|
|
Post by gundude on Oct 24, 2005 18:06:00 GMT -5
CAMBY GET IT STRAIGHT!,,,,, CRANE IS NOT HIGH FENCE! I CAN SHOW YOU MILES of fence that any deer could cross.........
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 24, 2005 18:46:41 GMT -5
So your saying it's a "short" fence? ?
Or are you saying it's escapable?
Did you see the pic of Radney's fence in the Sunday Star?
NOT...very tall of heavy duty!...Word is, he put it up himself!....I bet it "leaks" too!
|
|
|
|
Post by raporter1 on Oct 24, 2005 19:54:24 GMT -5
Camby, most of the Crane fence is just a farm type fence. Drive around it sometime and you will never mistake it for a high fence. I used to hunt around it and as I recall it didn't even have barb wire on top of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 24, 2005 19:59:11 GMT -5
CAMBY GET IT STRAIGHT!,,,,, CRANE IS NOT HIGH FENCE! I CAN SHOW YOU MILES of fence that any deer could cross......... DITTO...... |
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 24, 2005 20:03:08 GMT -5
OK...Strike Crane and insert Newport
|
|
|
|
Post by gundude on Oct 24, 2005 20:04:57 GMT -5
how about knowing what you are talking about before you post!...... It's not the first time you have been told about CRANE!
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 24, 2005 20:12:07 GMT -5
I was told that after 9-11 they put up a new fence (like Attebury did) with some of the Homeland Security money. I guess you have NEVER been wrong,  Gundude? |
|
|
|
Post by gundude on Oct 24, 2005 20:16:02 GMT -5
YEp I sure have been but i admit to it when I am and after I have been told by three different people about the FACTS I would spend a little time making sure they were correct before I started posting the same old stuff again. You might want to try it sometime.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 24, 2005 20:28:27 GMT -5
Easy fellers..
|
|
|
|
Post by gundude on Oct 24, 2005 21:48:13 GMT -5
It gets old woody, real old............ but i'll stop.
|
|
|
|
Post by reynoldss on Oct 25, 2005 6:46:08 GMT -5
Camby- Sorry but if one of your arguments is CWD.....then you must be against all cervid farming operations as well. These operations move deer in and out also.
Gundude- Whatever....hunting, killing....THE POINT BEING MADE WAS THAT WE ARE GETTING IN BED WITH THE ANTI!!!!!
As for hunters, "killers"not being properly licensed and high fence operations breaking game laws....seems a heck of a lot easier to police than whether or not a guy carrying a crossbow during early archery season has actually shot a deer!!!!
In regards to the pen being too small.....Oh well! Again, if a guy wants to shoot a boar out of a 5 acre pen or a 150 acre pen that is up to him. I think that this is one of those feel good issues that people can jump on and make themselves feel a tad more righteous than the next guy. If laws are being broken at these facilities then blame the law enforcement. If you consider this to be below you then never go to a high fense facility. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 25, 2005 7:18:54 GMT -5
YES!!!!
Live shipments of cervid should be HALTED. Cervid farming operations should manage their "stock" and if they are slaughtering, it should occur on their farm.
I agree 110%......enforcement (in the past) was a JOKE!
In the Bellar trial, dozens of folks testified that they broke Indiana game laws, yet the "state" refused to prosecute! Worse than that, is all the folks who seem to have came out against this practice...seemed to turn their head on all these violations.
Where is the out-cry to prosecute all these POACHERS?
Without "PAYING" customers that are willing to break the law, this issue would not be in the headlines. The HUNTER (or customer) is responsible to KNOW the laws in any state they wish to hunt in.....NO EXCUSES!
|
|
|
|
Post by gundude on Oct 25, 2005 9:37:34 GMT -5
I think this whole argument is a mute point. INDIANA sportsmen stood up and overwhelmingly decided that they did not want this practice to continue here............. Now if you want to take part in that sort of thing, just jump on your horse and ride it over to another state that allows it......... But it aint gonna happen here anymore....
|
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Oct 25, 2005 9:37:57 GMT -5
I have seen deer jump the fence at big oaks before
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 25, 2005 10:00:06 GMT -5
I have seen deer jump the fence at big oaks before Yes, and based on the number of "escapes" we see reported, it seems that no fence can keep them in. Just another reason to be concerned about this issue. |
|
|
|
Post by reynoldss on Oct 26, 2005 0:22:51 GMT -5
Missing the point once again, hopefully the third time will be a charm....not too hopeful though. The point ISN'T.... what does someone need to do to hunt, I mean kill, high fence animals and/or the best mode of transportation to get there. Rather, the idea of alining ourselves with the anti-hunters and anti-gun folks might not be in our best interest. Again, this is not about me wanting to hunt high fenced animals. I have plenty of great free ranging animals to hunt. I just dont like the anti's thinking they have won a thing here in Indiana....and they have!
