animal has a reasonable opportunity for escape and or self defense from the hunter then what the hell is the problem. On any given million acres of ground only a certain percentage of it actually holds animals. That is the truth. The rest is simply travel through at best. There is a reason wild animals can migrate thousands of miles a year. It’s because the in between is not usable. That on either end concentrates animals so by golly don’t hunt the either end because the animals are concentrated in large numbers and it’s not ethical or sporting.
This is my whole beef, the debate goes on and on and the vast majority can’t see the forest for the trees and with the exception of the elitists who don’t care about facts only their own self serving needs, the in between must educate themselves on reality and the way things actually have to work in the 21rst century. Unfortunately as with any issues there are always those hard heads convinced of their own superiority who that in reality don’t know shit from a shingle that fight those who are trying to help them.
I have no problem with anyone who chooses not to hunt a certain way because it doesn’t fall into their definition of ethical. That’s fine and more power to them. I will support their decision to the bitter end. But where I have a problem is with those who try to force their morals and ethics on others who are doing absolutely nothing wrong nor illegal just because they don’t agree with it. Those people are the problem and will be our ultimate downfall. It boils down to pride and ignorance of the facts and that pisses me off something fierce.

 

[crs]

Gizmo said "I'm so damn sick of this debate." Me too.
That is one reason that I usually skip prattle such as the the foregoing. Such BS!
Hunt where you can and will and keep it to yourselves about how and where others hunt.

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

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.

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.

 

[Tanks]

Tanks you bring up a valid point. The true free range animals would be on quota. I mention this as it brings up a point I made earlier so I’m not directing the comment at you.
Yes they are on quota which would force 1 of 2 things to happen and possibly both over time. So demand could not keep up with supply given the amount of hunters which would drive the cost up to the point only the super wealthy could afford it. 2 as revenue shrinks quotas would be relaxed and game numbers would suffer. Additionally because the areas no longer paid for themselves habitat loss due to human encroachment would start further driving game numbers down.
...

You realize other than game farms everywhere else the game is on quota and it has not driven prices up. Interestingly enough, the trophy fee for Zebra is the same in Zambia, Zimbabwe and RSA game farms. I also do not see the revenue shrinking, outfitters are already getting sold out in free range countries. I had to change my plan for a 14 day hunt in Zimbabwe to first of August, 2022 as all the time slots prior were sold out.

Heck, for the price of a single Zebra on your TX farm one can go to RSA for a week, shoot multiple species including the Zebra and have the full African experience. So RSA game farms do serve a purpose.

 

[CoElkHunter]

I doubt they'd be shot out as there are quotas. For example on my recent hunt when looking for leopard bait I was not allowed to shoot any female impalas as the quota for them had been exhausted. I will agree that if there were no game farms the demand on hunting would not be met.

Also, free range areas keep shrinking due to human encroachment as time passes. In the picture below the terrain was a forest as far as the eye could see, teeming with wild life as recent as 10 years ago. There is nothing there now.

View attachment 435958

My issue with fenced areas is same as @Red Leg

Looks like a place NOW where I've hunted doves in Arizona in the past. SAD!

 

[gizmo]

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.

