# Probably shouldn't go here, but WTH!!



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

OK, let me start by saying that I'm all about hunting. My life revolves around the sport, as it is not only my passion for my so called "spare time" but also how I make my living and support my family. No, I'm not an outfitter or a big-game ranch owner or manager. I work in the field of Wetlands Conservation Engineering. I grew up hunting not only waterfowl along the Texas coast but also deer in the East Texas Piney Woods. Now for the point of this thread.

I am constantly seeing pics of deer that are followed by comments that suggest taking a particular buck out because you certainly don't want him spreading his genes around to the does. Believe me, I understand the science of manipulating traits with geneology. I just have an issue with, ok, I'll go ahead and say it........"playing GOD" with these animals that are a wild, natural resource that belong to EVERYONE, not just those that can afford to high-fence their 10,000 acre private petting zoo! OK, so he may only 3 on the left, so he's not gonna get your name in the B&C, or whatever the latest scoring craze is this season, KILL HIM!!! We certainly don't want him to breed, that would result in more deer for future generations that may not be PERFECTLY SYMETRICAL! So what!!!??? I got a bum knee, should I have been "taken out" so that I wouldn't have offspring who may possibly have bad knees?????..................or poor eyesight?????...............or be succeptable to heart disease?????

There was also an earlier post that reported the sale of a particular buck for $600,000! For a supposedly "wild" animal!!!

Let's see, you build hundreds upon hundreds of miles of fence to keep them on your property, feed them an incredibly scientificly developed and balanced diet of grains and supplements, inventory and eartag them for identification, tranquilize them for the purposes of diagnosing and medicating them, artificially inseminate them so that you can grow bigger, heavier and "better" animals.............sound vaugely familiar to anyone?................................kinda like the cattle industry maybe??????????????

If someone wants to dedicate their life and fortune to breeding some kind of "SUPER BUCK" within the confines of their private, high-fenced little so-called "wilderness" then I don't guess there's really much at all that can be said or done about that. But I have proble when you start trying to do the same with "MY" deer, or "MY" ducks, or "MY" fish, or who knows, maybe even "MY" kids or grandkids! It just ain't right to me!

OK, sorry for the rant, but I had to vent or I was gonna flip out!

Mods, please remove this thread and accept my apologies for posting it if ya'll see necessary.


----------



## HEAVYDUTYCHEVY (Aug 3, 2005)

opcorn:


----------



## Syncerus (Oct 18, 2005)

I found this message addressed to you:

Please report to the Eugenics Center for termination at your earliest possible convenience. Beep.

Trust the computer. The computer is your friend.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

ADREED with you Triple f...100%


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

Sorryhwell: Knew that I was forgettin somethin!:headknock


----------



## Mr Mudbug (Apr 12, 2006)

Good point, but be careful the high fence boys get offended easily. If ya make to much noise or don't agree ya get threatened to be culled from this board. Believe me i know.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

Triple..I agree with you man!!!

I was just making a comment about deer genetics last week. I just don't think you can screw with genetics THIS MUCH, and not end up with some negative side effects. The only thing that deer "geneticists" are looking at, is horn size. With the sales of breeder buck deer semen rivaling 12 packs of bud light in south texas... the effects of the genetic super buck race are not all going to be good.

I'm also wondering about the new laws regarding antler size in East Texas. Personally, I think it's a good idea, since a lot of 1.5 year old deer were getting shot.. but there are probably a lot of hunters out there that don't give a rats *** about the size of the horns.. they just want some meat. Going along with the fact that in many of these counties you can't shoot a doe.. there are probably a few guys out there that will come home empty handed. Is this right?


----------



## Cactus (Jan 16, 2006)

thats absolutely ridiculous that you would call a 10000 acre ranch a "petting zoo"


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

It's okay to not like us "playing God" with animals. By chance do you have a problem with doctors as well who cheat death daily by treating their patients?

To improve the herd by taking out the weakest and inferior animals has been going on for centuries, it's nothing new. The Indians knew to do that. It strengthens the herd. Especially in the wild, low fenced areas of our state it is very important to monitor what is happening with the deer population. The current trend in those counties where the average age of a whitetail buck was only 2.5 years old shows that something needs to be done to increase the age of the deer; hence the 13" rule enacted by the TP&W. By removing the spike bucks and the inferior older bucks you are actually strengthening the herd. Now, if you take man out of the equation and eliminate hunting all together, then there would be no reason to do any of this; just allow nature to take its course and allow the animals to starve and die from diseases that will infect the herd.

If you're into wetlands, then you are doing a similar thing are you not? Improving upon the wetlands by making more of them and by planting that which the waterfowl likes the best and that which is good or them? Are you "playing God" when you create new ponds and habitat to increase the population of the waterfowl?

TH


----------



## cj9271 (Aug 24, 2004)

did I hear popcorn and milk duds are in order??????


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

I have been gone a few days, hunting by the way. So I must have missed whatever set you off on this rant. But I disagree with you. If I am hunting on my lease and I choose to pass on a 8 or a 10 point buck that's only 2 1/2 years old and opt for a 3 1/2 year old 4pt. it's my choice. And the very act of killing any of them I would think could be construed as playing god. So your thinking is flawed.

