# To Fence or Not to Fence?



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

What do you guys think about high game fencing? 

I am sure you have an opinion on this and how the Whitetail belong to the public, but that the land owners should have the right to use them as income. Could they exploit this natural resource? Should the state be more harder on these high game fence ranches?


----------



## Wildman (May 21, 2004)

*High Fences*

Should be illegal to have a fence over five foot. I hate'em and it makes Texas hunting look stupid to others. Yeah there might be fair chase on a 5000 acre high fence ranch but on the small places come on. Maybe we can genetically put antlers on cows and shoot them. Deer are wild and should be able to roam where they want. My two cents.............I'm sure some ole boy with a 300 acre high fence pen is about to rip into me but I have a right to my opinion. NEXT PERSON!!!!!


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

High fencing IMO has ruined texas deer hunting for ever. I will never be the same again.
Its now being completely controled by big money.
Just wish I had some big money to participate.


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

I don't like em, but there are other things I like much less. 

When you flip through Texas Trophy Hunters, it sickens me to see how many "deer farms" there are out there selling breed bucks, selling semen for AI'ing, selling does, and WORST of all selling hunts!


----------



## BoHonk445 (Oct 8, 2004)

*High Game Fencing*

The deer belong to the people of the State of Texas. So why can't we hunt them? High fences are a joke. If we can't outlaw them then I say ranches should either have to pay the state for the deer they imprison, allow so many public hunts on their land per year, or not allow high fences on land less than 2K acres (worst case scenario).


----------



## bp fishin(kat-a-lac) (May 21, 2004)

Woodrow, good comments. 
I'm against small ranches with game fences and raising deer.
If a large owner wants a high fence, ok with me. I'm sick of seeing a large ranch adjacent to a small ranch or even another large ranch which is partioned(cut up) and they put their blinds on your fence line. So fence them out. I'm sure many disagree, but we all have opinions.


----------



## badfisher (Jun 9, 2004)

The thing with the game fences is kind of a double edge sword. Most that you talk to use them so that their hard work and dedication to trophy management is not negated by someone across a fence. I have looked at it a ton of ways and the guys that high game fence are blamed for the rise in cost of hunting but I blame it more on the guy that day hunts 300 acres every weekend of the season and kills 35 bucks off of that property. If you really look at the financials of a big high fence ranch most of them make VERY little profit. Heck most of them have well over a million in fence alone not to mention the land and lodge. It takes a ton of deer hunts to pay for that even at $15000 a piece. The one thing they can hope for is to raise a deer like high roller and then sell him for $500000.00 or something.


----------



## Dr. Eyes (Oct 18, 2004)

*high fences:*

I met this guy who said he had 325 acres high fenced..when i asked him how many deer he had in there he said he had 125! was like ****! i asked him if he had them tied to a tree! He was like every other little rancher out there trying to make a buck selling hunts. After all, there is more money in deer hunting than there is in cattle. The problem is starting that if you dont have a high fenced ranch, then theres no deer, shot out etc. Im hunting is a place in duval county. Now that county is shot out! There are some very good ranches, but they are all high fenced. You dont see many low fenced ranches that are any good. Nowadays, you cant find a good deer lease. I must have looked at two dozen places before i gave up in disgust. Then out of desperation, i settled on my current one. All of the ones i saw, there was either no deer, shot out, high fenced all way around, or had this typical neighbor: (300-500 acres, like 10 guns on it, and at least 20 deer blinds). Im honestly starting think, screw it all and just buy myself a place. I know i cant afford but perhaps 200-300 acres, but ill proably high fence the whole place and grow me some deer.


----------



## Pablo (May 21, 2004)

This is a subject that has been cussed and discussed on about ten thousand messages boards. Everyone is either for them or against them, very little middle ground.

I personally think they are a useful tool in managing your habitat for "your" deer. Yes, they supposedly belong to the state, but a rancher has a duty and obligation to maintain a healthy deer herd. 

I don't see the state outlawing hi fences in my lifetime, too many private property rights issues.

However, I don't believe in them on very small acreage for a "canned" hunt.

Pablo


----------



## CHunter (May 25, 2004)

I am totally against high fencing. I am not against fencing though. I feel some form of fencing is warranted but anything over 4 to 6 ft range is just plain ludicrous.


----------



## Sea-Slug (May 28, 2004)

*High Fence*

Just my 2 cents worth, as most of you already know, I don't like high fences. They cut off game migration trails that have been used for thousands of years by game. I think this helped mix genes. Now we are fencing in Genetic Bottlenecks and really hurting our free ranging herds. I don't like them, never did, never will, and refuse to hunt behind one, no matter how big the place is or how big the Bucks are that are behind it! They are illegal in most states and should be in this one. No one can improve on mother natures design in the long run. As far as the guy over the fence shooting everything that moves, change the regulations! Make a statewide min. 8 pt. rule, or an unforked horn on one side, or no brow tine on one side rule! Up the doe limit to 6 a year, get our free ranging herds back to a 50/50 buck/doe ratio and manage the age of the herd. The high fence places would open thier gates back up in 10 years or so. Hire more Game Wardens! It is simple. The high fence country club will tell you thats way to complicated. lol!


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

Does anybody remember which isssue of TPWD magazine addressed this issue? I remember it was a one page essay at the beggining of the magazine written by cook.

I thought it was well written and it influenced me to hear both sides of this debate.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

When you say make the state do this and that , thats exactly what wont' happen. There's too many politicians with there hand s in the deer hunting pie, that benefit from this, in hunting or monetary gains . IMO


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

The problem I see with changing state wide restrictions is how much varience there is from one piece of land to another within each county, and more so within each region. Each individual tract of land has it's own unique needs. The antler restiction laws for those counties in central Texas is a good thing and seems to be having good results, but that is a fairly conservative plan in a region that for the most part really needs it. I have a buddy with a place in Colorado Co., they have to get permits for does every year from the state and still don't get enough...but they are the exception to the rule and you can't change the counties regulations because they have a good deer herd, the rest of the county will suffer. 

And yall are right in say that high fences won't be outlawed.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

First of all, Texas Whitetails don't "migrate" as do Mule Deer and Elk herds in other states. So, I'm not going to address that aspect of this discussion. But, I'm gonna try to shine a different light on this subject. Let me start by saying, I do NOT hunt a high fenced ranch. So I don't want anyone thinking I'm biased. These are simply my observations. 

