Understanding The Term "High Fenced Hunting"

[gizmo]

Just to add to the point from my understanding of my particular hunt there were self sustaining populations of lion and buffalo. I saw male and female lion. Bulls and cow/calf buffalo, and also saw evidence of the lions hunting and killing game for food. I’m sure at some point the animals are supplemented when necessary but what is the difference of that and anywhere else? Just because an exterior fence is present on a bajillion acre farm?

 

[375Fox]

I’m sure at some point the animals are supplemented when necessary but what is the difference of that and anywhere else? Just because an exterior fence is present on a bajillion acre farm?

It’s a difference in management. The difference of that and other areas is animals can’t just be supplemented elsewhere. It is not an option. The area where Tanks and I hunted in Zimbabwe previously had a 70 then 120 buffalo quota per year with a previous operator pre-2010. When the current outfitter took over they had to have discussions with game department and community and take a good financial hit to bring the quota down to a sustainable 40 bulls per year which took years to recover the correct age class bulls from the previous operator’s severe over harvesting. However, hunting a buffalo on a self sustaining farm in South Africa of proper size vs hunting one on a wild concession area is probably very similar hunting experience once your on a buffalo track.

 

[Tanks]

Majority of lions in RSA hunts are planted about 72 hours prior to the hunt per guidelines. I think there was one "managed" lion hunt advertised where they were self sustaining as opposed to "put and take". It is not as bad as when they were still drugged when they were shot, but it still is "put and take". It doesn't take 14 or 21 days to track and shoot an RSA lion. A lot of those hunts are a few days as the operators know where the lion is released and how far it can go.

Now, I can see why self sustaining lions would not be practical for RSA hunts. The lions would go through a lot of other game (costs the operator $$$$) before they get to be 6+ years not to mention there would not be enough mature lions to meet the demand compared to the land that is available.

If you look at the multitude of cape buffalo hunting videos, the buffalo were not that afraid of humans. And, of course, you can see the ear tags on some of them or the bales of hay.

Again, if that type of hunting satisfies you then more power to you. And if you have never hunted a wild leopard or a lion over bait I don't think you'd appreciate what goes into it. It is not as simple as slinging a carcass and voila the cat comes over to be shot. There is a reason it takes multiple trips for some to get their lion or leopard in wild areas.

 

[gizmo]

It’s a difference in management. The difference of that and other areas is animals can’t just be supplemented elsewhere. It is not an option. The area where Tanks and I hunted in Zimbabwe previously had a 70 then 120 buffalo quota per year with a previous operator pre-2010. When the current outfitter took over they had to have discussions with game department and community and take a good financial hit to bring the quota down to a sustainable 40 bulls per year which took years to recover the correct age class bulls from the previous operator’s severe over harvesting. However, hunting a buffalo on a self sustaining farm in South Africa of proper size vs hunting one on a wild concession area is probably very similar hunting experience once your on a buffalo track.

I totally get that and I agree with you. You are absolutely right but… that still has nothing to do good vs bad. That is a management responsibility for what is good for that particular herd. I do the same thing, obviously on a much much smaller scale. I will also say the the consequences of me making a bad management decision is much much easier to fix than if they do. So that being said the scale and consequences of management strategies have much more important and long reaching consequences than anything I would ever do. At the end though if you are a buffalo or whatever it is merely academic who shoots you and where. In both instances the animal is there to be hunted and the existence of its long term viability solely depends on the ability of the animal to pay for itself over the long term. In that way they are on equal terms. Obviously not in terms of experience or anything like that but their existence depends on the revenue generated from hunting and they are there where they are at due to an extremely large part of the fact that they are there to be killed.

Majority of lions in RSA hunts are planted about 72 hours prior to the hunt per guidelines. I think there was one "managed" lion hunt advertised where they were self sustaining as opposed to "put and take". It is not as bad as when they were still drugged when they were shot, but it still is "put and take". It doesn't take 14 or 21 days to track and shoot an RSA lion. A lot of those hunts are a few days as the operators know where the lion is released and how far it can go.

Now, I can see why self sustaining lions would not be practical for RSA hunts. The lions would go through a lot of other game (costs the operator $$$$) before they get to be 6+ years not to mention there would not be enough mature lions to meet the demand compared to the land that is available.

If you look at the multitude of cape buffalo hunting videos, the buffalo were not that afraid of humans. And, of course, you can see the ear tags on some of them or the bales of hay.

Again, if that type of hunting satisfies you then more power to you. And if you have never hunted a wild leopard or a lion over bait I don't think you'd appreciate what goes into it. It is not as simple as slinging a carcass and voila the cat comes over to be shot. There is a reason it takes multiple trips for some to get their lion or leopard in wild areas.

