Interesting discussion with Don Higgins on the Land Podcast

[Mortenson]

Was more of fact that they work hard at what they do.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DEN4CQuKkr58&ved=2ahUKEwim5pnP3Mz6AhWikokEHY5RAXwQwqsBegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw1is7a7-UDQXYB83GVo1Ab8

 

[Buckly]

I know lots of places that have done what your buddy did. I'm ok with it. For me I only have the deer that were on the property when I fenced it. Nothing ever introduced. La. or Mexico. I have found that with enhanced nutrition over time I can make profound improvements in the genetics. That coupled with allowing deer to reach full maturity is very powerful. But it does take time , discipline, and commitment . Some folks like to move faster than that.

Question, Is there any problems you see or have determined in the deer genetics being held inside without outcrossing of some sort?

 

[hillrunner]

Question, Is there any problems you see or have determined in the deer genetics being held inside without outcrossing of some sort?

I wondered that too, seems like it might be forced inbreeding.

 

[SwampCat]

I will never have a high fenced area - but in my opinion - a high fenced area lets the true habitat manager reach the pinnacle - outside most of the interference of neighboring lands. Managing wildlife within a fence allows the effort to reach more of the potential. Most of us can only hope to attract and maybe hold a big buck on our land a little longer. Most of us cant really produce big bucks. And Most of my investment of time, energy, and money reward the neighbors as much as they do me.

I know a couple guys with high fence areas - both around 1500 acres - and they are less likely to kill a deer than I am. It is more about the management to them - than the kill. And compared to my across the road high fence neighbor - my unfenced deer are tame. I have been on his property a few times and it is fairly uncommon to see a deer. I might see 30 deer riding around my place in an evening on my ranger. If I positively had to kill a deer tomorrow, no way would I choose to hunt my high fence neighbor’s property over mine.

 

[SwampCat]

Question, Is there any problems you see or have determined in the deer genetics being held inside without outcrossing of some sort?

I have also wondered that. I probably have 18 to 20 bucks right now using my 300 acres. I have a lot more does than that. These deer come and go - especially the bucks. We might kill two or three bucks and probably no does - because the neighbors will take more than their fair share. My across the road high fence neighbor does not have nearly as high a deer density as I do. He doesnt have to, because he doesnt have to share his deer. He also has much closer to a 1:1 buck to doe ratio - so even though he has a much lower deer density than I do, he has a higher percentage of bucks in the herd, which reduce the chance for genetic stagnation.

 

[BenAllgood]

I wondered that too, seems like it might be forced inbreeding.

It definitely takes out the dispersal ability. With a high fence you have tighter control on the variables of age, nutrition, and genetics versus a free range herd.

 

[Troubles Trees]

I'm sure he is a great steward to his pet deer and the land they live on, but he's taken away that land and habitat from the public's wildlife. One could argue it isn't any worse than any of the countless things that could have been done to eliminate the habitat but doesn't mean I have to like the idea. That and there is just something off-putting to me about taking the Shaquille O'neils and Brittany Greiners of deer, mating them, and feeding them a diet like they are a roided out body builder bulking for the mr Olympia comp.

I see what you are saying, it is your opinion and you are free to voice it, I am a big advocate for that. But don't you feel people should be able to do whatever they legally want on their property?

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I see what you are saying, it is your opinion and you are free to voice it, I am a big advocate for that. But don't you feel people should be able to do whatever they legally want on their property?

Fine but the wildlife is the states not the landowners. It’s basically theft

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I see what you are saying, it is your opinion and you are free to voice it, I am a big advocate for that. But don't you feel people should be able to do whatever they legally want on their property?

It's not a black and white issue IMO. There's things that people can legally do on their property that would be made illegal if everyone did it. I wasn't advocating for making high fences illegal but if they became common enough I would definitely push for tighter regulation of their use. There are already plenty of examples of restrictions on what can be built and where based on how it impacts the public's wildlife.

 

[SwampCat]

It's not a black and white issue IMO. There's things that people can legally do on their property that would be made illegal if everyone did it. I wasn't advocating for making high fences illegal but if they became common enough I would definitely push for tighter regulation of their use. There are already plenty of examples of restrictions on what can be built and where based on how it impacts the public's wildlife.