I have a wide range of opinions on this subject. And I have come to the conclusion that this is a multiple edged sword. But, I will say, I donâ€™t approve of 100-200 acre deer farms selling hunts. Itâ€™s ridiculous and borders unethical.


First, I think we need to look at why high fences originated. (this is my opinion only) I suspect, many years ago, a rancher realized deer hunting might be profitable and decided to try grow bigger bucks by letting them get old. But, he had a neighbor that didnâ€™t have his same opinion (see the thread entitled Feeders and Blinds on Fence line). Out of frustration, the rancher decides to put up a high fence to control the outside, contradictory influence of the disagreeable neighbor. Over time, the rancher starts to realize the fruits of his labor, grows older, bigger racked bucks, and begins making more money. Other ranchers find out and start doing the same thing. They have the same problems with their neighbors and begin erecting their own fences.



Now letâ€™s take this a step further. Because deer hunting then became profitable for the ranchers, they start seeking out ways to grow even bigger deer. They start looking into alternative feeding programs, selective harvest, etc. Thus, the infancy of QDM (Quality Deer Management) practices. These practices are implemented for several years and the bucks get bigger and more profit producing. As the bucks generated more profit, the managers started looking for better more productive ways to do these things. As ranchers started spending more money managing their deer, it became more and more imperative that they protect their investment. Thus more high fences.



I think most of you can follow the natural progression of that argument, so, Iâ€™ll stop there.



Now, letâ€™s look at another edge of this swordâ€¦.QDM is a direct result of profit. Because deer hunting became profitable, more research was commissioned to figure out ways to maximize potential. Thus, the additional genetic research and the development of products like AntlerMax feeds and Biologic seed. The fact is, the additional studies on herd management and the necessary R&D for the type of products listed above, is a direct result of profit. If it werenâ€™t profitable, none of the studies/research would have ever been done, and none of those new products would have ever been developed. In fact, if it werenâ€™t profitable, we probably wouldnâ€™t be having this conversation, because the phrase QDM would have never been coined. 



You see, we canâ€™t have it both ways. QDM, at itâ€™s origin, is a direct result of profit. But, the protection of profit, is the reason most high fences are built.



Yes, high fencing has gotten out of hand. Yes, lease prices are becoming prohibitive. But, the fact remains, there are more deer and more QUALITY deer, today, than there was 50 years ago. We are living in the greatest time ever (if you can afford it), to hunt quality Whitetails. 

just a penny of my thoughts


----------



## Bucksnort (Jun 29, 2004)

Dang, PR...glad you said it,,,,your're exactly correct


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

There's no doubt that there are more whitetails now than when chris columbus set foot on this continet. 
Due to agriculural yields, meaning more food ,and lack of, or eradication of predation. Whitetails now stand where they never existed before.
The only large mammal more prolific than the whitetail is the coyote.
In every state and province that they exist you can hunt on millions of acres for nothing or just by asking farmer brown, but not texas, and we have the most.

Now that trend is seaping into other states as well. And guess who thier blaming it on. They being the locals.

So there is no doubt that these are the good ole days. But the average Joe (our Children) 20 years from now will never know it. Because just like automobiles , deer hunting will be priced for the rich only.
Deer populations are already out of control in many places .

I know you have these morrons that dont know how to take care of what is not theirs so what do you do? ( YOU KEEP THIER SORRY A__ OFF OF IT) I HAVE DEER LEASE, but how many dont because they just cant afford it.

OK OK I'll stop , sorry I just carried away and P---ed off when this subject is brought up . or did I bring it up?
The ball is roling , there's no going back.
R.R.......................................................................................


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Redfishr said:


> .........
> In every state and province that they exist you can hunt on millions of acres for nothing or just by asking farmer brown, but not texas, and we have the most.


That's because 96-97% of Texas is private. Do you propose that landowners be required to let everyone have access to their land for the purpose of hunting. I'm not a landowner, but I suspect if I was, I would want to control what I did with my land. Additionally, Texas being predominantly private is exactly the reason we have the best Whitetail hunting in the country.



Redfishr said:


> .........Now that trend is seaping into other states as well. And guess who thier blaming it on......


So? I don't care who they blame it on. It's an inevitablity.



Redfishr said:


> .......... But the average Joe (our Children) 20 years from now will never know it. Because just like automobiles , deer hunting will be priced for the rich only.


I agree. It's about to price me out now. What's the solution?

If I knew the answer, I'd act on it. I want my grandkids to be able to hunt too.


----------



## Pablo (May 21, 2004)

TxPaleRider: I like the way you think.

Pablo


----------



## Blackgar (Aug 4, 2004)

*Blackgar*

All of the people that are griping about high fences need to go out & spend $600.00 per acre for about 4000 acres as we did & spend $2000.00 per month on feed & feed plots not to mention maintaining water supply & irrigation, then have the 50 acre plot that divides you & the next real hunter neighbor start day leasing & shooting all of the three year old trophies. See if you would high fence then!!!!


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Blackgar, I agree with you and can certainly see your point of view. I hate it when we spend 1000's of dollars a year on protien and refrain from shooting those young potential trophies and the neighbor just sets up as close as he can to reap the fruits of our labor.


----------



## Sea-Slug (May 28, 2004)

*Fence*

TX- I agree with most of your points. I was not trying to say deer have an annual migration like Elk or Caribu. But I am saying that deer genetics spread out over large areas over long periods of time. Once deer are fenced in, you take those genetics out of the mix forever. And the fences keep deer from ranging around exchanging genetics. It might take a thousand years for specific genes to be passed a thousand miles. But they did spread. Now, alot of the genetic diversity is threatened. Just a bad idea, wont have any consequences in our lifetime, but maybe a hundred years from now it could become an issue.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

I agree with that Slug. But, most responsible mangers know that and have an active deer exchange program with other ranches. Swapping does with other intensly managed ranches is common. Other quality bucks are also brought in.