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 26, 2005 5:27:07 GMT -5
www.newschannel5.com/content/news/15216.aspHigh Fence hunting is causing controversy as hunters are paying top dollar for a chance to shoot an exotic trophy animal in a fenced-in game park. Taxidermist Richard Smith knows hunters in Tennessee will pay top dollar for a chance at an exotic deer or sheep. “ The average man can't afford to go to Spain, Bulgaria or German to shoot a Muflan sheep,” said Smith. But they can afford to pay Smith between $1,000 and $3,000 to go after rare game in his Rutherford County hunting preserve. Now Smith no longer takes clients on his land but, there are several other private hunting preserves mainly in east Tennessee. And they draw plenty of hunters. Smith who works as a taxidermist says the owners of hunting preserves go to animal auctions to buy trophy animals for their clients to hunt. “We turned out animals free on the range as soon as we turn them loose on the area. They have feeding places and we try to just let them go back to a wild state,” said Smith. The hunting preserves do feature several hundred acres of wild and wooded land, but the properties are also fenced in. And critics say that's part of the problem. Many say the so-called high-fence hunting is not a fair chase for the animals because the animals have nowhere to go. And, 15 states have now banned the practice, but it remains legal in Tennessee. The state regulates and licenses the hunting preserves. Smith says they may become the wave of the future. He thinks the developments are eating the good land for hunting. The Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency currently regulates the type of animals allowed into the state for hunting preserves. They are largely sheep, deer and elk varieties. The state also monitors the game to make sure no new diseases are introduced to native animals.
|
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Oct 26, 2005 12:43:24 GMT -5
I don't see opposing the repugnant as being in bed with the ARFs , it's just a coincidence in my case .
I attended those meetings and gave my input because what those atrocities stand for is an abomination that I simply cannot abide . Plain and simple . If the ARFs helped get them shut down I won't weep crocodile tears for the deer procurers or cheer for the ARFs . They have their sights set on us anyway , shutting down abbatoirs won't change that .
The best way for our way of life to survive is for us to put our best foot forward , and increase recruiting of the youths through education and participation as early in life as possible . The general public looks at the ARFs as fanatical idiots and clowns at best , and most of them are smart enough to know that we don't agree with or support those clowns like PETA .
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 26, 2005 19:18:22 GMT -5
Reynoldss is mostly correct. It is one thing to be opposed to high-fenced hunting and actively encourage hunters not to spend money at these places, it is another thing entirely to actively try to close them down. That is over the line and no different than the animal rights orgs. efforts to force their beliefs onto everyone else. I do disagree with you on one point though, the ARFs are not all that involved in this situation here. They don't need to be. Why waste time, money, and effort that could be put to better use elsewhere when they have hunters all too eager to fight this fight for them. Divide and conquer.
|
|
|
|
Post by bullwinkle on Oct 27, 2005 17:33:33 GMT -5
The use of the anti hunting movement as reason for not opposing captive shooting Industry is being used by the industry in many state. The pemise suggest if you share agreement on one thing then you must accept all their agenda and that this agreement somehow helps their cause. Do you think that their side is worrysome that if they agree with sportsmen that canned hunting is not fair chase hunting then fair chase hunting has some merit.
Reynoldss do you really think it is in the best interest of hunting for hunters to support high fenced hunting in the public? Or do you think hunters should just look the other way as Mbogo suggest? Kind of like don't ask, don't tell? Do you believe Mr. Bruce and Mr. Blitzinger made conivincing statements that will convince 90% of the public that what he does should be an acceptable business here in Indiana. It did not convince the Indy Star as their Editorial condemned the Industry today.
|
|