Ok so very fair but still, just because it takes longer doesn’t mean that the latter isn’t a legitimate experience or hunt. I in no way would ever support shooting animals that are still drugged however, that was the reasoning behind the 72 hour rule. That is a sufficient amount of time for any sedative introduced into the animal to be completely gone as far as symptoms are concerned. BAM is a South African drug that I am very familiar with, when given the reversal all symptoms are gone within 2 hours. Combinations of ketamine and rompum have varying effects for varying times depend on what was actually mixed and what dosage. Symptoms after reversal are absolutely gone either way by 72 hours. Now any drug introduced can stay in the system of an animal and cause dangers in eating the animal anywhere from 15 to 45 days, that has nothing to do with the symptoms though.
I will also agree, though I don’t think you directly stated it though I’m making an assumption, that 72 hours is not long enough for an animal to be comfortable in their environment to make it fair to the animal. I personally will not allow an animal that has been released on my ranch to be hunted prior to 30 days. That being said the general time frame is 3 to 6 months due to the time of year I choose to release animals when needed. I know my lion was released onto that ranch but I also knew the time frame in which it was done as I refused to hunt one that had just been kicked out. Some of the lions on that ranch had been there their entire lives from my understanding. My lion had been there for a very long time as was evident by not only what they told me but by the way the lion knew the terrain and the way that lion acted.

 

[Bonk]

I read the first three pages and then skipped to the end because I had formulated my opinion and was going to post. Then I read the last page and started to back track through the conversation between @gizmo and @375Fox. Before I say what I originally intended to say it appears to me both of you are almost saying the same things. If I set aside the personalities I don't see a whole lot of difference in either point of view.

Now, here's what I wanted to say. This thread has been extremely informative for me. Especially the first couple of pages. I'll admit to had having an anti-fence bias but this thread has changed my opinion quite significantly. After reading about the technicalities of RSA game/wildlife regulations and the how/why of fences I now understand why they exist. I also now can see the benefit and practicality of them.

When I was investigating my first African hunt (still in the works) I was insistent I wanted a 'free range' 'fair chase' hunt. I didn't care what other hunters did but I wanted as pure an African experience as I could get. While my intentions were good it appears I was very incorrect and ill-informed about the who, what, when, where and why of fencing in RSA. I now believe I have a better understanding and fencing is no longer a consideration for me as long as the property is of reasonable size, the game is truly wild and no artificial manipulation of the gene pool and feeding is involved. All I want is to hunt the game in a natural environment with out any artificial interference of the game stock. If all that can be done inside a fence then I'm good with it.

Learning has occurred.

 

[gizmo]

I read the first three pages and then skipped to the end because I had formulated my opinion and was going to post. Then I read the last page and started to back track through the conversation between @gizmo and @375Fox. Before I say what I originally intended to say it appears to me both of you are almost saying the same things. If I set aside the personalities I don't see a whole lot of difference in either point of view.

Now, here's what I wanted to say. This thread has been extremely informative for me. Especially the first couple of pages. I'll admit to had having an anti-fence bias but this thread has changed my opinion quite significantly. After reading about the technicalities of RSA game/wildlife regulations and the how/why of fences I now understand why they exist. I also now can see the benefit and practicality of them.

When I was investigating my first African hunt (still in the works) I was insistent I wanted a 'free range' 'fair chase' hunt. I didn't care what other hunters did but I wanted as pure an African experience as I could get. While my intentions were good it appears I was very incorrect and ill-informed about the who, what, when, where and why of fencing in RSA. I now believe I have a better understanding and fencing is no longer a consideration for me as long as the property is of reasonable size, the game is truly wild and no artificial manipulation of the gene pool and feeding is involved. All I want is to hunt the game in a natural environment with out any artificial interference of the game stock. If all that can be done inside a fence then I'm good with it.

Learning has occurred.

Awesome buddy and I am very glad that this entire thing has helped you. Either way your opinion has swayed is not important to me as the fact that you got something out of it. This is the entire reason this is such a great site and is a lot of the reason I have always loved this site. Open conversations where people can share views and opinions to the benefit of all is a great thing. Sure a little shit slinging occurs from time to time and people, hell myself included, get their panties in a wad; it is all in good fun and rarely takes away from the end lesson. I’ve got thick skin and can take it as do most, at least from my end I’d sit down and drink a cold beer as friends with almost every single person I’ve ever got into bitchin matches with. Those few I wouldn’t were weeded out from the site long ago by members and admin who won’t put up with any true BS from those types.
this has been a great convo for me as well as I enjoy looking at different view points from people of opposing views. I find them quite educational as well and more than once have changed my opinion on something as a result. Hell my lion hunt was one of them, I was opposed to an RSA lion hunt at first. I educated myself on it and teamed up with the right outfitter that was able to provide exactly what I wanted in a manner that I found acceptable. It was one of the greatest experiences of my life and a memory I will always cherish and a hunt I am damned proud of.