----------



## gundoctor (May 20, 2004)

I still say the when enough of the lower to middle class are priced out of hunting, they will get mad, join with groups like PETA, and shut the whole thing down. If some way is not found to provide some affordable public hunting, it all will go away. 
There have already been articles published by the vice president of the NRA, in the American Hunter, expressing these same concerns.

Pale Rider, QDM is just a method of artificially making the deer look like a trophy. It didn't really improve the hunting, all it did was raise the price by bringing in out of state competition. I look on it as being just as unethical as a taxidermist adding a few inches to the spread to a set of sub trophy horns. I wouldn't want a trophy that some one spent years trying to genetically engineer(might as well buy and shoot a trophy Hereford that would taste better). QDM is just a way for the marketing types to put the screws to us another way and every one seems to be dumb enough to buy into it.

BTW: I love deer meat if its fixed right.


----------



## Whitecrow (May 26, 2004)

I'm not a big fan of high fences, but I do see the point of protecting "your" work and expense on the herd. I think the high-fenced ranches should have to buy the deer from the state, much like a poacher has to pay restitution for removing an animal from the state's herd. Let them build the fence, bring in the biologists for a census, and send them a bill. I think what gives most people heart-burn is the privatization of a state-owned resource. What would happen if you damned up a river flowing through your property??

The deer farming thing sux. I remember when I was a kid and someone whacked a big deer, everyone stood around "oohing and aahhing" and talking about what a great deer hunter "Bubba" was. Now everyone looks at a big deer and asks "How much did that cost?" I could take my mom and $5,000 and get her a 150" deer. Big deal.


----------



## waterspout (May 21, 2004)

High fence if you want,,,,,,,,,, but get all state(public) deer off property before you close the gate. At this point go buy your own deer and start your own crop/bid-ness. In my eyes the are caged, I thought it was against the law to hold a deer in a cage. 

Gundoctor, I agree 100% with you. I have already heard people taking that aproach. They were outpriced, they no longer hunt, there kids don't hunt and can't beleive people kill those deer. The day will come, and I feel bad for my grandkids I don't even have yet.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

I agree with your take on the price of hunting nowdays. However, I think your take on QDM depends on what your are talking about. I am not in any shape form or fashion in favor of raising or hunting genetically engineered, pen raised, unnaturally occurring deer. Or even the importing/introduction of non-native bloodlines. But, there is a big difference in that and practicing sound herd management practices, whereby you maximize the potentional of native deer through population control, selective harvest and range improvement. That's what I am speaking of when I refer to QDM. In fact, I take a great deal of pride in the strides we have made on our ranch in 5 years.

Here's 2 bucks I took a picture of last Sunday. The buck on the right would likely outscore the average buck we harvested 5 years ago, by 15-20". The buck on the left would have scored higher the the best buck we killed. Sunday, I never even reached for my gun. I'm proud of that.


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

My idea of management is what TXPalerider is referring to. He's hunting a low fenced place...which proves that a sound game plan does make a difference. 

I also don't think hunting will ever go away...sure there are people that will stop doing it, but too many people love it too much for it to stop. I don't like the way things are trending, but it could be worse...there are other states that have worse situations.


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

Similiar Side Note: (I also don't think hunting will ever go away...)

I agree Woodrow, but lets also not forget about the early 90's when all those activists groups started to become very influential in congress. They stirred up alot back then and luckily the Hunters are becoming more educated and not strapping their deer to the hood and thinking about other people that may not be an anti hunter, but dont neccerally want to see the blood and guts.

Im not preaching, I just thought I would remind us that hunting is a privelage and was endangered then. People say it is a right, but it is not. Bearing Arms is a right not hunting. 

A small group of people do have the power to change laws. We are seeing it here latley with Religion and Homosexuals.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

Yes I know of the private land majority.
Many states have bought or leased land for the purpose of public hunting .
Texas has hundreds of thousand of acres of land that the state owns but its off limits unless your a senators buddy or have a pal in TP&W. 
There is land that the state leases to indviduals for next to nothing for them to use it as they choose, because its been leased like that for 150 years and no one has done anything about it.
And I mean 100's of thousand s of acres.
What can we do to change it ? 
I surely don't know but I wish I did and had the Ba--s and know how to do something about it.

So no I wouldn't expect land owners to be required to give access, but the state do what so many other states do in this reguard, obtain access by monetary means .
If other states can afford it, I know texas can.
But with all of these ranchers making more money on deer than on cattle that won't happen either.

Just my views.

R.R............


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

Bar B Q:
I know this is a little off the subject but never say never. 
Do you know that all guns have been taken away from all people in Australia and England,
so what do they hunt with. Rocks , no ,
Hunting went away.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

Gun Doc 
I dont completely agree with your QDM philosphy but you hit the nail right on the head about the lower and middle class (If there is such a thing anymore) giving up on deer hunting and joining the "save the field mouse society". 
I see it happening.Because of lack of participation.


R.R..................


----------



## Dr. Eyes (Oct 18, 2004)

*even sadder*

is all the time you spend on a lease to make it better by being selective and proper feeding...just to lose it to a higher bidder....and for what? just for the higher bidder to kill your deer youve been raising. And if thats not the case, then your low fenced neighbor will blast every deer that crosses the fence. Nowadays, there is no loyalty whatsoever from landowners. I guarantee you that anyone approaches the landowner with a couple thousand dollars more a year and you are out. Nowadays, if you dont own the land, or dont have a high fence chances are youll be gone by the time the bucks grow to be nice deer or the person next door will shoot it. Ive seen friends of mine feeding protein religiously for like 5 yrs and then get kicked off. Ive even seen hunters help pay for game fencing then lose the lease....I say that the state should make selling hunts illegal or pay taxes...these people arent paying taxes on their hunts. The majority of these people selling hunts are losers who dont have jobs looking for a quick buck. Professional Huniting Guide by butt...more like Professional Bum. I think that with this system, its just locking out more and more hunters who cant compete with the high prices of leases. In south texas, 20 dollars per acre is not uncommon. We all know friends who have sold all their hunting equipment because that cant afford to cost. If you still have a lease that is affordable, well your days are numbered because some rich guy will come along and take it from you.