Pass the popcorn


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

Trouthunter said:


> It's okay to not like us "playing God" with animals. By chance do you have a problem with doctors as well who cheat death daily by treating their patients?
> 
> To improve the herd by taking out the weakest and inferior animals has been going on for centuries, it's nothing new. The Indians knew to do that. It strengthens the herd. Especially in the wild, low fenced areas of our state it is very important to monitor what is happening with the deer population. The current trend in those counties where the average age of a whitetail buck was only 2.5 years old shows that something needs to be done to increase the age of the deer; hence the 13" rule enacted by the TP&W. By removing the spike bucks and the inferior older bucks you are actually strengthening the herd. Now, if you take man out of the equation and eliminate hunting all together, then there would be no reason to do any of this; just allow nature to take its course and allow the animals to starve and die from diseases that will infect the herd.
> 
> ...


Trouthunter...I think we're way past taking out the "weakest and inferior" bucks.... have you seen some of the "cull buck" photos? These deer aren't "weak" their only fault is they have a set of horns that will never make the book.

It's not like people are paying $2000 for cull hunts to go out and look for a three legged, one eyed, 9.5 year old buck. They're looking for healthy, large deer, that have the largest rack with 8 points or less.

and as far as doctors healing people go... that's not really in the same ballpark...

as far as playing God goes, I would think that inserting a tube of super buck semen into a doe for the specific reason of larger horns might fall under that category


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

Mr Mudbug said:


> Good point, but be careful the high fence boys get offended easily. If ya make to much noise or don't agree ya get threatened to be culled from this board. Believe me i know.


I am low and high but I gotta let you know it is annoying as heck to hear the whining about how a high fence ranch charges to much for their deer, how a hunter didn't put any sport in the hunt, etc. We've heard it all. So instead of griping about it go out and do your hunt, report back, and dont worry about what the landowners are doing with their own property. You'll be whining the rest of your life if you let it get to you.


----------



## Stumpgrinder (Feb 18, 2006)

Big money + big egos = big antlers. So be it. I dont at all understand it but nobody really cares what I think about their game management

I think about what my deceased ranch owner buddy told me when I asked him how it felt to "own" a 5000 acre ranch. He laughed and reminded me that the land didnt know who "owned" it. 

The gargantuan horn fad will pass when the dollars exceed the ego boost. Not till then.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

I'll add to what I already posted:

A 10,000 acre ranch is not by any means a "private petting zoo". That is just showing your ignorance of the subject and should probably be edited by you triple f.

Also, let's not turn this concern of triple f into a high fence-low fence thread or it will go away. That subject has been debated enough and there is no reason to visit it again.

TH


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

Trouthunter said:


> Are you "playing God" when you create new ponds and habitat to increase the population of the waterfowl?
> 
> TH


No sir, not that I can tell. I am working to try and repair the damage that has been done by man. I am not working towards trying to grow 25 pound mallards, or pintails with 2' long pins, or teal the size of snow geese! I am simply trying to make sure that there is sufficient habitat to allow these animals to continue their normal life cycle and avoid, or at least greatly delay, their extinction!

There is, at least to me, a huuuuuuuuge difference between "Conservation" and "Genetic Engineering".


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

*So Kyle...*



Kyle 1974 said:


> Trouthunter...I think we're way past taking out the "weakest and inferior" bucks.... have you seen some of the "cull buck" photos? These deer aren't "weak" their only fault is they have a set of horns that will never make the book.
> 
> It's not like people are paying $2000 for cull hunts to go out and look for a three legged, one eyed, 9.5 year old buck. They're looking for healthy, large deer, that have the largest rack with 8 points or less.
> 
> ...


What's your point? You don't like deer with large antlers? Or you don't think it's right to strive to have a deer herd with large antlers for others to hunt? Which is it because I have to tell you I'm getting pretty thin skinned on all of this banter about big horns versus small horns, it makes no sense.

To some any buck is a good buck and to others it's all about the size of the rack, to each his or her own, what the hell is your problem with it?

TH


----------



## skurkp (Jan 29, 2005)

I also agree 100% FFF, not much of a hunt if I can drive the fence line in a few hours, there is just no where for the deer to go, I am guaranteed to get a kill.


----------



## Cactus (Jan 16, 2006)

I am simply trying to make sure that there is sufficient habitat to allow these animals to continue their normal life cycle and avoid, or at least greatly delay, their extinction!


I am too by culling the crud out of inferiors and trying to get the buck/doe ratio to 1:1


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

Trouthunter said:


> What's your point? You don't like deer with large antlers? Or you don't think it's right to strive to have a deer herd with large antlers for others to hunt? Which is it because I have to tell you I'm getting pretty thin skinned on all of this banter about big horns versus small horns, it makes no sense.
> 
> To some any buck is a good buck and to others it's all about the size of the rack, to each his or her own, what the hell is your problem with it?
> 
> TH


trouth hunter...I'm not going to argue with you about it. I could care less how thin skinned you're getting as well. If you can't handle it, then don't reply.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

*Maybe So*



triple f said:


> No sir, not that I can tell. I am working to try and repair the damage that has been done by man. I am not working towards trying to grow 25 pound mallards, or pintails with 2' long pins, or teal the size of snow geese! I am simply trying to make sure that there is sufficient habitat to allow these animals to continue their normal life cycle and avoid, or at least greatly delay, their extinction!
> 
> There is, at least to me, a huuuuuuuuge difference between "Conservation" and "Genetic Engineering".


But you're messing with nature, which means you're messing with what God has done. No doubt about that. The folks who feed protein and who take care of the deer, low fence or high fence are doing the same thing. They're improving upon that which is available.

You said it yourself;


> I am working to try and repair the damage that has been done by man.


I don't see any difference between what you do and what the ranchers do (scientific breeding aside) because scientific breeding is done within a closed cell, not an open one so that's contained.

