Aldeer.com Forums Alabama Deer Talk Serious Deer Talk Forum High fence

Hunted a Fenced area in Georgia years ago. It also had exotics, and that was all we were allowed to shoot.

Sitting in the shooting house, I counted 35 Whitetail at one time in the field.
Finally, a Red Stag walked out with his harem, and he got to ride in the truck with us.

I don't have a problem if that's what people want to do with there land and money. That's should be there right. I get a little irked at people who judge those that hunt high fence property though.

I personally don't put a lot of money in my hunting. I have ladder stands I've fabricated, shooting houses I've built and land I own. I probably spend $300 a year on seed, fertilizer and fuel to fill up my freezer. I don't kill a big deer every year either. But I'm satisfied.

No matter how you hunt isn't satifaction what matters? If you want to hunt a high fence and its not costing your family then I don't see anything wrong with it.

There were some judges in Alabama who once thought hunting was a privilege like some individuals on this forum. That was back in 1974.

Notice that they tried to educate us that hunting was only a privilege in their opinion involving a rule of the DCNR:


Sanders v. State, 302 So. 2d 117 - Ala: Court of Criminal Appeals 1974

The people of Alabama later decided to give those judges their own education. We agreed to amend our Constitution of Alabama 1901 to expressly recognize and protect hunting and fishing as rights endowed by our Creator. (see Section 1 and Amendment 597, Sportsperson's Bill of Rights) I remember voting for that amendment.


Our government holds wildlife and fish in a trust that we created through our legislature. That trust is responsible for the protection, conservation and increase of our wildlife. We still own the wildlife of this state and have the God-given right to hunt that wildlife and to reduce a reasonable amount of it to our own personal possession. We agreed with each other to limit our own personal use for the purpose of conservation and perpetuation of the various species to keep from depeleting the populations to levels where we would no longer have the species.

When you place your money in a trust with the bank, the bank holds your money in trust for you. The bank may hold title to your money to use for purposes in the best interest of the trust, but you still own your money. The trust may have conditions that were agreed to by both sides, but the bank cannot dictate added conditions you have not agreed to in the creation of that trust. The same principle applies to the trust we created for the conservation of our wildlife.

Do ya'll remove the tags from those buck's ears before you herd them up towards your "hunters"?

You can't dam up a creek without a permit and for good reason. What gives you the right, if I own land below you, to take that water? What if someone above you dammed it?? Some of ya'll need to stop and think. Just because you own a piece of property, does not make you God.

I've always heard you can't dam up a "named" creek/waterway.

I think it has gotten to the point of any branch/creek. Not that you can't dam it up, they just want to see a plan and make sure you don't adversely affect your neighbors. I see nothing wrong with that.

I only high fence hunt squirrels.

- I agree

Ha, if only it were that easy. They will make you buy mitigation credits for "taking" that stream and any associated wetlands. Makes all the fuel and equipment time look like pennies. I worked on a project that took a landowner over 6 years to build a 12 acre pond. You don't even want to know what it cost. He really wanted it bad.

Back to the original topic - I will defend a landowner's right to fence his property all day long, but I won't call it ethical hunting to shoot the deer or exotics within the fence. Ask any member of the general public how "ethical" it is to hunt deer or exotics within a fence. The size of the fence and acreage of the property is irrelevant. I am 100% against people bringing in exotics inside a fence. If God wanted stags or lions in the south, he would have put them here. I don't care if it's "worked" in Texas. Again, I'll defend your right to fence it, but I won't agree with the "ethics" of doing it just to prevent others from influencing "your" deer.

No, I haven't read most of the previous posts and no, I won't get into a pissing contest about it. Just wanted to state my opinion.

Really????

There are some very strange statements on this thread

so, 5,000 acres of hilly woods makes for unethical hunting???

I hunted a place in Zim called the Save Conservancy, something like 3400 square miles, and fenced(poorly kept up) but elephants don't fence. I really apologize for so unethical.....




..not really...

Easy money fence on side of your property and make breeder pens cheap

So were you trying to say it was easy? Cause you shot three times and only killed one deer

So those of you saying I can't fence because I don't own the deer, would you even be saying that if you weren't hunters looking out to keep your hunting better outside the neighbors fence?
Let's say Mark and Rick own land in the center of 5 square miles of smooth concrete. Mark owns 2000 acres of woods, Rick owns 10 acres that borders him. Both have exceptional hunting mostly due to Marks big chunk of land. Mark food plots and helps the deer heard all he can naturally. Rick usually puts out a feeder mid November and shoots his limit of whatever moves and that's it.

So Mark decides he has had enough, and is either gonna:
A: high fence his land
B: clear and smooth concrete his land like the surrounding 5 square miles

The way I read a lot of your posts, you are saying you would be all for him paving, but not high fencing? Even though both choices are perfectly legal, and both would effectively ruin Ricks hunting ground.
Basically sounds like a liberal approach to me, don't wanta mess up someone reaping huge rewards off of someone else's hard work.
Even though there are very few 5 square mile areas paved , you all know the basic idea deffinately exists I am explaining.

If Mark has truly had enough, he should offer Rick a fair price for his 10 acres.
Why is it people like you equate power with quantity? Mark owns 2000 acres at just say 10 deer per 100 acres, that's 200 deer. He's going to get worked up over Rick killing 3???? Better yet, he's going to spend a chunk of money to keep Rick from killing 3 bucks? Logical?
I guarantee you folks that are barking about land rights, ect, would be highly pissed if someone fenced an area next to your lease or property. At the end of the day, it's a dam deer. My gosh

I was offered the opportunity to kill up to a 130" for free and if I wanted to "buy up" I could. Anytime you start talking about up to 130 and buying up, I'm out. But that's just me. Needless to say I politely declined the offer and hunted the wild the next morning.

So jmj120, answer the question, is it ok for Mark to pave but not fence?

By the way I have no lease, I hunt public land only in AL

it does just a little...even hunter #2 isn't willing to put up with ALL the limitations and adversities that one must deal with in a free ranging deer. Not saying your a bad hunter or bad outdoorsman if you fence your farm and maintain a native herd, but killing a 150 in that situation still isn't the same as improving habitat on free ranging property and killing a 150 off of it, IMO.