----------



## gundoctor (May 20, 2004)

Its all a matter of numbers and hype. Every one in the state gets a vote at election time, whether they hunt of not. If enough of them want hunting stopped, then it don't matter what TP&W or Texas Trophy Hunters or anyone else thinks or wants. Its like when they put the grass carp in Lake Conroe, TP&W fought till the bitter end, but the votes in the legislature went against them. So TP&W sat and watched the grass carp dumped in the lake and fishermen have paid the price for that mess ever since.
The same thing will happen when enough kids grow up not hunting and not knowing the love of hunting like we do. It don't matter how much a relative few love it(we are a relative few, compared to the whole population of the state) or how much money some are making out of hunting, its dieing slowly(and it may not be so slowly) but surely under the current system. I don't look to see it last another generation, unless something drastic is done. Two generations at the outside, if things continue on the path we are headed down. 
Look at the population figures, Its doubling fairly fast in the cities, but the number of hunting license is not going up anywhere near as fast. TP&W wouldn't know what to do, if hunting license sales jumped 10% in one year, while the population of the cities in Texas goes up more than that EVERY year. Those people don't own land(maybe a lot their house sits on, but no more) and very few of them hunt. As you look at the younger ones, hunting is less common. As you go to lower income brackets, hunting virtually disappears, but they still get to vote.
Then you have the treehugger shows on TV preaching to our kids and grandkids about how hunting is wrong. The only way to fight all this is put the kids back hunting. The problem there is, ITS TOO [email protected]*n expensive under the current system. 
The landowners can gripe about how much it costs them in taxes and their landowner rights and all the rest of the stuff they us to justify charging such high prices, but all they are doing is screwing their next generation.
And all this doesn't take in the old farts that are mad because they got priced out of hunting.
Hunting is all about money now, them that have it and want a big set of horns on the wall, will pay to get that set of horns. It don't mean they are a good hunter. All it means is they will part with the cash. The land owners want that cash, so they will do what it takes to get it. The problem is the little guy is getting screwed out of a chance to hunt in the process and he don't like it. Enough of those little guys get together, and they can become a hell of a force to contend with.

Now on QDM. 
Before QDM became the new fad, getting a trophy buck meant outsmarting a old buck that was good enough to survive enough seasons to grow some big horns. Now, with people protecting them until all the bucks get big racks, while weeding out the inferior horns, all I see, is someone proving how much money they have, and not how good of a hunter they are. And that is about as bad as going down to the pawn shop and buying a head somebody else shot years ago, then putting their name on it.
True trophy bucks still exist, in places where its shoot any thing wearing horns. You know they are true trophies, because they are too smart for most people to even see, much less get a shot at. Their horns may not be as big, but they are a much better trophy than the biggest set of horns killed on a "managed ranch". It ain't how big the horns are, its how hard you had to work or how lucky you had to be to get that set of horns. And spending more money don't make it a trophy, no matter how big the horns are.

Those are just my thoughts on a system that is IMHO, screwed up beyond repair.


----------



## gunnut (Aug 3, 2004)

See my reply in the deer hunting section. I don't know how it got over there. bad router? Just wanted ya'll to here from a land owner.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

I would like to read it , where is the deer hunting section?


----------



## waterspout (May 21, 2004)

The guy that pays big time for that set of horns is not a true hunter anyway. Sitting on a feeder, waiting on deer that will eat out of your hand is bogus. It like going to the state park and killing the deer you fed at the pacnic table last month. Is that a hunt?? Oh well time will tell. Then true hunters will say, we told yalls sorry arses! And the weekend warriors will be at the golf corse not giving a rats arse anyway.


----------



## waterspout (May 21, 2004)

http://2coolfishing.net/ttmbforum/showthread.php?p=66716#post66716


----------



## waterspout (May 21, 2004)

I read it Gunnut. Now my ?? to you is do you think you have the right to high fence? yes , fine 
What about the state/ public owned deer, are you going to get them all off your property when/or if you high fence. They are NOT yours to fence in.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

Good picture palerider!
So when, do you, pull the Trigger?
What do you think those two will score and how old? 

R.R............


----------



## gunnut (Aug 3, 2004)

I wont be high fencing. As to your question, it is a catch 22. The deer, and all game are property of the state. The state also gives the RIGHT; not privledge (hunting is a privledge not a right. Just ask any poacher who can no longer hunt, such as the butthole on my property.) to fence in your property.

Until the state sets it up in a more logical way, there will always be that catch 22. In my experience most ranchers want to run their cows ,b/c cows ARE more profitibale than deer. Now the flip side is where a landowner becomes an outfitter. They aren't running cows, they are HARVESTING deer. I don't like it anymore than you do, but from a buisness stand point they are too trying to make a living. Now who's at fault here the land owner who has deer on 200 acres fenced in making a living, or 5 Houston Astros who hunt them on that 200 acres in Tilden TX.

Which has ethics, make a living or spend BIG MONEY to shoot deer in a confined area. I say neither! But i understand the land owners side a little more, b/c we all want toget a head and take care of our families. I don't see shooting a deer off of 200 acres productive in any light.

I'm not picking on the Astros only example I could think of short notice. Lots of wealthy people do it (Ross Perot, Clay Walker, Toby Kieth). The just have money to blow, to shoot a VERY big deer.


----------



## waterspout (May 21, 2004)

I have no problem with lease or charging to kill the deer. your property do it, I would. Now to take the animals that are the states and cage them where they can not get out is different. We have land in east Texas but not high fenced(that is what the thread is about). Not only do I think the fence is wrong for the free roaming animal sake but it looks like **** to drive through miles of that. Just think if everyyone in the state did it.


----------



## gunnut (Aug 3, 2004)

I'm not trying to be a jack*ss. I just want everyone to consider the landowners sides as well. Heck I wish there were good affordable leases for everyone, more over I wish all of these land owners could fence there places, to keep the slime balls out, but let the deer roam.

Its just not a utopia. Landowners deserve the right to protect their land, and use it to make money, as well as hunters deserve the right to take game legally. It will always be a catch 22, until the Jack*ss PETA groups ban hunting outright.