TH


----------



## cj9271 (Aug 24, 2004)

getting good but I have to leave the office now so I will check back for some more popcorn later at the casa


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

This is not about cull bucks!!!!! Or high fences!!!!!! Or about hunters paying whatever price for a buck!!!!!! Please don't take this thread somewhere it wasn't intended to go! My issue is with the attitude that we must eliminate all members of whatever group that do not meet up to our standards!


hmmmmmmmmmmmm, I've heard that philosophy before.......somewhere from school........history book I believe............just can't recall the name of the fella that was behind it.................


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

Kyle, tell you what, I read it twice, where did I miss your point? Perhaps you should read what I typed? Are you specific to a high fenced operation or what?

I'll ask you again, only once...

You don't like deer with large antlers? 

You don't think it's right to strive to have a deer herd with large antlers for others to hunt?

Two simple questions and I didn't even tell you to chill out.

TH


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

Trouthunter said:


> But you're messing with nature, which means you're messing with what God has done. No doubt about that.


NO SIR!!! I'm messing with what MAN has done _to_ what GOD gave him!


----------



## Syncerus (Oct 18, 2005)

FFF: you are obviously thinking of Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry and the new policy of the Democratic party regarding the Armed Forces.


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

OK, I'm about to head home. I will not be able to respond for the next 1 1/2 hours or so, so please don't think that I've kicked over an antpile and then hauled butt! I'm very interested in the replies here, so I'll be checking back in after I get to the house.

Peace out! And please keep them feathers slicked down!

Lance


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

triple f you do realize that every time you squeeze the trigger and pull that animal out of the herd, flock or school that you have altered the genetic pool and future of the species. In past generations people where causing certain species of fish and whitetail bucks to be genetically altered towards the smaller end of the spectrum. This was done unintentionally because we specifically targeted what was deemed to be trophies. Which left only the smaller _inferior_ ones to breed.


----------



## gmoney (Jul 26, 2004)

I have hunted both High and Low fences east and west Texas the onl;y thing that I can tell you is that you get what you pay for. If it is a monster buck you wish for than you will go to a High fence place and kill one of their monster bucks for a god awful price that they request. If you just enjoy the hunting and the out doors than you will probably be hunting a low fence place and harvest what you need for the freezer and not the wall. So for those who have the money and for those who want to continue to throw it away at these ranchers who breed big deer let them it is not your money. Someone said earlier than eventually the money and the deer will run out and we all can go back to harvesting what we need to eat isn't that what we are supposed to DO! just my 2 cents


----------



## Capt. Forrest (Jan 5, 2005)

I told myself that I wasn't going to even get involved with this thread, and I'm not. But, I just have some simple statements.

Statement 1: does carrying capacity, herd health, and animal husbandry not come into mind???????

Statement 2: let's let all the deer walk, no one shoot anything for a couple years, and just see what the deer herd is like across the state.............. (sarcasm if you can't figure it out)

Trouthunter and InfamousJ probably have an idea of what I really want to say, but, to be fair to the board, I will just keep my comments to myself.

Capt. Forrest


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

> NO SIR!!! I'm messing with what MAN has done _to_ what GOD gave him!


Isn't that what land owners are doing when they try to improve on the whitetail herd triple f?

For instance; In Lavaca, Colorado and Jackson counties Man had all but wiped out the population of whitetail bucks that were over 2.5 years old. The TP&W came in and established a 13" MINIMUM rule that I won't go into the particulars of, in order to build a herd of buck deer that would actually live past 2.5 years. They also issued doe permits to those who would work with them so that the population of the deer herd would be more in line with a healthy herd.

Land owners, myself included have strived to feed and control the habitat by burning for re-growth, clearing and planting that which a whitetail deer eats and thrives on. Since Man screwed it up by shooting anything with antlers for so long and for not shooting doe when they were able, the TP&W stepped in to force Man to do it with laws pertaining to what bucks could be shot.

Yea, it's playing God alright; to do what you're doing...repairing the damage that Man has done in years past.

TH


----------



## Clint Leopold (Mar 7, 2006)

Triple f, it sounds like this thread started from a post that I replied to earlier. All I said that an old looking deer with a slick horn needed to be shot. I am not trying to change genetics or what GOD made but I tried to use logic. If you are going to kill a deer anyways, why not shoot a deer that has bad genetics (I guess in my opinion anyways) and let a nice deer walk. It only makes sense to take it out a let another walk.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

Trouthunter said:


> Kyle, tell you what, I read it twice, where did I miss your point? Perhaps you should read what I typed? Are you specific to a high fenced operation or what?
> 
> I'll ask you again, only once...
> 
> ...


trout,

I actually edited my post after you read it.

Here's my problem...perhaps, if you had read all my posts, you'd know my point. Like I said, "I think the new antler regulations are a good idea" BUT, to some people who don't care about the size of the antlers, it's not a fair deal. There are a lot of people that don't get wrapped up in B&C scores, and they're only after it for the meat.

The post was referring to "playing God" it wasn't in regard to "post here if you like big horns".

I'm pretty sure anyone on this board would like to shoot a deer with "large antlers" although there are probably a lot of them that wouldn't value a deer shot out of a high fence the way you would.

If you're managing a ranch..to each their own. But don't make it sound like you're the Mother Theresa of the hunting world and helping the deer population out by shooting the "weakest" out of the herd...you and I know you're not shooting "weak" deer. an 8 point "cull" that weighs 200 lbs and scores 135 B&C isn't a "weak" deer.. it just has a rack that doesn't meets someone's specifications.


