# this is why hunter have a bad name



## golden acres (Nov 17, 2005)

I was looking around on the net, and found this a LARGE hunting operation less than 57 ac. and is a commercial hunting operation, this is how people get hurt and killed, I'm sure the rancher next door loves him. check it out you will love, you know as I was writing this I was thinking some of you might call him to book something..................good luck..... my rant for the day.

www.huntluna.com


----------



## saltaholic (Feb 19, 2005)

That is JUST PLAIN SAD...............


----------



## Redfishr (Jul 26, 2004)

That guy has been in operation for many years to.
I saw him advertising in the chronicle several years ago.
Must shoot every thing that walks.


----------



## JD761 (Jun 7, 2006)

Look at the dink bucks in the pics, and look at the "unlikely" to take anything over 8 points. Those deer must be inbred to no end...


----------



## trentmc (Jul 5, 2006)

Redfishr said:


> Must shoot every thing that walks.


No, It says they only hunt 4 days out of the week.









They charge a couple hundred dollars for a 4-pointer??????? I wouldnt let anyone shoot a 4 pointer on my property unless they had pictures proving that it was old enough to be considered a cull!!! This guy is crazy.


----------



## My Three Sons (Mar 23, 2008)

Kerr County is full of small "day hunt leases". A county ordinance states that you need over ten acres of land to shoot centerfire firearms. Notice the rifle leaning up against the tail gate of the truck? It could fall either way and I bet it's loaded.


----------



## copperhead (Mar 15, 2005)

Pathetic. Seems like this is what hunting is coming too sometimes.


----------



## BEER4BAIT (Jun 24, 2005)

We had a 100 acre piece of land that belonged to 7 families, right in the middle of our 6000 acre ranch, that shot everything that walked, they also would complain about our quail hunting, we checked the records they had no right of way so we changed the lock.


----------



## swtmike (Jul 20, 2005)

Trent, I noticed that also. Thought it was hilarious - $400 for a 10-pt (unlikely), as well as the 15 acre tract with "mostly fields".

What are they thinking, but I bet they pack em in there. I really just wouldn't post the acreage


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

they aren't in a "horn rule" county from what i just looked up, here is another instance where it is a good idea. bet the neighbors wanna choke em


----------



## Encinal (Jan 18, 2008)

JD761 said:


> Look at the dink bucks in the pics, and look at the "unlikely" to take anything over 8 points. Those deer must be inbred to no end...


Not inbred... just young and hungry...


----------



## reelthreat (Jul 11, 2006)

Anybody want to buddy up and lease tract "A" in december? It sounds and looks legit. 



The worst part of it all is that is probably booked all 4 days of the week, each and every week of the season.

Plain unbelievable!!!


----------



## dwhite (Jul 11, 2007)

Kill fees too....just blows me away!! Crazy!!


----------



## Encinal (Jan 18, 2008)

And then they will complain about a high fence being put up...

hahah


If anyone deserves to get fenced off...


They do...


----------



## hunt2grill (Dec 1, 2006)

Nice axis spike in the "Factors to consider page"


----------



## Spec-Rig.006 (Nov 2, 2007)

Oh my ...


----------



## Sea Aggie (Jul 18, 2005)

Encinal said:


> And then they will complain about a high fence being put up...
> 
> hahah
> 
> ...


I can think of several folks (/cough Idletime) that have had to put up a high fence on a "little stretch" of their ranch when a small parcel land owner starts to set up operations and take anything that hops the fence.


----------



## RAYSOR (Apr 26, 2007)

Sad, Sad, Sad, I Love All Aspects Of Hunting But Reading That Just Makes Me Plain Sick To My Stomach, Thanks For The Insight On Some Of The Bad Ones Out There So That The Good Guys Can Still Win!


----------



## JCN57 (Feb 25, 2005)

Email them and see what they say.


----------



## bearkat08 (Dec 10, 2007)

I can not stand to even look at that. It just makes me sick! Do these kind of people not know anything about game management? I do not know anyone who would pay that much money to kill a spike or a 4 point. This just makes me furious!!!!


----------



## trentmc (Jul 5, 2006)

bearkat08 said:


> I can not stand to even look at that. It just makes me sick! Do these kind of people not know anything about game management? I do not know anyone who would pay that much money to kill a spike or a 4 point. This just makes me furious!!!!


If someone was that desperate to kill a spike or doe I would trade them for a 12 pack. If they had a kid that wanted to kill a manegment deer I would even sit in the blind with them for free.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Wait, I thought high fences were to only keep inferior animals out, not to keep our animals in? This person's operation only goes to show what our wildlife of this state is becoming at an Exponential Rate, a disposable, sell to the highest bidder, domesticated, commercial animal that use to be a beautiful representation of what we all loved about the heritage of deer hunting in this state. SHAME, SHAME, on us for letting these situations happen!!! While we have stood idally by and let the politicians and rich dictate in which direction our beloved heritage is headed. Remember, this person is allowed to do this by OUR LAWS of this state and WE have let it happen. Also, remember by our laws (Parks and Wildlife Code, § 43.601. PERMIT FOR DEER MANAGEMENT) this person and many others like him are considered to be "managing the population on behalf of the state", which in a round about way, the "State" is considered as us the "People of the State of Texas"!! I for one do not want him or anybody like him managing a port-a-can much less my precious whitetail deer!!! I for one am tired of letting these type's of things give me, other hunters, and hunting in general a bad name and all we do is sit on our butt's and let it happen!! It is us, who have let this go on for entirely too long!! We let them and others legalize high fencing, controlled and manipulated breeding, transporting of deer to and from other states/countries for breeding purposes, selling of live whitetailed deer, breeding operations, ear tagging, etc. and all this done for me and you as these people are managing mine and your deer herd for me and you, well thanks, but, NO THANKS!!! In actuallity it's all done strictly in the name of the all mighty dollar and someone's ego. I'll stand down now off my soap box and if this gets me thrown off this board then so be it, I call it like I see it and I'm tired and sick of seeing it!!!!


