Then we would have bows and the problem would still exist

Landowner rights are all well and good for most people, as long as it protects what they want to do with their land. When the neighbor does something that might have an effect on them, then they no longer believe in landowner rights.

Most areas of public land you have to draw a tag. you can't just pick up a weapon and go.

the OTC areas are crowded with hunters. I'm glad that texas has the amount of private land that it does.

Its not fun to hike 3 miles, set up on a ridge then have 6 hunters walk past you during your morning hunt

How is that statement arrogant???

To say a man doesn't know hunting because of his disapproval of HF. I have been hunting this state since before you were a twinkle in your daddies eye and you are going to make a statement like that. There are people who don't believe in HF hunting.

This is just my opinion so take it for whats its worth....Trophy Hunting has done tremendous damage to the hunting heritage nationwide! Texas High Fence trophy hunting has just taken it to a completely different level! Bottom line is that money is the catalyst to all of the above, and in the end only those with the most money benefit....everyone else plays the game and also pays the price and I am not just implying this is the case here in Texas but across the nation, Texas just takes it to a different level. The only saving grace for millions of American hunters is that state and federal land is still available for them to tread on and hunt on, the same cant be said here in Texas. Looking at the number of petting zoos (HF ranches)that have been built in just the last 10 years is mind boggling, cant imagine what another decade of high fences being erected will do to the scenery and the resources.

ah, but it is about competition, why keep score if it doesnt matter who wins? it does matter. post a buck with a score attached and see how many questions u get about it from people that dont hunt anywhere near you and dont know u from adam. it does matter.

there are many arms of this argument, competition/jealousy is one for sure, but so is fencing out small landowners, fencing in native animals, pricing out "average guys,".....

how can u say it wouldnt "hurt" me if the neighbors of my 45 acres decided to fence their places? i guess i could always hunt squirrels and ride 4 wheelers.

Time to start passing this out.

To say a man doesn't know hunting because of his disapproval of HF. I have been hunting this state since before you were a twinkle in your daddies eye and you are going to make a statement like that. There are people who don't believe in HF hunting.

Not saying they will, I have had it happen before and alot of them dont understand why they have to pay for a deer they're not taking home and why it goes of what the guide had him scored at but thats just part of it. Blood or for sure hit and your paying for it no questions.

"Assault" bows do exist, don't they? This could be a problem.

I suppose the point could be argued that high fences can and do affect other properties, and, of course, landowner rights don't include infringing upon the rights of others.

How does a high fence affect the neighbor? It keeps game from leaving your land and entering theirs. Well, if your property is large enough to hold deer, I don't see the issue. If it's not large enough to hold deer, then you really didn't have much of a place to hunt to begin with, and you are probably part of the reason for the fence, anyway.

I believe it's the right of the landowner to put up any fence he pleases, though I can understand the frustration of a small landowner surrounded by such a place. The way I see it? You shouldn't be depending on your neighbor to carry the deer just so you can shoot them on your place. Buy a bigger place or lease or hunt public land.

I am not referring to the care taken of the resources, rather the fact that they take POSESSION of them by controlling where they can and cant go.

If it is a competition, then B&C must be the referee chosen by most. They don't accept high fence kills, so why worry about that?

That fence doesn't stop you from doing anything you want to do on your land. If you aren't seeing deer, it's because you have 45 acres. They can't fence you out on all four sides.

To say a man doesn't know hunting because of his disapproval of HF. I have been hunting this state since before you were a twinkle in your daddies eye and you are going to make a statement like that. There are people who don't believe in HF hunting.

thats a clown post bro. so what is a minimum amount of acreage one should have to have "much of a place to hunt?" or what is the minumum amount of acreage one must have to not be considered stealing deer from their neighbor?

so since my neighbor has more land than me i should just lease or go somewhere else so i dont shoot deer coming from his place?

is my 45 acres enough to hunt or should i just let my 60 acre neighbor hunt by himself out there?

but what if i am seeing deer on my 45 acres and i am feeding them all year and being very responsible with what i shoot/dont shoot, and they decide to fence me in, or out i suppose? should i be happy? nope, i would need 3 tubes of butt hurt cream.

Don't even know what put and take means but Im guessing its something else I wouldn't be in support of. All I am saying is that the deer that are on the 100,1000,5000, etc acres of land do NOT belong to the landowner. They are a wild resource that belongs to the people of the state. When you throw up a half mile of fence and contain and control the path that a wild resource travels IMO, its wrong on every level. But in response to that will be the "Im trying to manage my ranch for TROPHY deer and my neighbor shoots everything that walks".......so were back at the Trophy hunting issue.

So has anyone ever attended a deer auction?