----------



## Mr Mudbug (Apr 12, 2006)

gmoney said:


> I have hunted both High and Low fences east and west Texas the onl;y thing that I can tell you is that you get what you pay for. If it is a monster buck you wish for than you will go to a High fence place and kill one of their monster bucks for a god awful price that they request. If you just enjoy the hunting and the out doors than you will probably be hunting a low fence place and harvest what you need for the freezer and not the wall. So for those who have the money and for those who want to continue to throw it away at these ranchers who breed big deer let them it is not your money. Someone said earlier than eventually the money and the deer will run out and we all can go back to harvesting what we need to eat isn't that what we are supposed to DO! just my 2 cents


If ya gotta have your buck right now or on a particular weekend, then yes buying one is the way to go. But there are other ways, their just not guaranteed.

Oh and IJ I do hunt every weekend, just aint got nothing to report. Haven't shot a deer in a few years. When I do get one, I'll let ya know. Peace, I'll check on this tomorrow.


----------



## Shin-Diggin (Jun 17, 2005)

Big rack little rack no rack who gives a ****. There just good eating. 

SD


----------



## Clint Leopold (Mar 7, 2006)

I might get slamed for this but its just MY opinion. If anyone of us here hunt for the sole purpose of putting food on the table, wouldn't it be cheaper to go to the store and just buy the meat.


----------



## Capt. Forrest (Jan 5, 2005)

i had to laugh at several things typed throughout this thread, and it just made me realize that there are alot more wildlife biologists on this board than I thought there were.


Capt. Forrest


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

Shin-Diggin said:


> Big rack little rack no rack who gives a ****. There just good eating.
> 
> SD


Better than Angus filet? LOL I doubt it... and you can get some good angus filet at Kroger for $16.99 a pound right now... LOL

Gas to your lease, cokes, booze, rib eyes, campfires, stories, memories... thats what it's about, spending more than it is freaking worth.... Horns are thrown in the mix just like a cigarette boat and for some - trophy mattress thrashers at the local tavern to brag about at camp the next day... it's part of man, to get the best out of life...







And yall have to sit here and argue about it... sour grapes for most is all I see (jealousy and plum fed up since you dont own your own place to make your own rules).


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

*Kyle...*

I don't have a high fence ranch, it's low fenced and is co-oped and part of a WMA. I've hunted high fenced ranches and don't have a problem with the larger ones but again, this isn't about high fence-low fence, right?

The 13" rule may not seem fair to you but it's the only way of controling the age of the buck herd, and those who would shoot anything with horns is why we are where we are today.

And yes we are shooting the weakest links on our place and on the surrounding ranches. Spikes and doe and any buck with an unbranched antler is all we've shot for three years now. But it would be cool if some day we actually had an 8-point that weighed 200 pounds but that's going to be tough in Jackson and Bandera County.

TH



Kyle 1974 said:


> trout,
> 
> I actually edited my post after you read it.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mike Jennings (Oct 11, 2005)

Capt. Forrest said:


> i had to laugh at several things typed throughout this thread, and it just made me realize that there are alot more wildlife biologists on this board than I thought there were.
> 
> Capt. Forrest


aint that the truth...
the whole argumant is laughable at best ...Mike


----------



## jtburf (May 26, 2004)

Capt. Forrest said:


> i had to laugh at several things typed throughout this thread, and it just made me realize that there are alot more wildlife biologists on this board than I thought there were.
> 
> Capt. Forrest


Arm Chairs daddy O .... they are only Arm Chairs!

John


----------



## gmoney (Jul 26, 2004)

Hey has anyone got a recipe for boilded or baked horns I would love to try them out I just haven't mastered the art of cooking them yet. Just humor to all the talk about horns.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

triple f said:


> This is not about cull bucks!!!!! Or high fences!!!!!! Or about hunters paying whatever price for a buck!!!!!! Please don't take this thread somewhere it wasn't intended to go! My issue is with the attitude that we must eliminate all members of whatever group that do not meet up to our standards!
> 
> hmmmmmmmmmmmm, I've heard that philosophy before.......somewhere from school........history book I believe............just can't recall the name of the fella that was behind it.................


To answer your question it was Hiltler.

But, to your point, for years Man has continued to encroach on the whitetail's habitat. If we did nothing, due to overpopulation, the herd health would suffer dramatically (for many biological reasons I won't go into here). So it is our responsibility to keep populations in check. Lucky for us/deer, men like the feel of that hard stuff on their head. They will pay money to get it. Since we already are charged with population control, why not take from the herd those animals that will not produce the antlers that we desire. By doing that, we increase herd health AND increase antler size. That results in men willing to spend more money that ulitmately will go to conservation. Start shooting only the top off of the herd and ultimately the herd will not produce enough of what man is willing to pay for---antlers. End result will be reduced interest in hunting and less money for conservation. Basically, I'm saying "culling" is a necessary evil to maintain the system and the cash flowing for conservation. If you got to shoot deer anyway, why not shoot from the bottom up. I hope you understand my point.

For the record, my comments are not referring in any way to the hi/lo debate or genetically altering raising super bucks. Those are entirely different issues which I don't think you meant to get into.

Done. Going to get my popcorn now.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

All good answers...........


----------



## Todd Claunch (Sep 5, 2006)

to try and put things in the right frame of mind. i was always tought to be thankful for the things that i receive. and for the last twenty five years i have had the the fortune of hunting on my wife's ranch in the hill country.and to me just getting the chance to do these things make me feal very lucky.and the older i get the more iam able to watch the changes that have gone on in the hill
country.