Marius I completely agree, and that's not the point I was trying to make. Also I know for a fact the vast majority of ranches in the Eastern Cape supplement animals when needed. I've seen it done, I also talk to a crap load of outfitters all the time who send me pictures of the animals that are being brought in and released as well as watch the videos of the releases that I am sent. I've personally hunted several of the properties that at least you hunted with your company at one time and have seen pictures of releases that were done on a few of them. Now I cannot say that you still do as I've not had the chance to catch up with you in a while unfortunately.
Furthermore, there is an entire animal breeding industry in RSA just for that purpose just as there is in Texas. I've watched the auctions and get notifications of certain auctions and animals all the time via social media from over there as I like to keep up on the animal market in RSA. I have sent a lot of clients to RSA to hunt with outfitters that I work with as I don't want my clients getting screwed by some fly by night guy. We have the same problems in Texas, everyone with a pickup and a rifle calls themselves outfitters so it is important to me to make sure my clients are well taken care of by reputable outfitters outfitters such as yourself.
As a matter of fact the only reason I haven't referred anyone to you directly simply because I haven't had the opportunity to hunt with you yet. That being said every time I have been asked by people about offers you put up I have always said that I personally havent hunted with you yet but know a lot of people who have and every single one of them has nothing but excellent things to say about you and your operation.
I'm not saying you or anyone else is doing anything wrong. I am simply stating that a hellava lot of people think that just because there is a 1000 wildebeest that there are all these shooters running around and that trophy animals somehow mystically appear in an endless supply. Yes of course you will manage that herd properly, that's my point but it is simply untrue that herds are not supplemented at times with new animals for various reasons, especially by those who do not have access to the neighbor's property. The same can be said as to re-introducing species that were hunted out long ago or large properties that supplement their herds to keep up with demand. The animals don't just sprout up from the ground or fall from the sky is what my point is. Animals in South Africa, Namibia, and a few places in other countries are introduced or supplemented all the time. That is a fact and I'll be glad to post proof of it, it is a common industry standard in many places. It also doesn't mean that some how its less sporting or unethical. Bighorn sheep are re-introduced into places in NA all the time. As are pronghorn and many others. No different than a truly wild rhino hunt, they just don't happen. They are introduced animals. The majority of elephants in certain parts of RSA are fenced hunts and buffalo sure as hell are including some of the buffalo that I have mounted from your clients. Again, nothing wrong with that and I am not trying to say you are doing anything wrong. I am just pointing out the reality of hunting in certain parts of Africa as well as NA. I would ask you to tell me of places in RSA where one can hunt native sable and buffalo that have not been introduced or are under some form of containment whether it be a fence or some form of natural barrier the animals cannot cross. They are extremely rare. Then compare that to the places where buffalo and sable are commonly hunted. Then add in how many of all of those animals combined have not been bred and supplemented for the purpose of stocking or reintroduction. It would be less than 1 % of 1 %. That is just reality. RSA is the home of the black wildebeest and did an amazing job of saving that species. I have mounted black wildebeest that your clients have taken on some fantastic hunts you did for them, the truth of the matter is that every single one of those wildebeest were bred for hunting and introduced into that area at some point. Also, have you ever taken a client to get a Hartman's zebra? How about all the color phased springbok listed in your SA pricing on the website?
I am not picking a fight and I have tremendous amount of respect for you and your outfit and would hunt with you tomorrow if I could and will continue to tell people that I feel you are reputable when asked but lets call a spade a spade.

 

[375Fox]

Not to mention I have hunted and know a hellava lot of places that are 100 of thousands of acres that still get regularly stocked with new animals of certain species all the time. Why? Supply can’t keep up with demand. 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.

This is put and take hunting. This is no longer sustainable or about conservation. If there are 30 huntable bulls per year an outfitter shouldn’t be selling 40. This is the management that can exist behind a high fence I disagree with.

 

[375Fox]

2. They are stocked by government agencies all the damn time for various different reasons.

I challenge you to give proof of this statement. Your trying hard to say all the same practices can exist in a wild area but you are wildly exaggerating. An initial stocking of a depleted conservancy to establish a wild population is very different than yearly stocking because unsustainable. Once a population is in place it will fall on the outfitter and land owner (who ever that may be) to effectively anti poach and manage the hunting. There will not be an option to simply restock in a wild area. Also, no government aside from maybe South Africa or Namibia would be able to actually make this happen.

 

[gizmo]

You realize other than game farms everywhere else the game is on quota and it has not driven prices up. Interestingly enough, the trophy fee for Zebra is the same in Zambia, Zimbabwe and RSA game farms. I also do not see the revenue shrinking, outfitters are already getting sold out in free range countries. I had to change my plan for a 14 day hunt in Zimbabwe to first of August, 2022 as all the time slots prior were sold out.

Heck, for the price of a single Zebra on your TX farm one can go to RSA for a week, shoot multiple species including the Zebra and have the full African experience. So RSA game farms do serve a purpose.

