I have never said all HF places are the same.
I have said IMO most HF places exist to make more big bucks and to make them easier to kill. To me, that�s pretty obvious if one has lived in Texas very long.

No doubt there are many HF places where bucks are both wild and not easy to kill. Even at that, every big buck on such a place is EASIER to kill than on a free range place because he can�t leave. Period.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. But understand your disdain for high fences and canned hunts.

OK, I guess all that money building and maintaining those HFs is just a waste since it makes no difference.

"Low fence bucks are easier to kill"

I have heard it all now.

Nope. Helps us keep our herd numbers where they should be and helps us manipulate our sex ratios to the preferred 1:1. Helps us to cull inferior deer while letting the better bucks reach maturity. That's very hard to do on low fenced properties. We carry one deer to about 20 acres. Habitat and all other wildlife benefit. We're not of the thought that we're going to carry a deer/2-3 acres like some folks. That decimates habitat and costs $$$$$ in supplemental feed.

Guess you've not hunted many large, low fence properties. You're much easier to kill when you get outside your core area. So are whitetails when they start roaming far and wide looking for does.

No way I will ever believe only 5% of high fence places have white horn freak genetics.

I�ve lived here all my life and disagree. How many HF ranches have you hunted?

Now your making assumptions. I have hunted all my life and actually grew up on a large low fence ranch, but it does not matter, any greenhorn with common sense knows what the fence is for.

I can't believe we are even debating this.

I understand. All of which makes it easier to raise and kill big bucks vs. a free-range place that doesn�t have that level of control over the deer. Not to mention it keeps all those bucks on your place.

So you are assuming we all think the way you do?

Absolutely not, I know none of you city folks will ever think like I do.

I have a so called HF, not for raising WT but for raising Ibex. I also have WT that were either here when fenced or have jumped in the so called HF. I have hunters each year to harvest the amount of WT each year that I think need to be taken off the place. I have at 3 bucks that have not been taken in at least 4 years. A 13, 12 and 10 point. Come time to separate they become ghosts and usually not seen until at least Feb. I had a very good Axis that had jumped in a few years ago. I had offered him for sale. Somebody chimed in that since it would be a HF hunt it would be like shooting fish in a barrel. So I made an offer. If somebody wants to hunt him I have a deal. You give me $2000 and I will let you into the property at daylight. You get to hunt all day without a vehicle. If you get the Axis I will give you the $2000 back. If you don't I keep it. If you want to come back tomorrow bring another $2000 and you can try again. I had no takers.

maybe 10% .

is not as common as one would think if you take into consideration all the high fenced places in the state. Sure, a lot more than 10% have released deer onto their place, but most people look for typical, south texas looking stock, not a deer that looks like it grew up next to 3 mile island.

Lol I said I wasn�t going to get in an argument about it, but I�m coming dangerously close to doing so, so I�ll just let my prior posts stand for themselves as I think we�ve about covered it all anyway.

Lots of folks in Texas are kind of like the frog brought to a slow boil when it comes to HFs - they�ve just grown up with them and don�t see them as the obvious game-changer they are because they have been a part of the Texas landscape for so long. Folks elsewhere don�t have that issue I can assure you. And it is even changing here now as discussed above.

Folks elsewhere can pound sand if they don�t like it.....

I don�t see that being the HF capital of the country is anything to be particularly proud of. YMMV.

You can always move elsewhere they welcome Texas Apologists and we have no use for them here.

SPOT ON!!!!

High-fenced "hunting" operations are . . . well, read the article

Read the link in the Op's post's and all responses. Have a neighbor who fits the link.

Seems he who types the loudest is the winner.

I read the link and the comments. As with most issues both sides have a valid argument/concern.

My take on this is producers/ high fence places will be considered production agriculture and will be regulated as such. Regardless of opinions good/bad, this is what happens when you build a fence around something,breed it, and make huge profits.


I foresee it (highfence) being even more �special� and money driven than it already is. Some places will try to be competitive with low fence leases (130-140 class culls) but will not last to due to the foreseeable regulation coming.
Small places say 100-300 acres will get out of the game again due to regulation and extra expense.

The elite high fence places will have their $$ clientele and do well, and will play the regulation game will little issues due to $$$$.

The native deer herd will continue to do well, TPWD and Texas will continue to profit from traditional hunting.

I hope traditional hunting is spared from the high fence drama!

It's a tough issue. I appreciate that this debate has stayed so much more civil, despite the opening salvo/article being so divisive.

I think lots of high fence places are done well, generally preserving wildness and improving the deer herd.

That said, I think we have to be incredibly wary (maybe even prophylactic) against anything that smells like a canned hunt, even to the wholly uneducated urbanite. The future of our hobby/passion may depend upon it. If you think we can't get regulated out of existence, you'd better think again. It could happen to us.

Personally, I'd rather shoot "small" deer than do things that risk taking too much of the wildness out of hunting. What's "too much"? Both, that's a tough question. I don't mind planting or supplemental feeding. Personally, I won't build a high fence around any of my places. I understand that caps what I can do. I'll manage habitat and wildlife as best as I can in a low fence environment. And we'll probably shoot smaller deer, but we'll still shoot some good mature deer, and we will have a lot of fun doing it. But that's just me.

well said ernest, but people's egos and the all mighty dollar have ruined it. To the goobers that support this type of hunting, managing habitat like you listed never crosses their minds. It's all about the kill, take pictures, plaster on social media, and head back to their gated subdivision. I understand that is not the majority of hunters, but that pct represents us as a whole to the antis. Just as in the waterfowl world. Many places that you could go hunt mass concentrations of ducks and geese within the last 5-6 years for free are now leased out beyond belief. Not by some guy wanting to put his kids on a few birds either. Commonly by outta state "guides" with outta town hunters. Show full tailgates on facagram, book hunts, fly up, shoot'em, take pics, post back on facagram, throw picture props in the ditch on a county rd on way to airport, fly back to the gated subdivision. it'll get worse too....

^^^^

Lets just be honest, people from Houston ruin everything

Its not a hard line, black or white issue. I know many, many landowners who own high fence ranches who in a perfect world, would take them down/have never put them up, but situations ( neighbors, hunting pressure deer herd, etc.) dictated it was better to have them than not.


I hunt with people from several other states that cannot fathom us shooting deer over a feeder. At best, they laugh at us, some are downright disgusted at it. Yet most deer hunters in Texas drop their deer under a feeder. Last deer I shot, was not under a feeder, but I was in a UTV when I shot him, that is also frowned upon by a lot of people.


But again, I think we all unanimously agree that the types of places mentioned in the article, albiet being in the minority, for now at least, get most of the bad press.