In the sense of the original discussion on this topic - fencing a property line to restrict natural movement of local wildlife - mainly to restrict other hunter’s opportunity - is a little different than the original intent of the few folks I know of who high fenced their property - both to improve management results - and in both cases I know of locally - to contain exotics they moved onto their land. But in the end, it is all the same. Not sure you could restrict one without restricting the other. My state has stopped approving new high fence enclosure applications. But, I would guess a high fence that did not totally enclose a property would not even require a permit.


It would be an interesting situation as mentioned in this thread, where the neighbors installed the fences, effectively creating a totally enclosed piece of property for the particular landowner who never constructed a fence.

 

[Baker]

Several thoughts on the discussion .

It is a very interesting question if genetics are 'inbred' in enclosed pastures." I'll start with I don't know". What I do know is that genetic makeup is extremely complex and it would take time for that to happen. The short answer I think is ...it depends...It depends on the size of the enclosure mostly though I have no precise answer as to where the line is drawn on appropriate size. What I do know is there are tell tale signs of inbreeding. Bucks typically have more mass, shorter main beams, and shorter tines.It is also my experience that to think fenced enclosure are water tight is a fallacy. Deer get in and out. All the time.This obviously effects the question. But overall they do a good job of creating the ' opportunity' for allowing a deer to age. which is the chief benefit. I have no experience with fenced small pastures which I would define as a few hundred acres or smaller but I would think such could reduce genetic breadth over time...how long I don't know? . Regarding the question of scale and inbreeding I am very familiar with a 2000 acre property that was fenced in the 1980's by a super sharp manager. It is I believe probably the best acre for acre whitetail property on the planet.No signs of inbreeding but rather just the opposite. Tremendous genetic diversity with gorgeous whitetails

Another thing I know is that I have seen many cases where folks hi fenced a pasture and ruined it. Once a fence has been built responsibility increases substantially. So people who can afford it build a fence but don't know what they are doing and before long the 'goats' have destroyed the habitat.

Another thing I have seen is that partially fencing a property accomplishes nothing. Unless miles of fence are built deer will find a way to go around the fence back to the neighbors corn pile. Especially the bucks. Partial fencing just creates funnels around the fence.

I believe theft to be illegal by law. If its not illegal by law and it is bothersome then its just an emotional response to a circumstance someone may not like. Life is full of such and it becomes a philosophical approach to life how humans respond to their thoughts. Interestingly I believe Mexico has a far more enlightened approach to wildlife mgt. They base it on biological availability and beyond that they care little how or who removes the biologically surveyed abundance. Also there is none of the U.S. concept of who owns the wildlife that we adopted. a long long time ago.

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

I'm concerned that if high fencing becomes more common, then the traditional wintering grounds and migration routes for free range wildlife will be disrupted. That could lead to higher mortality, predation and decreasing populations on the adjacent properties.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Also there is none of the U.S. concept of who owns the wildlife that we adopted. a long long time ago.

Can you expand on this? If nobody owns it, how is the killing of it regulated?

 

[Baker]

I'll speak specifically to deer. We are required to do a preseason survey of deer on our property. We turn that number over to wildlife folks who issue permits based on our numbers and what they deem to be the biologically sustainable harvest. After that they don't care if I shoot everyone of the deer or how many any individual shoots. Just put the tag on it. Wildlife regulates it but they leave it up to the landowner to manage it within the sustainable parameters.

 

[Catscratch]

I'll never have a high fence because I'll never afford one.

I love to hunt for wild mushrooms. The scouting, the timing, the weather, etc... it's really comparable to how I hunt and I thoroughly enjoy it.

I love to grow giant pumpkins. The damn things require constant care, beyond normal nutrition, protection from predators, and the right genetics.

I would never give up the way I hunt because it's so much fun to me. If I could afford to have a large acreage high fence I would, and I would treat it like my pumpkins. The deer would have the best of everything. It would be different but enjoyable in it's own way. If invited to hunt a fenced area I would have no reservations whatsoever in giving it a try.

The question of if they were to become common is something I've never considered. I guess in my mind I've never thought it was a possibility that high fences could be common enough to affect wild populations, movement, and hunting. It's an interesting consideration and I don't immediately know where I stand on it.

