TREX will do it, he will do anything for a candy bar and a coke

Or we can try a diversionary tactic, When the tide goes out, where does all that water go?

He would have already done it. Should be able to have a discussion without the mixed in.

IMO, it is a very valid discussion and argument to have. Obviously, people will disagree and that is fine but it is to be discussed, not argued. Name calling and attacks aren't needed.

"Fair chase" is an arbitrary idea based on what you believe it is to be. As has been said, firearm versus bow, ML vs crossbow, guided versus public land, HF versus LF, dogs versus feeders, and every other method comes into play. Discounting them as "already established" or already "accepted" isn't a valid argument simply because each one has been outlawed, restricted, or confined in various regions.

To have a discussion on "fair chase", it first has to be defined. Who's definition do we use? Your beliefs or mine?

HF/LF always comes up and becomes a circular argument. if you were going to define it, would you define it as all HF ranches, those under 600 acres, those under 10k acres, those under 100k? Is a HF on 3 sides still considered fair chase? How high can the fence be? 6ft? 7ft?

There will never be a definition that will appease everyone. Some people hate doggers. Some ranchers don't allow bow hunting. Some people don't agree with feeders. There will always be a separation in beliefs. I believe what Bobo is trying to get at is that just because you disagree with something, is it worth the battle to fight it and risk other means and methods that you happen to agree with.

On the other side of the coin, where do you draw the line in the sand in regards to legally? Typically, laws are based on the norms of society within the region. Hence the reason you have states that don't allow feeders or baiting. At what point does this line of thought cross over into pushing your beliefs on someone else and violating property and personal rights?

I wouldn't know anything Dennis....I wasn't born till 1969 and never hunted

Me either sir, I was born in 62 and still haven't figured everything out.

I do know I like to hunt the way I hunt, within the laws I have to work with. What someone else enjoys, makes not one bit of difference to me unless it interferes with, or encroaches on me. Do I have my own opinions, heck yeah, but 9/10 I won't respond to a personal hunting thread if my POV doesn't side with that persons hunting style, I will let them have their joy doing what they like without me adding negativity to their hunt experience. If asked, I would give my honest opinion sure. I have friends that hunt all kinds of ways that I don't, but none of us are worse or better for it. If it is legal, who has authority to be the moral judge??

Good post thanks.

What got the thread going was the statement that "the term fair chase is complete and utter BS". A statement he has continued to stand by, your attempt to speak for him (or perhaps educate/save him) notwithstanding.

Debating the concept of fair chase is a healthy thing for all, but ignoring it/calling it BS is exactly the opposite.

What got the thread going was the statement that "the term fair chase is complete and utter BS". A statement he has continued to stand by, your attempt to speak for him (or perhaps educate/save him) notwithstanding.

Debating the concept of fair chase is a healthy thing for all, but ignoring it/calling it BS is exactly the opposite.