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

Gunnut
I found and read your post.
no more comment


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

gundoctor said:


> .....................
> Now on QDM.
> Before QDM became the new fad, getting a trophy buck meant outsmarting a old buck that was good enough to survive enough seasons to grow some big horns. Now, with people protecting them until all the bucks get big racks, while weeding out the inferior horns, all I see, is someone proving how much money they have, and not how good of a hunter they are. And that is about as bad as going down to the pawn shop and buying a head somebody else shot years ago, then putting their name on it.
> True trophy bucks still exist, in places where its shoot any thing wearing horns. You know they are true trophies, because they are too smart for most people to even see, much less get a shot at. Their horns may not be as big, but they are a much better trophy than the biggest set of horns killed on a "managed ranch". It ain't how big the horns are, its how hard you had to work or how lucky you had to be to get that set of horns. And spending more money don't make it a trophy, no matter how big the horns are.
> .......................


Seems to me you are saying that since I can afford to hunt on a lease for several consecutive years (BTW..I'm not on one of those $5K-$10K a year leases), choose not to shoot young bucks with potential, choose to pass on many opportunities to take average bucks, spend my hard earned money for habitat improvement and high protien supplements, that my deer is not a trophy. That's the same as going down and buying a head that somebody else shot? I'm not a good hunter? Should I just shoot every buck I see regardless of age and end up with a situation much like was created in East Texas after many years of killing the first buck somebody saw. That way when I killed a big deer it would be a "real" trophy.

I agree, some people buy their way to big deer. But, good land stewardship, sound herd management practices and little restraint are not bad things. I mean, I kinda see the point you are trying to make. But, what is the alternative? Don't do anything that might better your chances of killing a nice buck and hope for the best.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Redfishr said:


> Good picture palerider!
> So when, do you, pull the Trigger?
> What do you think those two will score and how old?
> 
> R.R............


I'll pull the trigger eventually. May not shoot a big deer this year. It's early.

The deer in the front is in the 140's and 4.5 years old. The deer in the back is 150 Class and 5+ years.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

First of all, just so nobody is confused, I'm not a big proponent of high fences. And requiring landowners to buy deer from the state when they high fence may not be a bad idea, in some form. But, I'm curious on another opinion. Once that land owner buys the deer from the state, he now owns them, right?. Does that mean he ceases to be regulated by state game laws? Can he now do whatever/whenever he wants with them?


----------



## Bucksnort (Jun 29, 2004)

PR, I think it is headed that direction anyway.


----------



## gundoctor (May 20, 2004)

TXPalerider said:


> Seems to me you are saying that since I can afford to hunt on a lease for several consecutive years (BTW..I'm not on one of those $5K-$10K a year leases), choose not to shoot young bucks with potential, choose to pass on many opportunities to take average bucks, spend my hard earned money for habitat improvement and high protien supplements, that my deer is not a trophy. That's the same as going down and buying a head that somebody else shot? I'm not a good hunter? Should I just shoot every buck I see regardless of age and end up with a situation much like was created in East Texas after many years of killing the first buck somebody saw. That way when I killed a big deer it would be a "real" trophy.
> 
> In a way you're right about what I'm saying PR. Its like fishing. If you fish a private pond that is managed to the point where only trophy size fish are there. Is catching one of them as much of a accomplishment, as catching the same size fish out of public water where anyone can fish?
> To me, the quality of a trophy, is how hard it was to get that trophy. It ain't how big the genetics and food supplements make the horns grow. Its how smart that old buck was, to have survived until his horns matured. Even if his genetics wasn't up to that young buck with potential that got killed at 18 months. Real trophies only come along once in a while, not every year. When everyone has access to the hunting on a piece of land, horn size is a good measure of a trophy. But with the lease system we have in Texas, its just another measure of how much time and money someone wants to spend growing a set of horns.
> I'm not critizeing you or any one else personally, but I am critizing the system we are forced to hunt under.


----------



## gundoctor (May 20, 2004)

TXPalerider said:


> First of all, just so nobody is confused, I'm not a big proponent of high fences. And requiring landowners to buy deer from the state when they high fence may not be a bad idea, in some form. But, I'm curious on another opinion. Once that land owner buys the deer from the state, he now owns them, right?. Does that mean he ceases to be regulated by state game laws? Can he now do whatever/whenever he wants with them?


My guess (and its only a guess) is they would become the rancher's personal property, just like the cattle on his land. TP&W would no longer have a say in how they were hunted or any thing else. Probably the only state laws that would be applicable would be property tax and animal cruelty laws.


----------



## gundoctor (May 20, 2004)

One more thing that gunnut mentioned and I always hear from landowners. You are worried about getting sued if someone stubs their toe on your property, then you go and lease out the property to some one that you get some kind of waiver from. 
Ask a good property liability lawyer how much good you waiver is going to do if you get sued by one of your hunters. I checked into this when I was in business and found out a waiver is only good if you run out of toilet paper. Its not worth the paper its written on in a court. It don't even matter if the person is a trespasser or invited. If they are hurt on your property and want to sue, you are going to pay.
So forget the "I'm scared I'll get sued" argument, that dog won't hunt.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

gundoctor said:


> ........ Its like fishing. If you fish a private pond that is managed to the point where only trophy size fish are there. Is catching one of them as much of a accomplishment, as catching the same size fish out of public water where anyone can fish?


But, when it's a 25,000 acre pond and there is only 2000 fish in it, and you are only allowed to fish in a 2500 acre section of it......it's still pretty darned tuff to catch the biggest one. Especially, when not everyone else is practicing catch and release. 

I see your point, but as I said, what's the alternative. I wish all the land was public and everybody practiced a little restraint. Then deer hunting would be great everywhere. On the other hand, when your not paying for it, there is no incentive to manage it.



gundoctor said:


> To me, the quality of a trophy, is how hard it was to get that trophy........


That's not always true. And trust me, I hunt plenty hard, and not always out of a box blind overlooking a feeder.

The measure of a trophy should only take into consideration what the hunter himself deems a trophy. I've killed relatively small deer that have a great deal more value as a trophy to me, than the biggest deer I've ever killed. I just take a great deal of pleasure in seeing what sound management can do for ranch. In fact, I suspect, I kill a lot less "trophy" deer than some would think.


----------



## pacontender (Jun 26, 2004)

I believe it was Roy Hindes who put up the first high fence for deer. When the state told him to take it down because the deer belonged to the state, he told them to come get all of the deer off of his property. That shut them up.