----------



## Bily Lovec (Sep 26, 2005)

are they doing anything illegal ?

or just unapproved ?

Im certainly not condoning this, just asking


----------



## State_Vet (Oct 10, 2006)

Bily Lovec said:


> are they doing anything illegal ?
> 
> or just unapproved ?
> 
> Im certainly not condoning this, just asking


Nothing illegal that I can see, just unappoved:biggrin:

They wouldn't be doing it if there weren't people lining up to pay to hunt on the place, so there are also some others to blame for this. I can promise you that if there wasn't any money being made they wouldn't be doing it.


----------



## Sea-Slug (May 28, 2004)

TXDRAKE said:


> Wait, I thought high fences were to only keep inferior animals out, not to keep our animals in? This person's operation only goes to show what our wildlife of this state is becoming at an Exponential Rate, a disposable, sell to the highest bidder, domesticated, commercial animal that use to be a beautiful representation of what we all loved about the heritage of deer hunting in this state. SHAME, SHAME, on us for letting these situations happen!!! While we have stood idally by and let the politicians and rich dictate in which direction our beloved heritage is headed. Remember, this person is allowed to do this by OUR LAWS of this state and WE have let it happen. Also, remember by our laws (Parks and Wildlife Code, § 43.601. PERMIT FOR DEER MANAGEMENT) this person and many others like him are considered to be "managing the population on behalf of the state", which in a round about way, the "State" is considered as us the "People of the State of Texas"!! I for one do not want him or anybody like him managing a port-a-can much less my precious whitetail deer!!! I for one am tired of letting these type's of things give me, other hunters, and hunting in general a bad name and all we do is sit on our butt's and let it happen!! It is us, who have let this go on for entirely too long!! We let them and others legalize high fencing, controlled and manipulated breeding, transporting of deer to and from other states/countries for breeding purposes, selling of live whitetailed deer, breeding operations, ear tagging, etc. and all this done for me and you as these people are managing mine and your deer herd for me and you, well thanks, but, NO THANKS!!! In actuallity it's all done strictly in the name of the all mighty dollar and someone's ego. I'll stand down now off my soap box and if this gets me thrown off this board then so be it, I call it like I see it and I'm tired and sick of seeing it!!!!


 I agree with you 100 percent. That took guts. Dont you like to drive thru Texas and see one high fence after another for a hundred miles.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

State_Vet said:


> Nothing illegal that I can see, just unappoved:biggrin:
> 
> They wouldn't be doing it if there weren't people lining up to pay to hunt on the place, so there are also some others to blame for this. I can promise you that if there wasn't any money being made they wouldn't be doing it.


yep , it's a day lease, legal, plain and simple , it;s done all over the state.

This one is just rediculously small, curious what the neighbors really think and if he stays current on his lease permits...public resource for personal gain....ohh welll


----------



## wadehedtke (Mar 1, 2008)

wow


----------



## golden acres (Nov 17, 2005)

the place is not high fenced so where did you come up with that??????


----------



## huntr4life (Apr 30, 2007)

I know we can not tell him how to run his "operation" but it seems that the State would go in there and do a land survey, deer count to see what type of operation he is running. Looks like nothing more than a meat hunting place, over shot. They just show you the blind and you kill what you want. Very Sad.


----------



## Capt Ryan Rachunek (Feb 16, 2006)

You have got to be kidding..... What an operation :headknock


----------



## Buck Master (Oct 19, 2004)

Jorge .... Scott ....I've got a new place to go hunting in Kerr Co........ wanna book a hunt. lmao Nahhhh .... think I'll save that place for myself. lol


----------



## Pablo (May 21, 2004)

txdrake-what Golden acres said.


----------



## El Cazador (Mar 4, 2005)

I am glad that this is not happening next door to me, but it seems to me that more than a few times year, someone starts a thread on how rediculously high the cost of hunting has become. Obviously this operation is filling a need for people who would otherwise not have a place to hunt. 

The little guy has a right to make a buck from a buck, just as much as the big guys. My .02


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

El Cazador said:


> .......... Obviously this operation is filling a need for people who would otherwise not have a place to hunt.
> 
> The little guy has a right to make a buck from a buck, just as much as the big guys. My .02


I agree. But, the big guys around him also have a right to fence him out too. Eventually it'll happen and he'll be singing a sad, sad tune. But, for now, he'll just take advantage of the situation and make a buck.....neighbors be dammed!


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

I was refering to not only the operation Golden posted (day hunting a piece of land to its demise) about but also the comments about high fencing the others made, it all sucks and will eventually lead to destroying our once proud heritage of combining family and the wonderful adventure of hunting as it was for so many years and now for the most part just a sad memory. I don't agree with the operation on the 53 acres and his management style but also dont agree with high fencing out people before trying to educate and working with them to try and come up with a sensible solution before coming up with the Ol' high fencing them out solution.