 

[Tundra Tiger]

@Bonk ... That last paragraph... well stated sir. That is where I was at researching my first trip, and the conclusion I arrived at as well. This site made it possible to find the right information to make an informed, educated decision. Best of wishes on your trip when it finally happens.

 

[TXhunter65]

"Just my take on thing.."

I'll never understand why as a group we have to out morals/ethics one another over and over again over the stupidest $hit. My high fence $hit doesn't stink but your high fence $hit does. Give me a break. If a hunter doesn't ask questions before a hunt and is unhappy with anything on the hunt it's for them to deal with. Everyone who pulls the trigger makes a choice and its theirs and theirs alone. It's nobody else's business. If they want to brag about it on a public forum then by all means fire away with your OPINION. If its legal every hunter gets to apply their own morals/ethics to their hunt and I'll bet not one single member can say theirs haven't evolved as they've grown as outdoors men and women. I know I'm wasting my breath because we'll never stop tearing each other down to prove our own superiority over some other group because they don't do it the way we do.

"the animals on the properties are self reliant and breed by themselves, they are also untamed nor used to humans as there are ample place to hide and there is very little to no interaction with humans."

Are the animals on the properties you hunt artificially fed or watered in any way and are "new genetics" ever introduced? If the answer to either one of those questions is "Yes" I'd say your above statement sounds like... propaganda.

 

[R eight]

I've never hunted behind a "high wire" fence.

However, I have hunted behind a "wide wet" fence/barrier...

But seriously, it's just common sense. We all have a pretty good idea of what is fair chase.

 

[degoins]

"Hell my lion hunt was one of them, I was opposed to an RSA lion hunt at first. I educated myself on it and teamed up with the right outfitter that was able to provide exactly what I wanted in a manner that I found acceptable. It was one of the greatest experiences of my life and a memory I will always cherish and a hunt I am damned proud of."

+1

 

[Zambezi]

Before joining this site I never realised how much high fence hunting offended some people's delicate sensibilities. BUT what is more worrying is how fragmented the general hunting fraternity is! Sad state of affairs.

Legal hunts are legal hunts.

Ethical hunts are "each to their own". Enforcing one's ethics on others or publicly casting scorn is the height of egomaniacal behaviour. Don't know if I have been guilty of it in the past but I'll make damn sure to try and not do so in the future.

 

[375Fox]

Legal hunts are legal hunts.
Ethical hunts are "each to their own". Enforcing one's ethics on others or publicly casting scorn is the height of egomaniacal behaviour. Don't know if I have been guilty of it in the past but I'll make damn sure to try and not do so in the future.

I’d have to say defining acceptable or ethical based on whether a person can afford today is the height of egomaniacal behavior. There is no consideration for tomorrow. We’d be in a better place if we could hold ourselves to a ethical standard and put our own rules in place to maintain control. Unfortunately this will not ever happen. When South Africa finally bans CBL lions will be your best example of that. It was reined in too late, and a government has decided to step in and make laws. It’s also interesting how Namibia has similar hunting but avoids the controversies of South Africa, because their hunting organization holds its membership to a standard.

 

[Zambezi]

I’d have to say defining acceptable or ethical based on whether a person can afford today is the height of egomaniacal behavior. There is no consideration for tomorrow. We’d be in a better place if we could hold ourselves to a ethical standard and put our own rules in place to maintain control. Unfortunately this will not ever happen. When South Africa finally bans CBL lions will be your best example of that. It was reined in too late, and a government has decided to step in and make laws. It’s also interesting how Namibia has similar hunting but avoids the controversies of South Africa, because their hunting organization holds its membership to a standard.

Tomato / Tomatoe... I hear what you're saying but taking one of the extreme outliers of all high fence practices and denigrating the whole industry seems very counter productive to the high fence industry and hunters/hunting as a whole. Not quite sure what you were referring to regarding "There is no consideration for tomorrow"... If you're talking about CBL then I can see your point, whether I agree or not is not material but open to that discussion. If you're talking about high fence in general then I'd disagree with you totally by citing the numerous benefits.