The 2 biggest deer we killed last year were outside the high fence. 198 and 185. Most of the deer we see from the Helicopter survey are never seen from the ground inside or outside the fence. It is not a petting zoo like most people think. Genetic rotation is done every few years, and the herd is kept very stable. The owners were tired of having nieghbors kill 4-5 year old 170 plus animals that we had passed up and would not kill for 2-3 more years.


----------



## Whitecrow (May 26, 2004)

*Uh, I've got a question.......*



TXPalerider said:


> Once that land owner buys the deer from the state, he now owns them, right?. Does that mean he ceases to be regulated by state game laws? Can he now do whatever/whenever he wants with them?


What weapon did you have in the stand with you last weekend, Pale dude? I can only hunt with a bow during October. So, yeah, I'm guessing that the majority of the high-fenced places are under MLD or LAMPS and do things that other landowners can not do. Like kill does and cull bucks way over the state-set, per-person limit in the name of "management" and hunt with rifles outside of the state-set seasons. They also pretty much set their own seasons in order to meet their kill quotas. Sounds like they do pretty much what they want anyway, to me. What does your lease cost??


----------



## Chance (Jun 10, 2004)

*Canned hunting*

Even though I could afford an annual shoot which some call a "hunt" behind a high fence I'm a purist on this subject and completely disagree with everything a high fence does and represents. I will never "hunt" behind one.

Slice and dice it however you like but at the end of the day the deer can not leave that property and therefore it's not fair chase, not eligible for B&C and shouldn't be legal. The cage may be bigger on 5K acres but it's still a cage and the animals can not escape.

Look where high fencing has taken Texas: deer capture and breeding, deer with cattle tags in their ears, selling semen and embroys, special "seasons" for deer breeders, importing deer to keep the animals from inbreeding behind the fences. That my friends is not wildlife management it's ranching.

Don't even get me started on "Texas Trophy Hunters". What a joke!!! That rag isn't even worth reading. The owner Jerry Johnston is on a TPW committee that sets rules and regulations for deer hunting in Texas. Talk about a conflict of interest. TTH's big buck contest allows deer taken under high fence as long as the ranch is over 200 acres. That is a canned hunt. Period, end of story.

If I were king this is what would happen: outlaw any additional fences or repair work on fences already up, exotic ranches may use high fences but must remove all whitetails from their property by either allowing the public to hunt them at no charge or trapping and relocating the animals at the landowners expense.


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

Great Britain Control
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/cgi-bin/ukparl_hl?DB=ukparl&STEMMER=en&WORDS=gun+&COLOUR=Red&STYLE=s&URL=/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm#muscat_highlighter_first_match


Austrailia Gun Control
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/1995-96/96cib16.htm
These are some links to the Countries you named RedFisher. They do indeed posses guns and can. The bans you are talking about include Handguns and firearms that are semi automatic. So that would only leave pump shotguns and bolt action rifle. That is all I use to hunt. Countries like Canada use a registering system for guns which has a unpopular past. I dont know how long their governemnt will be able to keep it up.


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

Those are some good points Chance!


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Whitecrow said:


> What weapon did you have in the stand with you last weekend, Pale dude? I can only hunt with a bow during October. So, yeah, I'm guessing that the majority of the high-fenced places are under MLD or LAMPS and do things that other landowners can not do. Like kill does and cull bucks way over the state-set, per-person limit in the name of "management" and hunt with rifles outside of the state-set seasons. They also pretty much set their own seasons in order to meet their kill quotas. Sounds like they do pretty much what they want anyway, to me. What does your lease cost??


Crow:



I had a rifle with me. Yes we are on an MLD program. However, we are NOT high fenced.

MLD and LAMPS (Iâ€™m not familiar with LAMPS) programs are available to all land owners.



If you think your landowner might like to take part in the MLD program, there are a few things they will need to do. This ought to get you started:



1. Outline goals and objectives for the property. Include plan/method of managing and harvesting deer to meet objectives. Including desired density goal for deer population (acres/deer), desired sex ratio (does/buck), and desired fawn production (fawns/doe).



2. Describe current habitat types and plant composition. To include vegetation association or type (e.g. Mesquite-Granjeno, Cenizo-Blackbrush, Mesquite-Lotebush Elm-Hackberry; Crops; Native or Introduced Grasses, etc.). State dominant plants occurring and/or crops grown on the property. Documentation should include any NRCS, TPWD, or other plan, map or aerial photo that may exist for the tract to identify soils, vegetation and water sources. The plant list should include browse plants utilized by deer. Also, state the degree of use of key browse plants utilized by livestock and deer. TPWD will also conduct a Stem Count Index (SCI), or other appropriate vegetation evaluation to determine relative condition of browse plants and other plant community components.



3.Describe past land use practices that have been implemented such as prescribed burns, range or pasture reseeding, brush management, etc. Describe past history of cropping, livestock, and wildlife management (census, harvest, etc.).



4. Prepare a list of all current management activities implemented to conserve and improve the quantity and quality of soils, water and vegetation and directed at maintaining a productive and healthy habitat. Some habitat management practices may be, but not limited to: rotational grazing systems, prescribed burning, proper deer herd management, reducing exotics, wildlife water resources, brush management, supplemental feeding through food plots, etc. 



5. Give present livestock information and recommendations for grazing management. Which is the planned manipulation of livestock numbers and grazing intensities to increase food, cover, or improve structure in the habitat of selected species. This includes: 1) kind and class of livestock grazed, 2) determination and adjustment of stocking rates, 3)implementation of a grazing system that provides planned periodic rest for pastures by controlling grazing intensity and duration. 



6. List sources of water and distribution. Include current and/or future developments.



7. Provide a list of all current Supplemental Feeding practices.(Managing the habitat for proper nutrition should be the primary management goal. Supplemental feeding and/or planting of food plots is not a substitute for sound range management). 



8. Provide a list deer harvest history for past three seasons.



9. List an approved survey method used for determining population density. Indicate date when current yearâ€™s survey data will be submitted.. (A minimum of 3 spotlight counts must be conducted)



10. List recommended deer population goals (Recommended density (acres/deer), sex ratio, desired fawns/doe ratio, etc.) that is compatible with the habitat.