----------



## Bholland8 (Dec 27, 2007)

that is the worst thing i have seen in a long time. they should be hung. i have spent years of culling my property, so i can produce good bucks. even though they about 100 miles from me, it still ****** me off to know that.


----------



## Encinal (Jan 18, 2008)

TXDRAKE said:


> I was refering to not only the operation Golden posted (day hunting a piece of land to its demise) about but also the comments about high fencing the others made, it all sucks and will eventually lead to destroying our once proud heritage of combining family and the wonderful adventure of hunting as it was for so many years and now for the most part just a sad memory. I don't agree with the operation on the 53 acres and his* management style* but also dont agree with high fencing out people before trying to educate and working with them to try and come up with a sensible solution before coming up with the Ol' high fencing them out solution.


Don't insult management pleaese.

He doesn't have a style.

He is promoting "shoot everything you can" off of my neighbors.

In the hill country on 53 acres parks and wildlife would want him to optimally have 5 deer.

Fence him off and let him manage those 5.


----------



## huntr4life (Apr 30, 2007)

Encinal said:


> Fence him off and let him manage those 5.


He would be out of business in one weekend


----------



## predator22 (Feb 2, 2005)

These type leases have been around forever in Texas. I went to one in highschool back in the early 80's it was 70 acres they charged us $125.00 and there was abolutely nothing alive on the property. 

Dont get me wrong they stink, it's terrible management, and basically a way for someone just to make a dollar, but they are nothing new. 

They are for poor young highschool saps who want to go hunting, waste money, and kill nothing. I can guarantee you this guy has not had a deer on his property since he opened.


----------



## predator22 (Feb 2, 2005)

Oh and when you show up to one of these places. Their sell and rhetoric is "Just took a big 8 pointer" "just last week as a matter of fact, and we seen a nice buck just a few days ago" "Oh yeah we got deer" That place I went to in the 80's was near marble falls, the blind the guy stuck me in was about 100 yards from a newly built home and I could see their dogs running around in the back yard. They took 10 hunters out that evening and not one person saw a deer. It's just a total scam.


----------



## John Galt (Aug 6, 2006)

hunt2grill said:


> Nice axis spike in the "Factors to consider page"


That poor [email protected] paid at least $1,000 for that. (2 day minimum X $100.00/day; $800.00 exotic buck kill fee AND there is no guesthouse available). For a spike with maybe 8" horns...I'll bet Swampus or Border Bandit could have found him something he could be proud of for not too much more.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Encinal said:


> Don't insult management pleaese.
> 
> He doesn't have a style.
> 
> ...


Encinal,

I misspoke and I agree 100%, 130%, no more like 150%, its not style its more like "Gluttony"!!! Also, thats exactly what Texas needs, ANOTHER high fence, yeah, thats the answer!!!! So how is that different than those that would high fence a piece of land to keep those deer for themselves? Again, I don't want this guy managing my or our deer, anymore than I do those that put that eye sore up called a "Game Proof Fence"!!!


----------



## huntr4life (Apr 30, 2007)

I would have to say that the guy with the 57 acres is on the extreme side of non management, heck if I were his neighbor and I was paying big money in protein, feed supplements and carefully managing my place, I would have to agree with Encinal to high fence it to keep this moron next door from setting 10 feeders along our bordering fence and having people hunt the fence line and shooting "our" deer. I am neither an opponent or proponent for high fence, it is their land, I can not tell them not to put a high fence no more than I have the right to tell the moron next door to quit day leasing his 57 acres and shooting everything. I hunt a 1300 acre place that it fenced on 3 sides by the neighbors and have been seeing and shooting better deer than ever in the last 10 years or so, part of it from the high fence? don't know, part of it from proper management?, definite yes, maybe a little of both. To me it would be great if the guy with the 57 acres would just high fence his place







problem solved.


----------



## mudhog (May 9, 2005)

Years ago I went to a day lease in the Hill country it was 1500 acres and he had 16 hunters. He told me he had every day filled during hunting season that includes bow hunters too. Thats 16 hunters X deer season on 1500 acres. His only rule was you must follow TPW rules, and you could tag out if you wanted.
This place is still advertised, I see the ad every year, I went to it back in the 80s and it was $75 a day. The one doe that I saw I felt sorry for her and walked back to camp. I bet Texas is full of them some could be right next to you.


----------



## RockportRobert (Dec 29, 2006)

Oh give me land lots of land, under starry skies above.......


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

So I was just wondering? If I own land, do I not have the right to not have my land's value diminished by someone else putting up an unsightly high fence along our common border. I mean wouldn't it be the same as someone putting a trailer house (excuse me, modular home) between two expensive slab based homes or someone keeping a bunch of broken down cars in their front yard between those same homes? The way I look at it, my rights end when it infringe's on anothers!! In another respect, my right to drink as an adult becomes null and void when I decide to get behind the wheel of a vehicle after said drinking and endanger another person's life as they have a right to be safe on that same roadway!!


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

Jason, basically no. Your rights do not extend beyond your property line. So far as modular homes, cars parked in the front yard, etc....That's why subdivisions have deed restrictions.

