There's ranches in this state that have pens that are 100 acres or more. Goo look at the 6666, the Pitchfork, parts of what was the XIT, the King, ect.

There's also ranches that the whole ranch is less than 100 acres. And yes less than 100 acres can be productive, so I have no problem with someone calling a place that size a ranch. Their definition of a pen will be different than the large ranch's definition.

Figured this thread twas a loaded question... As pappy once said: Tis like an ol smoke pole, ta see who goes off half cocked ....

Won't vote, since I would be implying that I am trying to dictate what a private landowner can do with his land with my views.

Or exclude 100,000's of acres of public hunting land by definition(islands, city locked, etc)

Golden

LOL!! Right!!

All we can do is hope that this thread has a quick death.

The poll may be easily criticized but the results are still interesting. I based it around a long standing question I had regarding the HF topic and how it is perceived in many different ways. Like you indicate Bobo, one point of view is that all the creatures on this earth are living inside various forms of high fence. But I'm not trying to cover that aspect with this thread. I had to guess at using <50,000 acres as a maximum because I figured anything larger was not relevant to my question.

Not voting is still a valid and helpful response.

The poll and thread is definitely not trying to imply good/bad, right/wrong, ethical/unethical, question landowner's rights, create controversy, acid rancor or butthurt, etc. It's merely a sampling of perception regarding a specific question.

If it gets deleted it would be nice for a mod to take a screenshot of the poll beforehand. I'd be very grateful. I'll try to take a screen shot a little later.

Not really what I was saying. There are 1000's of different public lands under 50k and above that follow under the same ideology of a HF but because they are public, and some being a draw tag some people choose to ignore the reality. So is its either a Pen perception or Access perception. That's all.

Won't get deleted as long as everyone stays respectful of others and those animals from both sides

One guy said "once the fence goes up they become livestock".

Sorry to throw the t#*d in the punch bowl... But as soon as you use all the modern tools like feeders, scents, guns, bows, scopes, food plots, choppers, guides, etc. they in fact become livestock.

The only people who can't see that are blinded by their own ignorant ego.

It's already high fences. We are surrounded by oceans

"Pens"as large as the ones you speak of are usually called "traps" instead of pens and have a series of smaller pens attached to work cattle. I have been to several of the ranches you speak of and those giant pens are traps. Many times to the 6666 and Tounge River.

So I killed a bull elk on Colorado public land, no feeder, no food plot, no scents, no chopper, but I did use a scoped rifle. The bull was born free of any fences and died free of any fences, but according to you he was livestock?

Geez...

Absolutely! You used tools that effectively and artificially shrunk/retarded his ability to evade you. That gives you an "unfair" advantage that is no different than what a high fence does.

I'm sorry, but when you evaluate high fences and scopes as limiting the animals ability to evade you, it really is comparable.

therancher, is this mastodon also considered to be cattle? The Clovis tribe was using a tool to kill it. Sure I'm way outside the box, but the way I read your post the answer would still be yes.

Absolutely. If you use any tool other than tooth fang and claw you are in fact reducing the natural ability of the animal to evade you. "Cheating". Which is "unethical" to some.

Now, do I believe the natural predators such as "Clovis man" or "Dallas Fort Worth man" should worry about "Cheating" their prey? Oh hale no.

I don't care if you kill them with a buick. Just hunt. And don't worry about what method your competing natural predators use.

Livestock are domesticated animals raised in an agricultural setting to produce commodities such as food, fiber and labor. 

It says nothing of the way they are slaughtered. "Rasied" would mean a person owns them much like every animal on your ranch. "Agricultuaral setting" would be animals raised on land a person owns or leases and has control of.

Killing any animal using a tool does not make the animal livestock. A fence can make them livestock, but a rifle, bow, speer, rock, or strangulation does not make the animal livestock.

By that definition, 99+% of high fences do not fit your "livestock" profile. Take your pick, but you can't have it both ways.

Are we denigrating high fences because they make hunting easier? Or because they enclose breeder pens? 99+% of high fences are not breeder pens.

If you own 2,000 acres. You charge 10 hunter $2,500 ea. to have the privilege to come onto your land and harvest deer located on your land. They pay you $25,000 to shoot with bow, rifle, spear... They harvest 30 deer using man made tools designed for killing. Then in July a fellow rancher comes to your ranch and buys 30 head of cattle. He uses horses and a helicopter to capture cattle. He pays you $90,000. He then haul's them to slaughter by tools designed for killing. Would both not qualify as "Agricultural livestock setting" your land provided the habitat and you gained the income from the harvest of animals on your land? Just curious

99% of high fences do fit in the definition. It allows a person to raise and maintain the animals within the fence. It says nothing on acreage, and anyone that has raised animals knows the fence has to surround them. I am not saying a thing about high fence hunting being easier or not.

YOU, however chose to veer way off the raisl suggesting that any time a hunter uses ANY tool, not including a fence, it makes the animal he kills insantly livestock. I am pretty sure 99% of the population of high school educated people will disagree with you. I am not cheapening high fence hunting, but you are taking a stance that looks like you believe deep down high fence hunting is not the same as free range hunting, so you want want to cheapen the free range hunt if a hunter uses any tool what so ever. That is just silly.

speaking for myself, the 1% on here that has trouble reading & understanding ya'll... As pappy once said: tis a lowfer, hunt free ranging, never hunted livestock...