11. List deer density estimates including exotic game for the past three seasons. List approved survey technique (i. e. helicopter, spotlight, etc.) used to determine these estimates.



12. List desired and/or anticipated deer harvest including number bucks/does.



Reaching Level 3 in the MLD program is a long process (which is the level you are referring to in your post). But there are also, things you have to do to remain in the program.



You have to provide deer population data from the current year and the preceding 2 years, deer harvest data from the 2 preceding years, and must identify at least 4 recommended habitat management practices that are being conducted or will be conducted on the property. Every deer (buck and antlerless) harvested on the property must be tagged with an appropriate Level MLD Permit. Weights, age, body condition and antler score must also be recorded and provided to the TPWD Biologist.

The landowner must accomplish at least 4 habitat management practices specified in the program within three years of initial permit issuance. The habitat management practices and harvest management must maintain the habitat in an *acceptable or improving *condition. On-site evaluations are conducted by TPWD to assess progress. Harvest rates are then set by a TPWD biologist. (Note: Some years you may not like/agree with their recommendation)



No we donâ€™t set our own kill quotas or seasons. Those are determined by the TPWD.



Yes we are allowed to kill deer over the â€œper-personâ€ state set limits as long as we have permits. However, I donâ€™t see what difference that makes if the deer densities will allow it. Additionally, as you can see, we have to provide a great deal of information to the TPWD and perform other range/herd improvement practices on an ongoing basis, in order to be allowed this privilege. I suspect that 90% of hunters and/or landowners donâ€™t want to deal with hassle or expense of these things to obtain a more liberal harvest. Also, being a part of this program does not necessarily ensure a more liberal harvest. In fact, 5 years ago, we could have killed more deer simply shooting the tags on our license. 



As far as my lease costs, are you asking what I pay the landowner ever year, or do you want to know how much I spend in total trying to benefit the deer on our ranch?


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

BarBQ

Thats not what I read. I saw pictures of piles (mountains ) of long guns being destroyed. 
But I wasn't there. Just relying on the media.


----------



## Whitecrow (May 26, 2004)

Pale fella,
I'm just pointing out that the rules are pretty fuzzy as it is........not much of jump to landowners making up their own rules. You have state rules, then you have MLD rules. My landowner is my father-in-law, and we have investigated the MLD program. Our acreage is small (300acs), and we don't do supplemental feeding and can't afford pasture rotation, etc. Unless all of our neighbors do it, MLD is not worth the effort for us. Even though a place isn't high-fenced, it is still the larger, higher dollar places that can do the MLD program. So you still end up with the "haves" that can make their own rules, and the "have-nots" that abide by the state laws. Just my observations, not looking to get into a pi$$ing contest. Just thought it comical that someone who hunts with a rifle during bow season and can shoot more than 5 deer legally would make a statement about landowners making up their own rules. 
As far as lease price, just curious what you pay per gun to the landowner.


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

We do LAMPS on the lease I am on right now. It is a Land Assistance Management Program System?

Basically this is for a land owner or agent to apply to TPWD for permits to kill over the allowed deer for that county. I had to fill it out for the land owner that I am leasing from, but they still have to sign it.

Steps I did:

1. Got the form and filled it out, land description and with an aerial pic.

2. Got the land owner to sign it, then mailed it in.

3. Got two orange LAMPS permits in the mail for two does. Usually they give you 1 doe LAMPS permit for every 100 acres.

4. The county I am is a 1 buck county so the only way I can kill does is to apply for LAMPS permits or hunt the "doe days". These are a few days out of the season that they allow you to kill a doe. It is double edged sword though, because if you have applied for LAMPS then you cannot kill over your permitted amount even on doe days, but if you do have a LAMPS permit you can take your time all year to kill does instead of being pressured to kill that weekend. It is confusing at best. The LAMPS is different from the MLD. The MLD is more of a program and LAMPS is just an annual survey that keep you in touch with TPWD.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Whitecrow said:


> Pale fella,
> I'm just pointing out that the rules are pretty fuzzy as it is........not much of jump to landowners making up their own rules. You have state rules, then you have MLD rules. My landowner is my father-in-law, and we have investigated the MLD program. Our acreage is small (300acs), and we don't do supplemental feeding and can't afford pasture rotation, etc. Unless all of our neighbors do it, MLD is not worth the effort for us. Even though a place isn't high-fenced, it is still the larger, higher dollar places that can do the MLD program. So you still end up with the "haves" that can make their own rules, and the "have-nots" that abide by the state laws. Just my observations, not looking to get into a pi$$ing contest. Just thought it comical that someone who hunts with a rifle during bow season and can shoot more than 5 deer legally would make a statement about landowners making up their own rules.
> As far as lease price, just curious what you pay per gun to the landowner.


The way I see it, there are state laws period. The state *also* offers programs that, if you want to put forth the effort, can be beneficial to landowners wanting to take the extra step in managing the deer. The ranch I hunt is between 2500-3000 acres. If it were not for MLD (due to county restrictions), we would have to bring in about 15-20 people per year just to keep the deer ratios/populations at a level that the TPWD considers good for the habitat. Granted, our deer densities are well above the county/state averages. But, should we not take advantage of the program and allow the deer population get unbalanced as in many other parts of the state?

I agree, there are landowners, that due to financial constraints, may not be able to take advantage of all the programs offered. But, it's that way with everything in life. Sounds like, by your above comments, if you had a larger place and you felt it was worth it, you would have taken advantage of the program to. Then you would have been one of the "Haves".

You might find it comical, but in reality, I seldom shoot 5 deer per year and I personally probably take fewer deer per year than a lot of folks reading this.

I don't want to get into a pi$$ing contest either. I just felt you were painting me with a pretty broad stroked brush, when you really know very little about my personal situation. In fact, many of the positions and comments I have posted on this thread, have very little if anything, to do with my personal situation. It is simply my perspective.


----------



## Whitecrow (May 26, 2004)

*Touche'...........*



TXPalerider said:


> In fact, many of the positions and comments I have posted on this thread, have very little if anything, to do with my personal situation. It is simply my perspective.