Now look at you example from another perspective. You've always wanted to retire to the Hill Country. So you buy 50-75 acres and retire. Your wife loves to feed the deer on the back porch. You like to watch them too, and you kill a couple a year for the meat. You've been living there for 4-5 years now and life is good. Then one day Mr. Luna buys the 57 acres that adjoins you, sets up 4 year round feeders, runs day hunts 16 hunter days a week. What are you gonna do?? There goes one of the main reasons you bought the land.


----------



## Solid Action (May 21, 2004)

Wow, consider the source.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Solid Action said:


> Wow, consider the source.


Huh?


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

TXPalerider said:


> Jason, basically no. Your rights do not extend beyond your property line. So far as modular homes, cars parked in the front yard, etc....That's why subdivisions have deed restrictions.
> 
> Now look at you example from another perspective. You've always wanted to retire to the Hill Country. So you buy 50-75 acres and retire. Your wife loves to feed the deer on the back porch. You like to watch them too, and you kill a couple a year for the meat. You've been living there for 4-5 years now and life is good. Then one day Mr. Luna buys the 57 acres that adjoins you, sets up 4 year round feeders, runs day hunts 16 hunter days a week. What are you gonna do?? There goes one of the main reasons you bought the land.


Palerider,

I understand what your saying and can certainly understand. But, I would basically handle it a bit differently than automatically putting up a high fence. Such as going and having a talk with these people and try to come to an understanding and possibly workout a situation that may benefit us both. Neighbors still do that on occasion these days, I suppose, or at least they should as thats the way neighborly folk use to do it here in Texas? Whatever happened to the old fashioned way of working out problems by talking rather than reacting?

I do know of people that have successfully filed lawsuit's against others for diminishing the value of their property because something someone has done on or too the adjoining property. So apparently, the right of someone to do something on their property that affects yours, does have a limit.

The things I say in these threads are my opinion only and I mean no disrespect and mean no harm by them!!


----------



## TXPalerider (May 21, 2004)

TXDRAKE said:


> Palerider,
> 
> I understand what your saying and can certainly understand. But, I would basically handle it a bit differently than automatically putting up a high fence. Such as going and having a talk with these people and try to come to an understanding and possibly workout a situation that may benefit us both. Neighbors still do that on occasion these days, I suppose, or at least they should as thats the way neighborly folk use to do it here in Texas? Whatever happened to the old fashioned way of working out problems by talking rather than reacting?
> 
> ...


Jason,

I agree completely with what your saying. My question is...after your neighborly talk with Mr. Luna doesn't work. What would you do? In effect, he is diminishing the value of your land.

I'm serious about the question. My brother lives on 75 acres and his neighbor owns 88 acres and they are surrounded by a larger ranch. They seldom shoot any deer off either place. My brother feeds the deer every morning and every afternoon in his yard and really enjoys them. However, right between him and his neighbor is a slug with 10 acres that refuses to stop shooting every buck he sees. They have talked to him on several occasions. They don't mind him hunting, but, his family and friends effectively kill every buck in the herd, every year. Luckily, the laws won't let him shoot does. So what would you suggest my brother do? The only solution they have is to fence him out. Any thoughts?

BTW, I get take no disrespect from your posts.


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

I bet a landowner with the resources could make a lawsuit stick for getting fenced out. The case is sketchy, but it could be made. It's isn't that much different than waterflow - one landowner can't legally dam up a creek at their property line to prevent a neighbor from having access to that water. I have to imagine a good lawyer could make that apply to natural resources and atleast make a case that impeding the deer travel is depriving the small landowner of a natural resource and depleting the value of his land. In other words, the large landowner should pay for the fence and also pay for the devaluation his action caused on another's land. Whether or not they win would be up to the judge. 

But in the real world, the small landowner is small because he doesn't have the resources to fight that fight, and the large landowner does.

Making the case on the other side, such as your brother's situation, would be much more difficult to prove in court. With a fence there is something real and tangible that obviously has an impact. With shooting too many deer, that is a lot of theory and personal opinion, you'd have a lot more to prove. 

Fencing someone out is a big time grey area. Two wrongs don't make a right. Different people believe different things when it comes to hunting. Shouldn't the owner of the land have the chance to choose what they believe? We claim all of these rights of private property owners when talking leases and lease prices, but then throw them all away if it doesn't meet up with out ideas of ethics. If the neighbors don't agree, either learn to live with it or buy his land. Heck, tell him if he's going to shoot all the bucks, you're going to feed and shoot them all first so he has nothing to shoot. Couple seasons of that and he'll be ready to talk. Or just tell him they're going to fence him out if he doesn't change... he'll either change or be ready to sell.


----------



## willydavenport (Jun 4, 2004)

Drake, I would reverse the question/statement about the devaluation of property. Assuming there is no high fence around this day hunting operation, isn't the landowner devaluing his neighbors' property by killing off all of the wildife? Also, isn't HE depriving his neighbors of their enjoyment of a natural resource by essentially using it all for his own benefit? You could almost make the same argument about the daming of a stream. The way I see it, this landowner is stopping the flow of a natural resource by killing it all when it is on his property. I realize the landowner isn't doing anything illegal but neither are his neighbors if they choose to put up a high fence.