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

TXPalerider said:


> To answer your question it was Hiltler.
> 
> But, to your point, for years Man has continued to encroach on the whitetail's habitat. If we did nothing, due to overpopulation, the herd health would suffer dramatically (for many biological reasons I won't go into here). So it is our responsibility to keep populations in check. Lucky for us/deer, men like the feel of that hard stuff on their head. They will pay money to get it. Since we already are charged with population control, why not take from the herd those animals that will not produce the antlers that we desire. By doing that, we increase herd health AND increase antler size. That results in men willing to spend more money that ulitmately will go to conservation. Start shooting only the top off of the herd and ultimately the herd will not produce enough of what man is willing to pay for---antlers. End result will be reduced interest in hunting and less money for conservation. Basically, I'm saying "culling" is a necessary evil to maintain the system and the cash flowing for conservation. If you got to shoot deer anyway, why not shoot from the bottom up. I hope you understand my point.
> 
> ...


Wow... somebody actually came up with an argument for all of this that follows logic. Congrats TxPalerider! Seriously, first decent argument I've heard. Necessary evil is a concept to put some thought into.

FFF, for the most part you're spinning your wheels. The folks most sold into the horn hunt and that actively manipulate "their" herd have already managed to somehow justify themselves in their minds, no matter how silly it seems. Kind of like a single man justifying getting as many women in bed as he can. It takes a sick logic to do it, is obviously wrong to most folks, yet he's totally blind to it.

The 13" rule in counties where you are not allowed to shoot does is just stupid. It isn't about improving the age structure, that is just trying to justify it. It's about getting some bigger horns out there without upsetting some old time and influential land owners that don't think does should be killed, but want venison. Problem is, the meat hunters would just assume shoot does as young bucks, and what if a "genetically inferior" buck dies of old age never having a spread over that? My first deer was a 5.5 year old E Tex buck that had 6 points and about an 8 inch spread. He would still be alive. Most of these counties have buck to doe ratios of 1 to 10 or 1 to 20. It makes more sense to just allow people to shoot a spike and one deer, buck or doe. Then you can manage buck/doe ratio rather than horns.

And the whole high fence argument... sheesh. If they are there to keep other deer out, they should be required to drive the deer out of their property before completing the fence, then ship in their own privately purchased deer. Or buy the current deer from TPWD. Then I have no problem with it. That would maintain both property rights and public game rights - but too many landowners with money and a corrupt state gov't won't let that happen.

God forbid logic enter into anything here, it's all about money.


----------



## wacker (Mar 22, 2006)

Snows are being wacked but thats OK? Deer are meat not people and yes I do think any human spikes should be culled.


----------



## LongRodMaster (Mar 5, 2005)

If any one needs me I will be sitting on the porch with Capt. Forrest LMAO the funiest part is I don't think it was meant to be a troll.


----------



## gunnut (Aug 3, 2004)

Since I've joined this board my favorites topics of argument are:

High fence or low fence...?
Did the oversized redfish have his tag on...?
catch and release crappie...?
large or small calibre bullets...?
did the Osprey party boat wrong its customers with poor service...?

This one could enter the archives...


----------



## wacker (Mar 22, 2006)

You forgot Potlicken.LOL


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Don't forget..Just Keep 5!!


----------



## Profish00 (May 21, 2004)

TXPalerider said:


> Don't forget..Just Keep 5!!


I wish, I would love to catch five!!!!


----------



## 15476 (May 15, 2006)

my nephew guided on a very exclusive ranch here in texas. he told us a story about texas trophy hunter magazine going there for a "guided hunt". the buck was picked out of a group of bucks that were penned up. he was set aside for a few days before the hunt, then turned loose in the area were the feeder was.next morning they go out and STALK! the mighty trophy. he said that he, and the other guides were standing right behind the film crew in the wide open when the buck came into feed. anything for a tv show i guess.


----------



## scwine (Sep 7, 2006)

I can see how the "playing God" argument could come up if there were no restrictions of deer a person could take. BUT, if take you 5, for example, why not choose what kind they are? Just my 2 pesos(which isn't much).


----------



## warcat (May 22, 2004)

Every single human on this planet plays God everyday. Yes, I just said that. I'll say it again slowly, so read it slowly... Every single person on this planet plays God every single day.

You do, your wife does, your brother does, your sister does, your children do. Whether it is killing that fly that's buzzing around your house or the fire ants you kill in your yard, or simply driving your car to work, or eating a burger at lunchtime. As the supreme predator of the planet Earth, humans control the lives of ALL other living creatures on the planet. Our existence causes death to all others. It is a fact that cannot be denied.

Having said that, it doesn't matter if you want to kill a small antlered buck or a big antlered buck, or a fat cow or a butterfly on your windshield. You're already playing God everyday. So, what does it matter?


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

i think i should stay out of this one. sweetie, would you melt some more butter, please?


----------



## activescrape (Jan 8, 2006)

Not Exactly. Man exercises a God given right every day. A God given authority.

Genesis 1: 28 "God blessed them and said to them,"Be fruitful and increase in number, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." There's lots more scripture pertaining to this.

Also, we are called to be good stewards of everything we have been blessed with.



warcat said:


> Every single human on this planet plays God everyday. Yes, I just said that. I'll say it again slowly, so read it slowly... Every single person on this planet plays God every single day.
> 
> You do, your wife does, your brother does, your sister does, your children do. Whether it is killing that fly that's buzzing around your house or the fire ants you kill in your yard, or simply driving your car to work, or eating a burger at lunchtime. As the supreme predator of the planet Earth, humans control the lives of ALL other living creatures on the planet. Our existence causes death to all others. It is a fact that cannot be denied.
> 
> Having said that, it doesn't matter if you want to kill a small antlered buck or a big antlered buck, or a fat cow or a butterfly on your windshield. You're already playing God everyday. So, what does it matter?