Likewise.
The number of deer you shoot is irrelevant to the point I was making. The fact that you CAN shoot more than five is my point. You can, while I (and the majority of others in Texas) can not. 
It really doesn't matter to me, as I and my family are able to shoot enough to keep us in eats for the year. I was just responding to your comment that once a landowner bought deer from the state, they should be able to make up their own rules. My response is that they already do......to a certain extent. No offense intended.


----------



## Red3Fish (Jun 4, 2004)

*My $.02*

Texas has a couple of laws unique to this state, that will always cause controversy--Open beaches, and the deer belong to the people of the state. Both involve rights of the landowners. Big money has already got a shoe in the door on open beaches belonging to the people of Texas and in the door of the deer "ownership" question. I am sorry fellows, but deer hunting as my Pop and I knew it is no longer here, and deer hunting as you knew it is running out--in Texas. "Hunting used to involve skill, knowing the traits of your prey, and a little luck" Most of these have been removed from "hunting" deer today in Texas. Thats why I switched to squrrill (how ya spell that little rat?), hunting with a rifle--kinda takes the same skills without the money or bragging rights! LOL

Other states still have large land areas that people can "hunt", but it ain't in Texas.

Wishing all of ya, warm campfires, old whisky, clear crisp mornings, and a hunting partner that doesn't snore!!--Preferable with big knockers!! LOL

Later
R3F


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

Those are some great points, but seriously can anyone remember or do they have the article that Robert Cook wrote in an issue of TPWD Magazine? 

I looked for it last night to post it on here but I couldnt find it.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Whitecrow said:


> Likewise.
> The number of deer you shoot is irrelevant to the point I was making. The fact that you CAN shoot more than five is my point. You can, while I (and the majority of others in Texas) can not.
> It really doesn't matter to me, as I and my family are able to shoot enough to keep us in eats for the year. I was just responding to your comment that once a landowner bought deer from the state, they should be able to make up their own rules. My response is that they already do......to a certain extent. No offense intended.


That's fine. However, the point I was making, is that we earn the right, and create a need to shoot more deer. Due to our habitat and herd management practices, we have more deer than others in the specific county we hunt in. Therefore, an exception to the specific county rules is made. The alternative is to do nothing to improve the overall habitat/herd and just follow the current county specific rules. Ironically, because we have gotten our ratios to an almost 1:1, this year we are allowed to shoot less does than we would if we just shot our tags.

As far as my "comment", it was question. I didn't say they should be able to make their own rules. I was asking.....should they then make their own rules. Others had suggested that landowners by deer from the state when they high fenced. I'm fine with that. I was just wondering what their thoughts were on the regulation of those deer after they were "purchased."


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

Palerider has it going on, I'm just not to certain I would be spending all my money on leased land. You sign a 99 year contract, Tx? 

I lean toward the saying, "you high fence not to keep deer in but to keep bad people out from destroying what you worked hard to create". The only pet peeve with high fencing I have is the deer should not come to a banging bucket of feed. LOL If you think about it, regardless of high fence or low fence, the deer can still be patterened, grow acustomed to taking to the same trail to a feeder or food plot, and be studied each year such the way as Tx is doing with his low fence. What else changes with a high fence that really truly matters (facts), except for 300 acre or really small places?


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

InfamousJ said:


> ......... You sign a 99 year contract, Tx?


Nope. You know where I could get one? I'd definitely start over if I could. I just don't see I have any other options right now.

If you have any ideas J, I'm willing to listen.


----------



## Bucksnort (Jun 29, 2004)

InfamousJ said:


> Palerider has it going on, I'm just not to certain I would be spending all my money on leased land. You sign a 99 year contract, Tx?
> QUOTE]
> 
> Well I'm not so sure he has it going on....did you see all the regulations he listed that they have to do...how many of us have the time or are willing to put in the time. Are you accusing him of spending all his money on a deer lease? We or at least I don't know his financial situation but would really be surprised if he was spending all his money on leased land. There is no doubt that he has good deer on his ranch....but look at the effort he (and I know he didn't do it alone) has put out to get to where they are today. Heck, I know most of us would be tickled pink if we found a place like that and could afford it....and if he is a millionare,,so what,,,it doesn't make any difference. Look at his knowledge of the outdoors, He just ain't some rich guy paying for a package hunt....that should be obvious here.....


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

You misread my statement Bucksnort. Got it going on meaning he is doing very positive things on the property. My next statement was that I dont think he owns the land, or at least thought I read that somewhere before. If not, he is putting alot of effort in for the landowner and I hope they have a good enough relationship that the landowner doesn't take it all away from him, possibly going for the money market on those trophy deer. I did not mean to be negative in my statement at all about Tx's successes and I hope he didnt take it that way. I could care less about you... LOL just kidding dude. Hope I clarified myself.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

TXPalerider said:


> Nope. You know where I could get one? I'd definitely start over if I could. I just don't see I have any other options right now.
> 
> If you have any ideas J, I'm willing to listen.


Give me 5 years, and then we might can work something out.


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

J:

I didn't take your comments as negative.

And I'm serious. I'm always looking for a better situation. Our's is less than ideal. But, the hunting is now great, so I deal with it. It's about as hard to find good long term hunting arrangements as it is to find good long term, like minded, hunting partners.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

Thats what I'm talking about. I plan on buying a ranch and will need the help of people like you. You never know. I just need about 5 more years to get the ducks in a row, maybe less, hopefully not more. I've got land in Lampasas I am trying to sell right now that I bought while in college to get out of Austin (not a city boy). It is just 60 acres of cedar along a county road with water, electricity, and plenty of deer but worth more than I paid for it being 45 minutes from Austin. Once that sells, the ball will start rolling even quicker.

I dream of owning my own place. Don't we all?


----------



## Bucksnort (Jun 29, 2004)

Ah So,,InfamousJ....clear now....This has been a great post and I have actually learned a few things from it. I'm glad you were kidding about not caring about me....that would have devistated me.....


----------



## Pablo (May 21, 2004)

And I know a good ranch realtor, ole buddy, ole pal. LOL

Pablo


----------



## BillyG (Oct 19, 2004)

TXPalerider said:


> J:
> It's about as hard to find good long term hunting arrangements as it is to find good long term, like minded, hunting partners.


Man I totally agree with that.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

Once I start looking, I'll call to see what you got..


----------