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

willydavenport said:


> Drake, I would reverse the question/statement about the devaluation of property. Assuming there is no high fence around this day hunting operation, isn't the landowner devaluing his neighbors' property by killing off all of the wildife? Also, isn't HE depriving his neighbors of their enjoyment of a natural resource by essentially using it all for his own benefit?


Like I stated above, prove it. It's easy to prove that a deer proof fence exists and that it prevents deer movement and the leasing of that land for income. It's an objective case.

Proving that the neighbor killed all of the wildlife (and not cars, predators, or even your own hunters), and then proving how much less you are able to retain in lease fees as a result is a very subjective argument. It might could be done, but it would have to be an extreme example to provide a preponderance of evidence that a 10k acre piece of land was significantly damaged by a 50 acre place that borders less than a tenth of it.

Personally, I think both are wrong and should be liable. It's just that one is much more difficult to prove.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

You would have a hard time proving that someone devalued your land when they put up a fence on their property. It would be impossible to prove what a deer would do without the fence being there to begin with. I'm sure there has to be case law on this already. If one guy has the right to run a seedy hunting operation another has the right to erect a fence. I don't want anymore impositions on landwowner rights myself.


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

If you were fenced out on only one side, you're right that it would be difficult to impossible to prove. But if you are fenced on all sides, it seems like it would be easy to prove. Still not sure that it would hold up, but I think the case could be made if someone had the resources to fight and found it worthwhile financially.

His point is that others fencing someone out is an imposition on their rights to natural resources as a landowner. It's the same thing as impeding waterflow in a stream. You have the right to say what you want, but you don't have the right to do what you want if it negates the rights of others. So where you claim to be arguing for landowner rights, you're actually arguing for selective landowner rights.

If someone criticizes a picture of a box full of trout, the boobirds come out about their right to follow the law and not be bound by another's ethics. Yet a small day lease gets posted, where the owner is simply exercising his right as owner of the land, and everyone dogpiles someone who is doing something completely legal because it doesn't match their ethics. Then those same people will state landowner's rights to fence him out. Sorry, that just seems hypocritical to me.

It's poor ethics to shoot up a place like that no doubt. But it's also poor ethics to fence out a little guy and take away his livlihood just because you can. I'm not into the whole two wrongs make a right kind of thing. I think I could find a more creative and old fashioned way to deal with it.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Land OWNERS rights. Not Neighboring owners rights who have no rights to anything on my land. Water rights laws are a completely different animal. It is easy to prove someone cutoff or redirected water and their are laws on the books governing who, when and where it can be done. 

Where there are State, County or Municipal restrictions that restrict certain property rights (or deed restrictions) and there are fencing restrictions on the books you may have a case. However, we are talking about a piece of property in the country and as I said, you would be hard pressed to get Mr. Deer on the stand to say his daily activities were inpeded by a fence. 

I can't believe so many folks on here side with a blatantly unsportsmanlike hunting operations rights just to further the high fence/low fence debates.


----------



## willydavenport (Jun 4, 2004)

capn said:


> You have the right to say what you want, but you don't have the right to do what you want if it negates the rights of others. So where you claim to be arguing for landowner rights, you're actually arguing for selective landowner rights.


I guess this is where my thinking differs from yours, capn. In my opinion, if someone is abusing a herd, they are impeding on my rights to the resource as well. Let's look at it like this. Aassume that I am his neighbor and I own 300 acres and there are 4 bucks on my property that are young and seem to have a lot of potential. Ideally, I'd like them to live to maturity, pass on their genes, and if I'm lucky maybe I'll get a chance to harvest one when he is in his prime. Is my neighbor not infringing on my rights to the resource if I know that if any of those deer were to jump from my property into his they would be killed?


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Haute Pursuit said:


> You would have a hard time proving that someone devalued your land when they put up a fence on their property. It would be impossible to prove what a deer would do without the fence being there to begin with. I'm sure there has to be case law on this already. If one guy has the right to run a seedy hunting operation another has the right to erect a fence. I don't want anymore impositions on landwowner rights myself.


I would think that you could make a case of defacing or debeautifing (is that even a word?) your property by the erection of a high fence. Thus, the erection of that high fence would devalue your land. Again, I know of several situations where a building or other situation devalued an adjoining persons property and they won the suit and it was said that they person that was the defendent had to pay the plantiff for damages and had to remove the eye sore. Haute Pursuit, maybe you could explain as to why the court, jury or judge decided to do this? I agree it would depend on how deep the person's pocket's are as to whether or not you are successful!?!? Again, my individual rights end when it infringe's on anothers!!


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

TXDRAKE said:


> I would think that you could make a case of defacing or debeautifing (is that even a word?) your property by the erection of a high fence. Thus, the erection of that high fence would devalue your land. Again, I know of several situations where a building or other situation devalued an adjoining persons property and they won the suit and it was said that they person that was the defendent had to pay the plantiff for damages and had to remove the eye sore. I agree it would depend on how deep the person's pocket's are as to whether or not you are successful!?!?


If it is built ON your property, yes. However, if it is built on your neighbors property and there are *no fencing regulations* where you are, how is it defacing Your property?