Either way I would think it would be virtually impossible to define what is ethical for EVERYBODY. Who decides? Who elects those who decide? Who implements? What are the repercussions? How will that stop what the new rules deem unethical? Will that stop operators and/or hunters from doing what they are going to do? Should people outside of the countries where the hunting is taking place even have a say in what is ethical??? CITIES is a prime example of outsiders throwing their 2c in largely to the detriment of the actual owners of the land/animals.

Ethics are an internal thing to each individual. Maybe 90% of us agree what is ethical but maybe only 80% of us may be right in our convictions.

Maybe a bit more unity would help bring consensus and raise standards where needed. More carrot and a whole lot less stick IMHO. Lambasting people that have different "ethics" to you/me/us/them only causes division and provides an opening for the antis.

 

[375Fox]

Tomato / Tomatoe... I hear what you're saying but taking one of the extreme outliers of all high fence practices and denigrating the whole industry seems very counter productive to the high fence industry and hunters/hunting as a whole. Not quite sure what you were referring to regarding "There is no consideration for tomorrow"... If you're talking about CBL then I can see your point, whether I agree or not is not material but open to that discussion. If you're talking about high fence in general then I'd disagree with you totally by citing the numerous benefits.

Either way I would think it would be virtually impossible to define what is ethical for EVERYBODY. Who decides? Who elects those who decide? Who implements? What are the repercussions? How will that stop what the new rules deem unethical? Will that stop operators and/or hunters from doing what they are going to do? Should people outside of the countries where the hunting is taking place even have a say in what is ethical??? CITIES is a prime example of outsiders throwing their 2c in largely to the detriment of the actual owners of the land/animals.

Ethics are an internal thing to each individual. Maybe 90% of us agree what is ethical but maybe only 80% of us may be right in our convictions.

Maybe a bit more unity would help bring consensus and raise standards where needed. More carrot and a whole lot less stick IMHO. Lambasting people that have different "ethics" to you/me/us/them only causes division and provides an opening for the antis.

Your not wrong on a lot of the questions you proposed. In the meantime the only avenue that exists is to have conversations about it. I think not challenging things ourselves gives more of an opening for the antis.
I will explain my comment about no consideration for tomorrow. I’m in my early 30s, just in last 20 years the view of hunting seems to be growing increasingly negative. Trophy hunting is viewed generally by public not on a country by country basis. If hunters choose to define acceptable just because they can afford it, it will accelerate this negative trend. I’ve seen here too many times the excuse is they can afford it, no consideration for if it benefits conservation. It’s a shortsighted view because many aren’t thinking about hunting in 20 or 30 years because they will no longer be hunting. The damage caused to South Africa’s/hunting’s image by CBL lions is a good example. I wrote my view on fences most clearly in my first post on first page. I’m opposed to the management a high fence can allow, not high fences.

 

[Zambezi]

Your not wrong on a lot of the questions you proposed. In the meantime the only avenue that exists is to have conversations about it. I think not challenging things ourselves gives more of an opening for the antis.
I will explain my comment about no consideration for tomorrow. I’m in my early 30s, just in last 20 years the view of hunting seems to be growing increasingly negative. Trophy hunting is viewed generally by public not on a country by country basis. If hunters choose to define acceptable just because they can afford it, it will accelerate this negative trend. I’ve seen here too many times the excuse is they can afford it, no consideration for if it benefits conservation. It’s a shortsighted view because many aren’t thinking about hunting in 20 or 30 years because they will no longer be hunting. The damage caused to South Africa’s/hunting’s image by CBL lions is a good example. I wrote my view on fences most clearly in my first post on first page. I’m opposed to the management a high fence can allow, not high fences.

Can maybe agree with some things you mentioned and maybe not with other things. That's the beauty of my new found zen approach is that within 10 minutes of typing I'm thinking about something else or doing something else. I have no desire to be judge and jury to anyone else. If asked my OPINION I will give it. If asked if my opinion is right... well that's another story. And I think therein lies the meat.

In my opinion CBL was disaster but if it was done right it could have benefitted the hunting industry. But you'll always have the shady operators in any industry.

Don't ask me my opinion on farming lion for the oriental bone / medicine market. Or farming rhino or selling ivory. Most won't like my practical point of view.

 

[Nyati]

The SA high fence game ranches have given me the opportunity to hunt in Africa on seven occasions, visiting 20 different farms in five provinces, hunting 28 different species, one of whom is extinct in the wild (Scimitar Oryx) and another which cannot be hunted anymore in its home range, (Aoudad).

I am certainly not the most experienced hunter around here, but I do know that there are very good Outfitters/PH and others, well, not so much. You only have to see some of the “trophy” pictures on the forum, of animals that are not mature, and should never have been shot. And you cannot blame the novice hunter, who does not know better.