----------



## 2x Drop Tine (Sep 24, 2006)

Very nicely said ascrape. I think there is nothing more to add to this topic......"Rule over & Good stewards" thats what we should be doing!


activescrape said:


> Not Exactly. Man exercises a God given right every day. A God given authority.
> 
> Genesis 1: 28 "God blessed them and said to them,"Be fruitful and increase in number, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." There's lots more scripture pertaining to this.
> 
> Also, we are called to be good stewards of everything we have been blessed with.


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

Alot of great replies! I want to thank everyone for their input on this issue. I didn't plan on changing anyone's ideas or practices with this thread. That was never my intention. I simply had to get my views out there before I blew a gasket over this.

I never intended to offend or ****** anyone off! If I did, then you have my full apology right here and now. Very, very few of the people on this board actually know me, so I am putting absolutely NO merit to the replies that talk of "ignorance" or sarcasm towards the "armchair" "wildlife biologists" and such.

Now, for what may (or may not:tongue: ) be my final points on this subject...



wacker said:


> Snows are being wacked but thats OK?


This statement, along with alot of the other comments that have been made, are talking about population control and have absolutely nothing to do with the concept of shovin a straw full of some monster buck semen into a penned up and/or sedated doe in order to grow a whole herd of gigantic antlers simply so that whoever happens to "own" that particular herd has the bragging rights and can now bump his price up to $15,000 or $20,000 or whatever he feels like he can get!

The whole concept of "owning" a natural wildlife resource is totally foreign and sooooooo unnatural to me. That may be why I am having such a hard time with the AI and selective geneology parts of this practice.

Captive, selective, AI, genetically engineered breeding simply to produce a massive and freakish set of antlers? Why not just grow them in a lab to the buyers specifications?

Population control and habitat management are tools that, when used and implemented properly, will allow "WILD"life to flourish and prosper as long as we, as stewards of these resources, do our jobs and protect them.


----------



## stdgwl11 (Sep 9, 2005)

*Playing God*

I've read all of this, and I have my own opinion whenit comes to high fencing and taking that are smaller or are inferior. I feel that that as more and more land is becoming urban areas, for example sub-divisions, malls, highways, towns expanding, the availibility of land for these deer to eat and grow and populate is decreasing. This does not include the fact that many big ranches and large pieces of land are being inherited by people that do not care to retain ownership and sell that land in smaller tracts. This also implements many different styles in managing deer in relation to foraging and reproduction areas and capabilities. In other words people are buying these smaller ranchettes in prime deer country and killing more bucks and/or does than they should as well. Many new land owners doen't manage deer populations. The outcome can produce inferior deer herds, with horrible buck doe ratios and or pushing large numbers of these deer to other areas causing over population. These are the reasons I believe in high fencing. Those that spend the money on high fencing usually have biologists or managers hired to help with buck to doe ratios, planting food plots and providing for deer so that they are healthy and productive deer. We are loosing precious habit for all species of animals daily, and as an avid hunter I hate to see it. I try to manage what I hunt, by providing for them and would only high fence as a necessity to better provide for them. 10,000 acres is larger than most deer habitats today thanks to construction and urban areas developing and growing so fast. I applaud those that still have 10,000 acres for animals to live anf grow in. Thats my take and everyone has the right to disagree with. May God Bless.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

triple f said:


> .............Now, for what may (or may not:tongue: ) be my final points on this subject...
> 
> This statement, along with alot of the other comments that have been made, are talking about population control and have absolutely nothing to do with the concept of shovin a straw full of some monster buck semen into a penned up and/or sedated doe in order to grow a whole herd of gigantic antlers simply so that whoever happens to "own" that particular herd has the bragging rights and can now bump his price up to $15,000 or $20,000 or whatever he feels like he can get!
> 
> ...


WOW! I didn't see those topics as directly related to your original question/comments. I've got a whole other opinion on these topics. Yet, I'll withhold for another day.

g'nite.


----------



## warcat (May 22, 2004)

activescrape said:


> Not Exactly. Man exercises a God given right every day. A God given authority.
> 
> Genesis 1: 28 "God blessed them and said to them,"Be fruitful and increase in number, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." There's lots more scripture pertaining to this.
> 
> Also, we are called to be good stewards of everything we have been blessed with.


Thank you. You are right. God Bless.


----------



## berto (Oct 14, 2004)

man ive got 10k acers behind my house.. anyone wanna donate some deer? Hell ill charge half price.  its a low fence though.. the deer will have to get along with the cows though.. make sure u inject them with frendly deer sperm..

Hell I would just love to shoot a deer.. its been over 5 years since ive had a place to hunt.. maybe one day


----------



## muzzleloader (May 21, 2004)

I think one obvious fact has been overlooked about the 13 inch rule. I live and hunt in Lavaca county, have been for over 30 years ( moved here when I was 22 years old). We started a "local" GMA among ourselves several years before the Official State GMAs became in vogue. Our concern was that so many "ranches" were only 15, 25, 50 acres and had 5, 6, or even more hunters. The state actually looked at a regulation that would limit the amount of bucks killed by acreage. Can you imagine the uproar if a rule was put into effect that limited killing bucks to one per say 100 acres per year ? It would haved caused an uproar. But how many "trophy" bucks are raised on a 100 acre place or a 1000 acre place ? The 13 " rule is an effective , not perfect, way to keep the buck deer from being slaughtered in an area were the average "ranch" is way less than 100 acres. Our buck doe ratio was around 12 or 14 to 1 when it started, now it is around 3 to 5 to 1. "It ain't perfect but it's the best method that has been implemented yet" Deer management policies are constantly changing and, IMHO, becoming better with time.