The real issue is that in an ideal world, the State would manage its own natural resources (deer in this instance) to its highest and best use. They recognize that they don't have the manpower or resources to do so. I would bet you that 90% of the ranches who have built a high fence and even those that are larger ranches that are low fenced spend 500 times the amount the state could ever hope to on managing, feeding and bettering the deer herd. Take away the ability for these guys to do this and the ability, through selling hunts or offering season leases, for them to recoup some of their expenses and where would the incentive be to do it. Many of these ranches would simply be split up and sold or turned into agricultural managed places. The whole state would be like East Texas in some areas where it is dominated by small tracts of land with the owners shooting everything in sight until we have pretty much wiped out years and years of highly successful deer management. I realize that this is an exxageration but not by a whole lot.


----------



## Encinal (Jan 18, 2008)

TXDRAKE said:


> So I was just wondering? If I own land, *do I not have the right to not have my land's value diminished by someone else putting up an unsightly high fence along our common border.* I mean wouldn't it be the same as someone putting a trailer house (excuse me, modular home) between two expensive slab based homes or someone keeping a bunch of broken down cars in their front yard between those same homes? The way I look at it, my rights end when it infringe's on anothers!! In another respect, my right to drink as an adult becomes null and void when I decide to get behind the wheel of a vehicle after said drinking and endanger another person's life as they have a right to be safe on that same roadway!!


Considering the fact that property value goes UP with a high fence surrounding a property you are on pretty shaky ground. Those are expensive improvements, which people will pay more money for.

I don't expect you to accept that, but that is the way it is.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

> Originally Posted by *TXDRAKE*
> _So I was just wondering? If I own land, do I not have the right to not have my land's value diminished by someone else putting up an unsightly high fence along our common border. I mean wouldn't it be the same as someone putting a trailer house (excuse me, modular home) between two expensive slab based homes or someone keeping a bunch of broken down cars in their front yard between those same homes? The way I look at it, my rights end when it infringe's on anothers!! In another respect, my right to drink as an adult becomes null and void when I decide to get behind the wheel of a vehicle after said drinking and endanger another person's life as they have a right to be safe on that same roadway!!_


 

_Only if there are deed restrictions or ordinances that state someone can't have broken down cars in their front yard or a trailer house on their property can you prevent it from happening. It's on their property, not yours and there's nothing you can do otherwise. _


----------



## Saltwater Servitude (Mar 18, 2006)

Haute Pursuit said:


> Land OWNERS rights. Not Neighboring owners rights who have no rights to anything on my land. Water rights laws are a completely different animal. It is easy to prove someone cutoff or redirected water and their are laws on the books governing who, when and where it can be done.
> 
> Where there are State, County or Municipal restrictions that restrict certain property rights (or deed restrictions) and there are fencing restrictions on the books you may have a case. However, we are talking about a piece of property in the country and as I said, you would be hard pressed to get Mr. Deer on the stand to say his daily activities were inpeded by a fence.
> 
> _*I can't believe so many folks on here side with a blatantly unsportsmanlike hunting operations rights just to further the high fence/low fence debates*_.


That ain't no BS.


----------



## Bucksnort (Jun 29, 2004)

The fact of the matter is this. Hunting is expensive and it isn't getting any cheaper. As long as this guy offers affordable pricing then people are gonna pay it. Bottom line. As far as the high fencing him issue. There isn't anything he can do about it. Got a friend who bought 20 acres in South Texas. Thought he had a little piece of paradise. Put a house on it and never intended to kill anything but maybe an occasional deer, hog or javi. Big time powerful S.Tex Doctor/Rancher owned surrounding land and put up high fence enclosing his property completely. Friend filed lawsuit against Dr. went on for years and years. Dr. dies, widow trades land to his big time S.Texas attorney for owed attorney fees. She doesn't want the land anyway. Still high fenced. Attorney knows every S.Texas judge in the county. 20 acres still has no value. The doctor tried to buy the land from him several times but he thought he'd win the lawsuit. Now that doc is dead the attorney could care less about the little piece of paradise. Bottom line he is screwed.


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

willydavenport said:


> I guess this is where my thinking differs from yours, capn. In my opinion, if someone is abusing a herd, they are impeding on my rights to the resource as well.


We don't differ there, I completely agree with you. That's why I've stated several times that I see both actions as wrong. I just think that a fence would be easier to prove in court. Shooting everything that walks is wrong, and fencing the little guy out is wrong too.

Haute can make accusations about taking up for landowners like that if he wants to, it just shows that he hasn't actually read what's been posted. He apparently feels so defensive about his pro-fence stance that he can't allow someone to debate a side issue of the fence.

For the record, I am not anti-high fence and am very much in favor of landowner's rights. Haute's assumption is incorrect. I think a landowner has every right to erect a fence. However, I think that neighboring landowners have the right to not have their land devalued by the actions of neighbors without fair and just compensation. Bucksnort's example is a prime example of how a high fence completely devalued a neighbor's property. That landowner has been left in an unjust situation. If you do something on your property that harms me, fine, but pay me to make up for the harm.

How do you think those watershed laws came about in the first place? Landowners were taking actions on their land that harmed downstream landowners. And I'm sorry, but it isn't hard to prove that a high fence completely surrounding a 20 acre tract will prevent deer and other wildlife that add value to a piece of property from travelling through the property. And it isn't hard to prove that the change took place after your ownership, so you didn't knowingly buy a fenced off piece of land.