I am not going to argue with anything you have said as I agree with you. My point was "What if the RSA farms were banned". Also as to the shot at me for zebra, that is not entirely true but very close. A zebra would cost about $5500 to hunt with me. Say you get a 3k package on a 5 day safari that includes a zebra (pretty low end industry standard on RSA pricing I might add but I have seen them with reputable outfitters in that price range) then add in airfare, travel expenses, tips, DPC, shipping of trophies, and taxidermy you are dead wrong. Lets look at some figures
RSA or where ever
5 day package
Kudu Zebra warthog 3k
airfair (shoot the middle) 1,800
DPC 500
Shipping (current quote I get them in about 1 a month) 2300
Taxidermy assuming shouler mounts 3800
Shipping to your house after taxidermy 800
Total: $12,200
That doesnt include tips and incidentals such as having to overnight at african sky or anything like that. Also even if you had subpar taxidermy done in africa it would lower the taxidermy bill by about $800 and raise the shipping an minimum of $1500
So we are going to average RSA at 12.2K
My ranch:
Day fees $1000
Trophy Fee $ 5,500
Taxidermy $ 1300
Shipping of finished trophy if necessary $400
Total: $8200 assuming the client has trophy shipped to their home as opposed to picking it up at the ranch the following year on another as is what normally happens. Otherwise the total is $ 7800
Now even taking into account the incidentals and travel to my ranch you are still thousands of dollars from it being cheaper to go to africa to hunt 1 zebra. I'm not going to pretend that Texas is africa as it is not but the client will absolutely have a very good experience and hunt but in now way am I saying it is africa.

Now a kudu for example, one is crazy to shoot one in Texas ( I don't raise kudu) as you could absolutely go to africa for the cost in Texas and have money left over once your trophies are on the wall. But....... a Texas Bongo hunt on my place would be about 35% of the cost of doing it in Africa. You cannot compare Texas apples to apples as they are two different places with two different economical factors but the direct comparison you chose is dead ass wrong.

 

[gizmo]

This is put and take hunting. This is no longer sustainable or about conservation. If there are 30 huntable bulls per year an outfitter shouldn’t be selling 40. This is the management that can exist behind a high fence I disagree with.

Great! then don't do it but you have no right to say that other people can't or shouldn't.

 

[375Fox]

Great! then don't do it but you have no right to say that other people can't or shouldn't.

I cannot stop you if it’s currently legal, but I will continue to express my opinion that it’s unethical and have every right to do so

 

[gizmo]

I challenge you to give proof of this statement. Your trying hard to say all the same practices can exist in a wild area but you are wildly exaggerating. An initial stocking of a depleted conservancy to establish a wild population is very different than yearly stocking because unsustainable. Once a population is in place it will fall on the outfitter and land owner (who ever that may be) to effectively anti poach and manage the hunting. There will not be an option to simply restock in a wild area. Also, no government aside from maybe South Africa or Namibia would be able to actually make this happen.

Bull shit, Texas re stocks pronghorn all the time, moving them from one area to another to establish populations that are hunted within a few years. Wild turkey are released in areas that turkey numbers are down. Dessert bighorn have been reintroduced into areas. The state of Texas for years until about a decade ago released feral pigs for additional hunting opportunities. Several African countries have introduced rhino and elephant into certain places, generally funded by the land owners. I can go on and on. Furthermore, once you get to a point where those animals are sustainable you are still hunting animals that were planted. I think you are totally missing the point I am trying to make. Are there put and take operations, sure, and everyone's definition of that varies. At the end of the day WHO CARES. If you don't like it great dont do it but as long as its being done legally and ethically within the realm of what they are doing people have no right to force what they view as their morals and ethics on others. Its no different than politics, religion, and a jillion other hot topic issues. You do you, if you don't like something then swipe right, but no one has the right to force their morals and ethics on others as long as those things that are being done are done so legally and ethically. If it doesnt directly effect you, and i mean directly as in prevents you to your right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness then what freaking right you you or anyone else have to tell me or anyone else what we should or shouldn't do?

 

[gizmo]

I cannot stop you if it’s currently legal, but I will continue to express my opinion that it’s unethical and have every right to do so

Well sure you do and I support that right but as the saying goes we all know what opinions are like. I also have the right to view that mentality as elitist, stuck up, and holier than thou. At the end of the day though I don't care. All I'm saying is the emotions involved in this issue cause division and as we are grossly out numbered by people who either dont care either way or are avid anti hunters its this kind of fighting and nonsense that will be our ultimate demise. I'm not trying to change your mind and get you to do things you don't want to do. I am saying that we must unite to defend the rights of all hunters or we are screwed. I'm also worn out on this debate as there are people that just simply don't get it and are glad to cut their nose off despite their faces. I am done with the argument, I support you and your hunting rights, we disagree on what we consider ethical, but I am not going to continue to beat a dead horse as this conversation is going to continue to go nowhere. We are going to keep firing back at each other with rebuttals and continue to go in a circle. I don't have time for it. Nothing you have said I have taken personally and I certainly haven't intended to attack you personally, we just disagree and will likely always disagree on certain aspects of our passion. Good hunting and I hope you are able to continue to pursue those passions that you wish to pursue!