----------



## parkman14 (Jul 27, 2006)

Look guys not everybody who manages land is behind a high fence. Some of the better lands taht are managed are a couple of neighbors that are under low fence and have gotten on the same page. I hunt behind a high fence and we manage our deer herd. So what if you disagree with what we do. We bought the place and we put money into it, so please just let us do what we please. On our place we don't buy deer and put them on the place everything we have done and have come from our ranch. Besides if you arfe behind high fence it won't count for the B&C books anyway. I am tired of everyone bagging on us high fence hunters. Please just let us hunt. We don't bag on the people that huntbehind a low fence. I have hunted dehind high fence and low fence and it is just as challenging either way. I have hunted low fence in jackson county, and in Mexico and in Maverick County. Our rach is in Zavala county.I have experienced both and enjoy both types of hunting. We don;tneed to be arguing between each other. I guess that is all I should say on this subject. Don't take my message as me being angry or mad. I am writing this with an open heart but lets jusst all get along whether we are High fence or low fence.
Cody


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

Capt. Forrest said:


> i had to laugh at several things typed throughout this thread, and it just made me realize that there are alot more wildlife biologists on this board than I thought there were.
> 
> Capt. Forrest


If that's the way it "should" be.. then why don't we pass a message board rule that prior to posting any message, you must post your professional credentials. If you do not hold some sort of professional position in exactly the field upon which you are posting, you post should be removed, and you should be banned from future posting......otherwise....I'd hate to see a bunch of "arm-chairs" posting their opinions on a freaking fishing/hunting message board.


----------



## triple f (Aug 23, 2005)

TXPalerider said:


> WOW! I didn't see those topics as directly related to your original question/comments. I've got a whole other opinion on these topics. Yet, I'll withhold for another day.
> 
> g'nite.


Brad, my whole point is that these animals are "WILD" yet they are being manipulated and managed by man so as to completely eliminate any and all "inferior" members of the species. Just havin a hard time dealin with the fact that a natural resource that belongs to all of us is slowly being fenced in, eartagged, grown into some kind of super breed and then cataloged to be sold and traded like cattle.


----------



## BigBuck (Mar 2, 2005)

*Management bucks*

I agree 100% with ActiveScrape. We have a God-given responsibility to oversee the wildlife. As is said, "the devil is in the details". This thread may have been started by my post on a management hunt. If so, the 10,000 acres we hunt is not high fenced (except along the county road). We do not artificially inseminate any animals. The biologist told us to kill 70 bucks and 70 does off the ranch. Should we kill them as we see them? Take out 2.5 yr old 10 pts? We are removing as many mature 8 pt and less deer we can find. Same thing as picking out a big drake pin or mallard from a flock. We know it is better for the herd, then clients will pay more for bigger deer, ensuring the ranch stays a ranch and not cut up into "ranchetts" and sold. Hunting is big business, and for good or bad, it does help to maintain ranches for future generations. 
Now pass the popcorn.
BB


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

Kyle 1974 said:


> If that's the way it "should" be.. then why don't we pass a message board rule that prior to posting any message, you must post your professional credentials. If you do not hold some sort of professional position in exactly the field upon which you are posting, you post should be removed, and you should be banned from future posting......otherwise....I'd hate to see a bunch of "arm-chairs" posting their opinions on a freaking fishing/hunting message board.


you don't necessarily have to be a professional with credentials in order to have and post a worthwhile and valid opinion on a given subject, or field.


----------



## bluefin (Aug 16, 2005)

TripleF,

I see where you're an avid duck and goose hunter. At one time I used to do a lot of that as well. Most of the guys I hunted with had dogs and those dogs were all selectively breeded based on certain characteristics for the purpose of hunting. And some of those 'pedigreed' dogs can get just as expensive as some of these deer leases.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

mastercylinder said:


> you don't necessarily have to be a professional with credentials in order to have and post a worthwhile and valid opinion on a given subject, or field.


MC.... there was a heavy amount of sarcasm attached to that message. That's the only problem with posting a message.. it's hard to get the feeling of the author sometimes. But I agree with you man! I think just about everyone's opinion is as valid as anyone else's.


----------



## surfspeck (Jun 7, 2006)

I hunt 1000 high fenced acres in the hill country and if you think you can drive the fence, much less walk the fence and kill a big buck on my place you are sadly mistaken. Ive hunted 5 days already this season since Wed last week and I havent seen a buck worth taking as a trophy or a cull yet. So much for the high fence = no fair chase theory. Get a grip


skurkp said:


> I also agree 100% FFF, not much of a hunt if I can drive the fence line in a few hours, there is just no where for the deer to go, I am guaranteed to get a kill.


----------



## Mr Mudbug (Apr 12, 2006)

> The whole concept of "owning" a natural wildlife resource is totally foreign and sooooooo unnatural to me. That may be why I am having such a hard time with the AI and selective geneology parts of this practice.
> 
> Captive, selective, AI, genetically engineered breeding simply to produce a massive and freakish set of antlers? Why not just grow them in a lab to the buyers specifications?


That's probably the next thing if it hasn't started already.
This scientific breeding thing is just not a good thing, eventually some decease or something bad will come from it, just cause a few prilivedged people had to have there deer now.