Put and take, I have witnessed how some great animals (sable, buffalo) have been delivered to the farm to be shot by the client who wants to brag about a great trophy, they asked for it, paid for it, and the outfitter delivered, a business transaction, no deception involved. Not for me but none of my business.

Stocking, yes, why not, it´s always a good idea to bring in “new blood” to animals in a fenced property. Of course, I am referring to stocking with young animals that will take a few years to mature in the farm.

Hunting the wide open unfenced land of Africa sounds nice, but that is outside my budget, so I will stick to SA fenced game ranches, some of which can give a very good hunting experience.

 

[Code4]

Hunting South Africa is all a compromise. Taken to the extreme, High Fenced Hunting can mean any form of human management. You may find self sustaining populations but you will always find some kind of intervention. High value 'trophy' display animals infinitely more so. The level of intervention your comfortable with is up to you.

 

[Mark A Ouellette]

How many of us daydream about hunting the Africa of WDM Bell? When 100 pound tusks were fairly common? Those days are long gone. Today, any hunting remotely like that in Bell's time is the provence of the very wealthy. Unfortunately, that is not me.

I recently returned from a dual location hunt which included a 15,000 South African ranch where when hunting, I never saw the high fence. After that I spent 10 days following elephant tracks near the Hwange National Park in Zimbabwe. That area was unfenced but limited by tags or allocations of a bull in this 10000 acre community block but not in any adjoining block. No high fences but when jumbo track left the block we had to start over.

Zimbabwe was amazing but not like Uganda in Bell's day. We encountered locals often when searching for tracks along roads and Jeep trails.

The South Africa high fence ranch certainly provided more game to see and hunt than did the unfenced Zim. The SA ranch offered a very comfortable experience (when not hunting) with amazing lunches and dinners. The Zim experience wasn't as Spartan as what I endured for over 20 years of service in the US Marines, but parts of it were. I did however spend those 20 years practicing to be miserable and got darn good at it. I don't require so much of it now... A great high fence ranch meal of the game I shot a day before is mighty fine indeed!

That brings me to the present where I write this on my pocket miracle while waiting for a whitetail doe to pass by. My blind in Michigan USA is elevated with a propane heater. It also has tinted plexiglass windows that slide open silently. Fifty years ago, freezing as I waited behind a tree for deer in the mountains of Potter County Pennsylvania, I would have laughed at those Michigan guys in their treehouses. Now I am one.

Also, back then only an absentee flatlander city landlord from Philly would dare post their land with no Trespassing signs. Now due to liability laws and so on, posted land is common everywhere.

What's the point of this senseless rambling? Times change. Conditions change. People including hunters adapt. There is a place for high fence game ranches. Especially, since there is less and less unrestricted hunting available.

Finally, prior to me booking a high fence hunt, I asked the owner if it were true that one could shoot game from the back of their hunting truck? The reply was, "We have 80 year old clients who can barely walk a kilometer. We tailor the hunt to be as easy or as hard as one desires". Did I mention that I crawled behind the PH for over 40 minutes to get a shot at my buffalo? We also chased Zebra for a few days before I got a shot. I didn't see any fences during those stalks, even though far away they were there.

 

[mark-hunter]

Things change, times change, as mentioned. Karamojo Bell time has gone by. Thats the fact.
If i tried to envision what will be in Africa, in the future, 100 or 200 years from now, at best it will become either Namibian and South African model, or european managamnet model, where true wilderness no longer exists.
At worst, hunting will be gone forever, with encroahment, species extintion, loss of habitat, urbanisation, overpopulation, and wildflife limited only to reduced national parks. But continent wide, wilderness will no longer be.

 

[Tundra Tiger]

@Mark A Ouellette ... Thank you for that read over my morning coffee. We all have different perspectives. I identify strongly with yours. Your RSA experience was very much what mine was as well, and I'll treasure it the rest of my days. And this is my situation as well, as with you: "Today, any hunting remotely like that in Bell's time is the provence of the very wealthy. Unfortunately, that is not me." Yeah, I'd LOVE to have hunted wild Africa when it was easier to find and maybe afford.

So I find wilderness elsewhere. Here in a couple of months I'll go out to look for a winter moose. I plan to camp once I get to the area, because it will take a reasonable effort to get there. (via snowmachine) It is very much wilderness, in every sense of the word, and I look forward to it, even though camping in 0 degrees or less (while hoping and praying it'll maybe ten to twenty degrees) doesn't seem as easy it did in my younger years. I will travel on a really nice snowmachine, and stay in a tent with a small woodstove, so if all goes well, the "hardship" can be minimized somewhat. It's not "wild" Africa, but it is a wild that's available to me, and I'm happy to have it.