----------



## swtmike (Jul 20, 2005)

Not that I'm for this nor am I suggesting it, and I think about the only time it would be beneficial would be situations like this, but has the state ever tried to limit the amount of deer harvested based on the amount of acreage? Just curious.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

capn said:


> Haute can make accusations about taking up for landowners like that if he wants to, it just shows that he hasn't actually read what's been posted. He apparently feels so defensive about his pro-fence stance that he can't allow someone to debate a side issue of the fence.


You can debate till your blue in the face but it still doesn't change the fact that you have no basis for a lawsuit. If you want to change that I'd suggest talking to your legislators.

By the way, I don't hunt on or own a high fenced ranch.


----------



## Charles Helm (Oct 22, 2004)

swtmike said:


> Not that I'm for this nor am I suggesting it, and I think about the only time it would be beneficial would be situations like this, but has the state ever tried to limit the amount of deer harvested based on the amount of acreage? Just curious.


Personally, I thnk it would be a great management tool, although it would have to be adjusted by area and many people would be unhappy. It is done for MLD properties. They cannot take more than the recommended amount even by hunters with unfilled tags.

I have not hunted MLD land, so if I am mistaken someone step in.


----------



## swtmike (Jul 20, 2005)

Oh I meant to throw in by location in the state after amt of acreage. 

I agree there would be some very upset, but it sure would end disputes such as this one, as well as end most places who abuse the land such as this group on the original post. I can see it being beneficial, but do realize the adverse flip side. Although, I can't see many real management minded groups having a problem with it.


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

Haute Pursuit said:


> By the way, I don't hunt on or own a high fenced ranch.


I don't hunt on or own a high fenced ranch either... LOL I have no problem with people who do though.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Encinal said:


> Considering the fact that property value goes UP with a high fence surrounding a property you are on pretty shaky ground. Those are expensive improvements, which people will pay more money for.
> 
> I don't expect you to accept that, but that is the way it is.


No, that is not the "way it is" and I wouldn't nor do I expect you to understand considering your username "Encinal" is the name of a town right smack in the middle of the Golden Triangle and that the value of that small land tract that has been high fenced to go down if it is secluded because of being high fenced, thus devaluing it. Also, their are many that don't have the same values as you and consider getting up each morning to look out their front, side, or back windows at deer that would normally be roaming their property stuck behind a neighboring 8' or 10' high fence not so attractive!! Also, the only people willing to pay money for a piece of land that is high fenced are ones that can afford to purchase a large piece of it and those are the very heart of the problem!!


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Trouthunter said:


> [/i]
> 
> _Only if there are deed restrictions or ordinances that state someone can't have broken down cars in their front yard or a trailer house on their property can you prevent it from happening. It's on their property, not yours and there's nothing you can do otherwise. _


Again, I beg to differ as you can bring suit against someone that has devalued your land by an act that they have done on theirs, irreguardless of deed restrictions or ordinances. If someone opens a pipe yard next your property, thus devaluing it, you have the right to "TRY" and seek diminished value of your land from the owners of the neighboring property. Does this mean that you will win "NO", Does this mean you will lose "NO", thats completely up the Judge and or Jury.


----------



## willydavenport (Jun 4, 2004)

What's the point of even making that argument? Sure, I can sue you for whatever I want. Maybe I'll win, maybe I'll lose. What's your point?


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

willydavenport said:


> What's the point of even making that argument? Sure, I can sue you for whatever I want. Maybe I'll win, maybe I'll lose. What's your point?


Only that their dosen't have to be deed restrictions nor ordinances in place for you to seek compensation or damages for the davaluing of your property done by anothers actions on their property that borders yours. And that was the point.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

How does building a fence on my property devalue your property? How does you potlicking deer from a ranch that adjoins you not devalue theirs? The whole jist of this thread was a guy shooting way more deer off of a small property than it could sustain. If I owned property next to him, i'd fence his shabby operation out in a heartbeat. Let him try and sue me for fencing my land. I bet he won't find a lawyer who will do it on contingency. If his land is so small that building a fence runs the deer off then too bad... potlickers reward.


----------



## Levelwind (Apr 15, 2005)

Haute Pursuit said:


> The whole jist of this thread was a guy shooting way more deer off of a small property than it could sustain.


How do you know how many deer he's shooting? Just because he's advertising doesn't mean people are killing. I'd be surprised if they are.

Absent deed restrictions, I believe there are very few and very specific causes for which a civil action may be taken in the context of "devaluating neighboring properties" and I'd be really surprised if this would make the cut. And OBTW you cannot bring suit over anything. You have to at least make a superficial case that a civil claim is warranted under statute.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Haute Pursuit said:


> How does building a fence on my property devalue your property? How does you potlicking deer from a ranch that adjoins you not devalue theirs? The whole jist of this thread was a guy shooting way more deer off of a small property than it could sustain. If I owned property next to him, i'd fence his shabby operation out in a heartbeat. Let him try and sue me for fencing my land. I bet he won't find a lawyer who will do it on contingency. If his land is so small that building a fence runs the deer off then too bad... potlickers reward.


Again, Typical, lets put up another High Fence, yeah, thats the ticket. The whole point was that many of the people's first reaction on this board to this man's blatant disregaurd for wildlife management is to react with a very high degree of retaliation (High fencing) rather than first trying to go and negotiate with the neighboring land owner and come to an agreeable outcome, rather than the Ol' "We'll High Fence his butt out" knee jerk reaction!! By the way, if you were or happen to be a neighboring piece of land to this individual, you probably would only out fence him on one side, not on all four or however many sides he may have. So you would have to High Fence your entire property rather than just the one side of it as they will simply just walk around it to get to his two dozen feeders, otherwise it wouldn't do any good to high fence just his side. So let me think about this, I am going to high fence my entire property becasue of the acts of one person on one side of it, Yeah, thats makes perfect sense!!