 

[IvW]

Do you have Texas Bongo on your ranch in the high fenced under 400ha area?

 

[WAB]

I challenge you to give proof of this statement. Your trying hard to say all the same practices can exist in a wild area but you are wildly exaggerating. An initial stocking of a depleted conservancy to establish a wild population is very different than yearly stocking because unsustainable. Once a population is in place it will fall on the outfitter and land owner (who ever that may be) to effectively anti poach and manage the hunting. There will not be an option to simply restock in a wild area. Also, no government aside from maybe South Africa or Namibia would be able to actually make this happen.

@gizmo, I have a ton of respect for you but you are letting your emotions drive you to saying things that are simply not true. I can assure you that the government is not restocking the wild areas I have hunted in Moz, Zambia and Botswana.

These areas are more expensive than an RSA hunt but not out of reach for most international hunters. I think the difficulty of getting there likely keeps more folks away than the cost.

 

[Tundra Tiger]

Just to point out that everyone is on a different place on these various spectrums... I'll point to mine with regards to cost, and what I wanted.

Had I stuck with my package deal (I did not), I could have harvested impala, kudu, blue wildebeest, blesbok, and ZEBRA, for under 4K (package was something like 3850). 9 days there, seven hunting days. I live in remote Alaska so airfare sucks monkey balls wherever I go. It was about 2200 total. Dip and pack was a grand, shipping looks like it's going to be about 3K. There are other costs (gun fees - took my own, tipping) All that said, I have had people on this site reach out to me, after my hunt report, and ask if they could do it under 10K and - minus the taxidermy (a deferred cost) - my answer has been absolutely yes. I can see pathways to sub 10K African hunts.

You mention the cost to your ranch for a zebra as being something like 8K, give or take a bit. I sincerely hope, business-wise, you do well. I truly do. For me the difference would and will always be I want to hunt AFRICA. Is RSA the Africa of Hemingway and Roosevelt? Heavens no. But it is the same continent, and I had to travel the same distances and I got to watch the sun rise and set over the same basic place on earth. That, for me, was worth a LOT. I grew up wanting to hunt AFRICA... not African animals someplace else.

I get what @375Fox is saying, and respect his opinion, and wish fervently I could hunt really unencumbered wild areas... but I am at peace with properties of 20K to 60K or more of space. It is enough, for me, to stalk through heavy brush for a kudu bull (X2!!) on tens of thousands of acres and knowing any fences are long way off.

At the end of the day, we have to decide what's right for each of us. For some, maybe African species in Texas is it. Me? I want to stand on African soil. I do agree with what others like @Tanks have said about really small put and take operations.

 

[gizmo]

@gizmo, I have a ton of respect for you but you are letting your emotions drive you to saying things that are simply not true. I can assure you that the government is not restocking the wild areas I have hunted in Moz, Zambia and Botswana.

These areas are more expensive than an RSA hunt but not out of reach for most international hunters. I think the difficulty of getting there likely keeps more folks away than the cost.

I did clarify that statement and I did not specify countries. To the point I know for an absolute fact that private land owners in Namibia and RSA have bought and stocked elephants and rhinos. Certain governments have been involved in projects from time to time but it is almost always the result of the land owner or wildlife benefit projects funded through donations. In NA however on native species it is almost always the state DNR or USFW that is responsible for releases such as sheep or pronghorn etc... private entities such a The National Wild Turkey federation often release turkeys and such.
SO in the end I do not understand where you are saying I'm making comments that simply arent true. Im certainly not taking any offense to your comment, hell if I'm wrong I'm wrong but I think the reality of it is I may have not articulated the intent of my comments well or i very well could have over generalized.

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

I did clarify that statement and I did not specify countries. To the point I know for an absolute fact that private land owners in Namibia and RSA have bought and stocked elephants and rhinos. Certain governments have been involved in projects from time to time but it is almost always the result of the land owner or wildlife benefit projects funded through donations. In NA however on native species it is almost always the state DNR or USFW that is responsible for releases such as sheep or pronghorn etc... private entities such a The National Wild Turkey federation often release turkeys and such.
SO in the end I do not understand where you are saying I'm making comments that simply arent true. Im certainly not taking any offense to your comment, hell if I'm wrong I'm wrong but I think the reality of it is I may have not articulated the intent of my comments well or i very well could have over generalized.

I agree with some of the things you have said but these examples aren’t comparable at all to a private put and take hunting operation.