Hello....that is what I said. Deer are treated more like a livestock in the model that haulingboat described. So why are you jumping on me? I didn't say it was wrong just that it was different than my notion of 'wild' deer.

Well, ok, the antibiotic issue still creeps me out. But also, I am not a big fan of feeding preventative antibiotics to any livestock. But then again since you are so keen on comparing deer to livestock this becomes a moot point.

I can see that you are somewhat emotional about this issue. Perhaps you feel I am a non-hunter or anti-hunter, I assure you this is not the case as my wife will certainly attest to.

Whistler

 

I'm with you on this issue.

 

I'm leaving this one alone, I've made my position clear. I'm well aware of current farming and livestock practices and I am an avid hunter, so please don't presume that I am coming to my conclusions based on ignorance or a lack of practical knowledge.

Beyond that, I have zero interest in being dragged into a fight on this one.

Waxy

 

I understand that some of you have difficulty agreeing with this practice. As I mentioned before, many Texans can't agree on this either. Waxy, I think you automatically percieved the worst. Last year, I shot a very nice buck on a low fence ranch. He was a10 point with very unique acorns on each tine and two mule deer folks for a total of 12. His inside spread was only 16." He scored 146 Boone and Crockett. A very nice buck by all accounts. He was not fenced in or fed anything other than what he could find in the wild.

This season I shot a very nice buck inside high fence. He was a 8point with one mule deer folk for a total of 9. He measured 221/2" inside and his left G2 measure just under 13." He was tall and wide. A great buck. He had 3 fewer points than my buck last year and scored 154" Boone & Crockett. People come from all over the world to hunt whitetail in Texas, some in high fence and some in low fence. The last two years have been very wet by Texas standards. This has helped to produce better deer. The protien feeders were all still full when hunting season began this year. This indicates deer were finding plenty of food elsewhere and ignoring what we put out. If you guys witnessed the situation I am certain that you would feel different.
Now Waxy is that a sad state of affairs? I think not.
In the end, all ranchers have achieved is producing a heathier herd with nicer antlers. I don't expect you to agree or respond in anyway other than how you have already. You made it clear that you have no intention of seeing anything differently than you do now. The problem with that opinion IMHO is that by not doing something we will end up with the same problem that the hunters coming from else where complain about. Ranchers are doing what they can to keep their ranches healthy and productive.
Whistler I would suggest you take a drive south of San Antonio towards Laredo or Corpus Christi. There you would see what many refer to as "Gods Country." You can ride for miles and miles and see nothing but brush country. Land that is untouched by anything other than the wildlife that lives within.

 

Here's a link to a post with my thoughts on buck/"trophy" hunting. I think it was a little before your time here at FTE.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/s...hreadid=175964

I'm sure I have perceived the worst, unfortunately the worst comes with the territory. I think you are presenting only the best.

The sad state of affairs I referred to was in response to your statement about hunters that have to travel inter-state distances in order to have a decent shot at bagging an animal. I think it's pretty obvious that in your neck of the woods, where the deer are as valuable as cattle (if not more), that the population is going to be healthy.

You're farming "wild" animals, manipulating them and fattening them up for harvest. Please don't try and tell me that it's a benevolent exercise for the benefit of the animals and future generations, that's a weak rationalization IMHO. Call a spade a spade. Nature would do a far better job if left to the task.

All of Canada and vast parts of the US are proof that deer populations are more than capable of sustaining themselves at high numbers (too high) without the help of ranchers and protein/antibiotics. To suggest otherwise is a falsehood.

Waxy

 

If it were a falsehood then explain the hunters coming from Pennsylvania saying " we hardly see a deer with horns." Nature is not doing such a good job keeping up in that state. Between road kills and overhunting they have been wiped out. The state of Texas and Parks and Wildlife have done a great job mentoring and policeing hunters and wildlife management. Whitetail season use to be a few weeks long. Deer populations were very low and poaching use the norm. Between ranchers and the State working together all of that has changed. Hunting season is now a few months long and the state deer population is as strong as it has been in many years and getting stronger. There is a smaller population and there for fewer hunters in the country of Canada. The pressure on the animals there I suspect is far less than than the animals in Texas. Parks and Wildlife have made the nessacery laws to protect the wildlife. They have done an incredible job of punishing poachers and reducing illegal hunting. WE are doing what is nessacery to protect herds for future generation to view, photogragh, or hunt. BTW, that is exactly why your government is protecting their herds. So dont make it sound as though your practices are so just and ours are so crass.

PS I did present the worst. If you look back to my comments about hunting from a helicoptor, aswell as the overpopulation problems, and culling the smaller antlers.

 

Originally posted by whistler
Hello....that is what I said. Deer are treated more like a livestock in the model that haulingboat described. So why are you jumping on me? I didn't say it was wrong just that it was different than my notion of 'wild' deer.