 

[Baker]

Elaborating on the above it is just like the DMAP program that many states have. Here in La. I do much the same thing as the state gives me a lot of flexibility with which to the deer on my farm. In practice they have come to learn that we know what we are doing so they ask us how many tags we want knowing how we mange the resource. With a tag the state gives a lot of flexibility as to who actually shoots the animal and how many are taken as the idea is to more effectively manage the wildlife.

The same thing has happened in Mexico. Officials know and trust our strategies appreciating we know more about managing deer on our property that they do so they simply ask us what we want to do.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I'll speak specifically to deer. We are required to do a preseason survey of deer on our property. We turn that number over to wildlife folks who issue permits based on our numbers and what they deem to be the biologically sustainable harvest. After that they don't care if I shoot everyone of the deer or how many any individual shoots. Just put the tag on it. Wildlife regulates it but they leave it up to the landowner to manage it within the sustainable parameters.

Can anyone do the survey and does it have to be a certain time of year? If someone owned 20 acres, would they get allocated deer too? Are there public lands where people can hunt in Mexico?

It makes sense for the LA and Mexico depts to give you the reigns to manage your own farms but you are far from the average hunter. The way I see it is hunting regs are largely written to provide opportunity to those of modest means but at the same time prevent those without the means, knowledge, or care to positively impact conservation from wiping out wildlife.

This conversation brings up a lot of different thoughts/questions that i'm ignorant to
1. What dictates when someone needs a tag to shoot a deer in a high fence vs being livestock that can be sold or killed at will?
2. Is it typical for there to be permits or approvals needed to build a high fence on rural properties?

 

[SD51555]

I don't think anyone has a great handle on what rural life is going to look like 5-10 years from now. There are lots of things that are changing, and one of them is wildlife. It's a sad state for deer, because deer have no advocate other than deer hunters. And deer hunters don't compensate society for the damage caused by deer.

States are going to grow tired of paying contractors to shoot troublesome deer. I wouldn't put it past state science to start working on sterilants in feed that they can drop from airplanes (even onto your property under the cover of darkness), deer specific poisons that don't affect off-target critters, or even gene edits that degrade the DNA of whitetail deer to blunt their survival and reproductive instincts.

If someone wants wildlife on their property, they may end up being required to take responsibility for those animals (including keeping them on your property), or the state will kill them.

 

[SwampCat]

Can anyone do the survey and does it have to be a certain time of year? If someone owned 20 acres, would they get allocated deer too? Are there public lands where people can hunt in Mexico?

It makes sense for the LA and Mexico depts to give you the reigns to manage your own farms but you are far from the average hunter. The way I see it is hunting regs are largely written to provide opportunity to those of modest means but at the same time prevent those without the means, knowledge, or care to positively impact conservation from wiping out wildlife.

This conversation brings up a lot of different thoughts/questions that i'm ignorant to
1. What dictates when someone needs a tag to shoot a deer in a high fence vs being livestock that can be sold or killed at will?
2. Is it typical for there to be permits or approvals needed to build a high fence on rural properties?

I am sure the regs vary by state - but I believe in our state - high fence owners go by state regs for native game and pretty much anything goes for exotics. I know a high fence owner who was cited for shooting does after shooting hours.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I don't think anyone has a great handle on what rural life is going to look like 5-10 years from now. There are lots of things that are changing, and one of them is wildlife. It's a sad state for deer, because deer have no advocate other than deer hunters. And deer hunters don't compensate society for the damage caused by deer.

I mostly agree. Lots of non-hunters like the idea of deer on the landcape and seeing deer but next to none are advocates.

States are going to grow tired of paying contractors to shoot troublesome deer. I wouldn't put it past state science to start working on sterilants in feed that they can drop from airplanes (even onto your property under the cover of darkness), deer specific poisons that don't affect off-target critters, or even gene edits that degrade the DNA of whitetail deer to blunt their survival and reproductive instincts.

If someone wants wildlife on their property, they may end up being required to take responsibility for those animals (including keeping them on your property), or the state will kill them.

Really don't see this happening considering states have always been the one telling landowners that the wildlife is a condition of the land and to accept it rather than the opposite. Hell, something to that effect is in Montana's state constitution.