IJ my argument isn't about jealousy either, my family owns a ranch we can afford to fence if we thought that was right. I personnally pay too much to hunt somewhere else, & usually don't get a trophy, but still persue my quest to shoot a wild trophy buck. As far as our family ranch my brother shot the 1st buck there in 7 years, it scored 140 inches as a 9 point not bad for Caldwell county. We made a pack we the neighbor not to shoot any inmature deer, and that was the result, it can be done.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

Honestly, that to me is the best way to do it Mud but you know as well as me that all neighbors aint the same... thats part of life. And also we cannot stop business and progress.. its human nature. Deer are in it and producing big time for those that have.

I was just talking to a friend on the phone and IMO, based on most of the controversy revolving around this, alot of these ethics seem to be influenced by a persons monetary value. I said alot, not all. Sure there will be some who no matter how much money they had would be strict low fence conservative old school hunters but I think the tone would change on alot of the whiners if their bank accounts filled to the brim and $10k was like a dollar bill. I wish I had the $$'s to do whatever whenever.


----------



## TPD (Jun 11, 2004)

*J*

Why are they whiners if they don't agree with you?


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

You're right.... just complainers I guess. Hearing the same complaint everytime on this hunting site makes it look like whining. Sorry, not offensive.


----------



## Mr Mudbug (Apr 12, 2006)

I agree not all neighbors are the same, example at our place the neighbors to the south and west agreed on let'um mature, but the ones on the north and south didn't. Hopefully they change their minds now, we'll see. Hopefully we can lead by example.


----------



## TPD (Jun 11, 2004)

*agreed*

I don't hunt high fence so any opinion I have certainly wouldn't be educted. But I do see merit to both sides of the argument. It doesn't seem to me to be cut and dry on either side, even though some here might strongly believe their opinion is absolute. One thing does puzzle me. Why would you think it is surprising for people to continue to talk about a very emotional topic related to hunting on a hunting board? Seems like the only place to do it to me. I would prefer to bash croaker soakers, but, I don't think I would get as much response on this board.


----------



## TPD (Jun 11, 2004)

*Mudbug*

Its those guys directly to the east I'm worried about.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

TPD said:


> Why would you think it is surprising for people to continue to talk about a very emotional topic related to hunting on a hunting board? Seems like the only place to do it to me. I would prefer to bash croaker soakers, but, I don't think I would get as much response on this board.


Bottom line?

In my honest opion, it divides us all to attack each others legal methods and opens the door for the true anti's against us. Plain and simple.


----------



## TX CHICKEN (Jun 4, 2004)

The time wasted on arguments like these could be much better spent elsewhere. While I could afford to hunt a nice ranch and shoot big deer I chose to go on a western big game hunt once a year other than pay 5-6k to hunt a managed ranch in Texas. I don't agree with traping, pen raising, and artificail insemenation but all other mgmt techniques are fine with me.

Obviously we all are passionate about hunting so lets agree to disagree and move on because argument like this will just divide us as hunters and with all the tree huggers out there we need to stick together!!!


----------



## Rack Ranch (May 25, 2004)

It's fine to argue over these things because it means that we all have a passion for what we love..BUT REMEMBER THIS..We are all on the same page when it come to the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS..There are more votes in Harris County than the rest of the state west of I 35..So introduce as many people as possible to the outdoors ..And before you cast your vote in an election know there stance on GUN CONTROL..

p.s. The deer don't know what side of the fence their on..

Walker


----------



## El Cazador (Mar 4, 2005)

TX CHICKEN said:


> The time wasted on arguments like these could be much better spent elsewhere. While I could afford to hunt a nice ranch and shoot big deer I chose to go on a western big game hunt once a year other than pay 5-6k to hunt a managed ranch in Texas. I don't agree with *traping*, pen raising, and artificail insemenation but all other mgmt techniques are fine with me.
> 
> Obviously we all are passionate about hunting so lets agree to disagree and move on because argument like this will just divide us as hunters and with all the tree huggers out there we need to stick together!!!


What is *traping?* Is that a cross between *t*rapping and *raping*? LOL sorry I couldn't resist...


----------



## TPD (Jun 11, 2004)

*following that line of philosophy......*

Can you name one other time in American history where that was the case? Where two sides didn't discuss something (somewhat intelligently) and come to a conclusion based on some type of previously agreed upon program? Its the American way, boys. If you think its so wrong and that the anti's might be given more ammo then why do you include your opinion in the post to begin with?


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

TPD said:


> Can you name one other time in American history where that was the case? Where two sides didn't discuss something (somewhat intelligently) and come to a conclusion based on some type of previously agreed upon program? Its the American way, boys. If you think its so wrong and that the anti's might be given more ammo then why do you include your opinion in the post to begin with?


FWIW, My opinion is not against anyones method of legal hunting although I may dislike some of it quite a bit. And this aint a free speech board either since I have the ability to control the negativity. We do let you talk your opinion however. Go get your own hunting board to complain to about high fences, deer breeding, young kids shooting big bucks, etc. Comprende?

Edit: just had a good idea.. take it down to the Jungle board.. you can have at it all you want there.. perfect forum for the arguing.


----------



## TPD (Jun 11, 2004)

*ok*

But I didn't complain about any of those things. Except croakers.


----------



## crowmagnum (Feb 4, 2006)

Dang,I missed all the fun.If some of ya'll would just go hunting you wouldn't have time to fight this loosing battle over and over again.The rut is on boys and I don't care which side of the fence you are on.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

crowmagnum said:


> Dang,I missed all the fun.If some of ya'll would just go hunting you wouldn't have time to fight this loosing battle over and over again.The rut is on boys and I don't care which side of the fence you are on.


Maybe that's the problem.. if we could all get off work for the entire deer season, no one would have any time to complain here!!

LOL


----------