I wasn't jumping on you. If you look at the heading, you'll see that I was replying to Waxy, not you.

Well, ok, the antibiotic issue still creeps me out. But also, I am not a big fan of feeding preventative antibiotics to any livestock. But then again since you are so keen on comparing deer to livestock this becomes a moot point.

I'm not keen on anything. I was just explaining why it may be done. I don't have a nickel into any such endeavor.


I can see that you are somewhat emotional about this issue. Perhaps you feel I am a non-hunter or anti-hunter, I assure you this is not the case as my wife will certainly attest to.

Me, emotional about the issue? huh? I don't have problems with non-hunters. I haven't hunted in almost 30 years. It's just not my cup of tea any more and my son has never expressed a desire to hunt. If you got the impression that I was all worked up over this issue, I apologize. It really isn't a topic that I have strong feelings about. I do, however, agree with some of the issues and comments on both sides of the debate. While I don't think hunting on a 5000 acre ranch is hunting in a pen, I do find some of the hunting on reserves (particularly bird hunting) that remove the elements of skill and luck aren't sporting. Heck, my father was such a devoted sportsman that he would only hunt pheasant with a bow when he brought our Springer Spaniel with him and only shot airborne birds.

 

See my post re Trophy Hunting for your answer to that question.

Willdife manangement does not equal wildlife farming.

There are clearly some more populous states that have management issues, IMHO fencing the animals in and farming them isn't the answer.

All your points regarding management and punishment of poachers are very valid and I completely agree with them. What you've described is poor management leading to poor populations. That's an obvious outcome. However, when good management techniques were brought in, a rebound in deer populations occurred. My assertion is that those management factors (ie hunter control) alone would ensure a healthy population. Anything beyond that becomes farming the animals for profit.

I now live in a city of over 1 million, and I can drive a 1/2hr in any direction and see all the deer I could ever want.

Waxy

 

jpsartre--

No harm, no foul. The way you disected my post I jumped to some assumptions regarding your motives. Sorry about that.

Whistler

 

Damn, either he is a good shot or you went hungry alot.

 

I also live on the out skirts of a city. Only 227000 live in this city. We drive 15miles to the low fence acreage where i shot last years buck. This year I watched a very nice 10 point there. I was planning on taking him this year until I came across the other one. The 10 point at the low fence ranch lives in a 400 acre brush thicket. He has been their for three years. We have been watching him each year grow a little bigger. When we first saw him we aged him at about 3 1/2 years old. That puts him at about 6 1/2 years old now. He has reached his pinnicle. He now has the best rack he will ever have. He has free range to come and go as he sees fit and yet he stays there.
The same is true in the high fence ranch. Even during the rut when buck are chasing does we never see them more than 2 or 3 pastures away from there territory. Yes there are fences that prevent deer from going to the neighbors property. However they are far from being fenced in.

 

Haulingboat--

This is meant as nothing more than an observation.

Antlers seem to be a big part of your hunting experience. For others, myself included, antlers are quite incidental.

I'm not begruding you your style of hunting but it is quite different and difficult to relate to.


Just one screwball's opinion though,
whistler

 

2 things,

First: Protein feeders would be considered "baiting" in many southern states, even on private property. As a matter of fact caging deer would be a problem. Most southern states do a pretty good job.

Second: Feeding deer will take the edge off of their survival skills as well. So a corn fed 16 point buck may "Look" impressive when in reality its a lot like shooting a milk cow while a scrawny 12 point that grew up eating acorns is wiley and may take some "hunting" skills to bag is less impressive.

Its still shooting ducks in a barrel.

It will be a cold day in hell before this hill billy pays a damn big Texan the price of a new truck to hunt a deer.

I'd rather shoot a long horn! At least you know what you have got . . . a stringy over rated bovine with an impressive set of horns.

Whats next? GMO (genetically modified) deer? They already have deer breeding programs.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by haulingboat
If it were a falsehood then explain the hunters coming from Pennsylvania saying " we hardly see a deer with horns." Nature is not doing such a good job keeping up in that state. Between road kills and overhunting they have been wiped out.

In my youth, I only hunted deer in NJ. In the southern part of the state, there were more deer found dead on the road or starving in the Pine Barrens than hunters were taking. I can say that with a fair degree of certainty because my father was a game warden at the time.

 

That used to be the case, but the past two seasons you can only shoot a buck with at least 3 points on one side. I can't believe the difference it made in only two years. After the first season I saw 10 times as many bucks, and this past season, looking at the kills in the paper, there are many happy hunters out there. Before, most bucks that got shot were small and a six point was considered a good one. This past season the average was probably 8 points, and they were much bigger.