----------



## capn (Aug 11, 2005)

Levelwind said:


> How do you know how many deer he's shooting? Just because he's advertising doesn't mean people are killing. I'd be surprised if they are.
> 
> And OBTW you cannot bring suit over anything. You have to at least make a superficial case that a civil claim is warranted under statute.


On the internet, not only are we all great hunters, outdoorsmen, and upholders of the highest standards of both imaginary and situational ethics, we are also experienced in property law, medicine, family law, passing gas, making noises that sound like passing gas, Biblical studies, real estate, and most definitely mountain lion sound identification (but not marksmanship).

Please don't question our claimed expertise again, you're proceduring on thin waterbased substances that could unbearingly faulter underneath your mass.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

capn said:


> On the internet, not only are we all great hunters, outdoorsmen, and upholders of the highest standards of both imaginary and situational ethics, we are also experienced in property law, medicine, family law, passing gas, making noises that sound like passing gas, Biblical studies, real estate, and most definitely mountain lion sound identification (but not marksmanship).
> 
> Please don't question our claimed expertise again, you're proceduring on thin waterbased substances that could unbearingly faulter underneath your mass.


Thats right on the mark and funny as all get out, ROFLOL!!!!!! :rotfl:


----------



## willydavenport (Jun 4, 2004)

LOL Thanks, capn.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

willydavenport said:


> LOL Thanks, capn.


By the way, Willy, excellant last name!! Happens to be the same as mine, Nice!!


----------



## Charles Helm (Oct 22, 2004)

capn said:


> On the internet, not only are we all great hunters, outdoorsmen, and upholders of the highest standards of both imaginary and situational ethics, we are also experienced in property law, medicine, family law, passing gas, making noises that sound like passing gas, Biblical studies, real estate, and most definitely mountain lion sound identification (but not marksmanship).
> 
> Please don't question our claimed expertise again, you're proceduring on thin waterbased substances that could unbearingly faulter underneath your mass.


vBulletin MessageYou have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.
​You are on a roll, and I seem to be repeating myself!


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

TXDRAKE said:


> Again, Typical, lets put up another High Fence, yeah, thats the ticket. The whole point was that many of the people's first reaction on this board to this man's blatant disregaurd for wildlife management is to react with a very high degree of retaliation (High fencing) rather than first trying to go and negotiate with the neighboring land owner and come to an agreeable outcome, rather than the Ol' "We'll High Fence his butt out" knee jerk reaction!! By the way, if you were or happen to be a neighboring piece of land to this individual, you probably would only out fence him on one side, not on all four or however many sides he may have. So you would have to High Fence your entire property rather than just the one side of it as they will simply just walk around it to get to his two dozen feeders, otherwise it wouldn't do any good to high fence just his side. So let me think about this, I am going to high fence my entire property becasue of the acts of one person on one side of it, Yeah, thats makes perfect sense!!


I'd high fence my driveway too so the deer couldn't lick the paint off my truck. :cheers:


----------



## willydavenport (Jun 4, 2004)

Charles Helm said:


> vBulletin MessageYou have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.
> ​
> You are on a roll, and I seem to be repeating myself!


I got ya covered Charles. He's killing me too...


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Ok, I've wasted away to many of my precious life minutes that I will never get back on here. So I'm out of here, but, Bat friends I will return, new bat time and same bat channel!!! Adios Amigos


----------



## Charles Helm (Oct 22, 2004)

willydavenport said:


> I got ya covered Charles. He's killing me too...


Thank you sir.


----------



## John Galt (Aug 6, 2006)

swtmike said:


> Not that I'm for this nor am I suggesting it, and I think about the only time it would be beneficial would be situations like this, but has the state ever tried to limit the amount of deer harvested based on the amount of acreage? Just curious.


I think they do that up in East Texas. My neighbor has less than 100 acres not far from Crockett, and he is not allowed to take does. He said they issue doe permits tied to the number of acres you own....or something like that.


----------



## Too Tall (May 21, 2004)

Haute Pursuit said:


> I'd high fence my driveway too so the deer couldn't lick the paint off my truck. :cheers:


Its like the old Tootsie Roll Pops commercial. They are trying to see how many licks it take to get inside of your truck and get to the corn growing in the backseat. :doowapsta


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

*Okay....*



TXDRAKE said:


> Again, I beg to differ as you can bring suit against someone that has devalued your land by an act that they have done on theirs, irreguardless of deed restrictions or ordinances. If someone opens a pipe yard next your property, thus devaluing it, you have the right to "TRY" and seek diminished value of your land from the owners of the neighboring property. Does this mean that you will win "NO", Does this mean you will lose "NO", thats completely up the Judge and or Jury.


You sue then because someone did something completely legal on their property and you "think" you've been wronged in some way. Hopefully, HOPEFULLY a judge with good sense will throw your case out of court and make you pay the attorney fees that the property owner had to pay.

In any case, this one has played itself out.

Thank God.

TH


----------

