Editorial: Pursuit of big antlers isn’t worth the risks


In one appalling case in Indiana, according to prosecutors, hunters paid a preserve owner thousands of dollars to stalk and kill deer inside a 1-acre pen. Some deer, according to witnesses, were drugged to make them easier to shoot. One deer, suffering from pneumonia, was so sick that it apparently was propped up so that a hunter crouching nearby could kill it with a rifle. The hunter paid $15,000 for the privilege.

All for the antlers.

And, on the part of breeders and preserve owners, all for the money.

The high-fenced hunting industry in Indiana has long raised alarming questions about sportsmanship, humane treatment of the animals and the disease risk posed to wild deer when out-of-state animals are introduced here. Animal protection groups and many hunters have pushed for stronger regulation of preserves, and for an outright ban, on high-fenced hunting, with little success.

Now, an investigation by Indianapolis Star reporter Ryan Sabalow and photographer Robert Scheer has revealed the dangers posed by the practice of captively breeding, transporting and then shooting deer inside fenced hunting grounds.

The market, loosely regulated, has developed because the deer have been bred to grow abnormally large racks of antlers. The deer are kept inside fences to ensure that wealthy clients have much better odds of finding and killing a prized buck. In some cases, hunters even select specific animals from online catalogs.

All of that makes a mockery of traditional hunting. Worse, it poses a health hazard for other deer, livestock and potentially even humans when diseased deer are transported across state lines.

In the case described above, the hunting preserve’s owner, Russ Bellar, served nine months in federal prison because of his operation’s excesses. But lobbyists representing deer farmers have pushed for the federal government to eliminate some of the rules that got Bellar in trouble.

State regulations, meanwhile, are all over the map. In Indiana, there’s legal confusion about whether farm-bred and -raised deer are classified as livestock or wildlife. Courts have issued conflicting rulings on the matter, and as a result the Department of Natural Resources has stopped regulating the four hunting preserves that operate in the state.

It’s incumbent on the Indiana General Assembly to clear up the confusion. Lawmakers also should finally put a permanent end to high-fenced hunting in the state in light of the serious abuses revealed by The Star’s investigation.

Congress also needs to set tougher standards for the interstate transport of deer, elk and other animals bound for hunting preserves.

The pursuit of big antlers simply isn’t worth the health hazards and ethical challenges the industry creates.

http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/2014/04/04/editorial-pursuit-big-antlers-worth-risks/7324021/

Good article. Generally speaking though, the pursuit of big antlers is probably a curse to the sport of deer hunting regardless of high fenced farming operations or the fair chase world of food plots, minerals, trail cams, leasing and on and on.

Dave, you hit the nail on the head with that statement. Antler worshiping and horn porn will and has already started to change deer hunting in Indiana. As an old timer I see it already happening. As big money gets more involved the poor man or little guy gets pushed out, then when anti hunters push legislation to change laws and hunters need the little guys vote he simple don't care any more. Some of you younger guys will see drastic changes in the future and Im afraid the changes wont be in your favor. h.h.

You both hit the nail on the head.

^^^ that is why we put our hunting efforts toward the overall "experience" and not all on antlers. Kill a big buck? Sure, but that is not the goal.

This is the reason why Luke chooses to hunt the youth hunt at Cedar Branch (which is doe only) and skip the chance at shooting a buck. It is the experience of camp, friends, and the outdoors.

I agree with all of you........

Hunting is all about the enjoyment and experiences with family and friends for me.

Besides, the best tasting deer in the woods is the button buck...they just get gamey and tougher after year 1.

another Risk is friendship I got so wrapped up in antlers and letting little ones go, a sin to kill a bb and all the management ideas out there relating to growing big bucks ,, I got real mad at my brother for shooting a buck that didnt meet my standards A wrong thing to do I see Now and when I saw a buck Killed by neighbors or poached that I had been after it Made Me Sick Physically sick And now I see its not worth it so Shoot what makes you happy and want , dont fret about things you have no control over or you will loose the Joy you experience while hunting As I came real close to doing Its just not worth it

Does "shoot what you want and what makes you happy" include shooting a deer with big antlers?

Because thats what makes me happy.

I fully agree with the principal though.

Quote from the Bill Dance fishing show from a long time ago, "Keep what YOU can use and release the rest." Kind of seems to apply here.

As long as you don't try to impose YOUR standards on others. That's where the rub lies.

+1

I seriously doubt there is one among us that would not be happy to put their tag on a trophy deer. That may not be your goal when you leave the truck....but if you are loading a big whitetail buck in the back of that truck for the ride home....it is probably going to take at least a few days to wipe the smile off your face.

For some of us though, the mature buck is the goal. Personally, I have zero desire to kill what I consider to be immature bucks...2-1/2 years old or less. In my youth, I didn't hesitate to shoot any deer that gave me an opportunity....but those day are long gone.

Unfortunately, those 2-1/2 year old deer are exactly what the state of Indiana manages for. People used to tell me: "If you don't like it, go hunt somewhere else." So I did. All those trips to Iowa, Illinois and Kansas just re-enforced what I already knew in regards to my home state.

It took a few years, but I finally figured out it didn't have to be that way. I could get close to same experience at home...but it would take alot of hard work and effort to get there...via private land management. Yes, that costs money...but so does traveling out of state to hunt.

This state is comprised of entirely too many deer hunters that are hung up on more "opportunity" and longer range weapons. For a guy like me, that is like being on a train going the wrong direction. The old saying goes..."If you can't beat em, join em." I say screw that. If you can't beat em...take matters into your own hands!

Some of you may not like the direction we're headed in Indiana...but make no mistake, if you fall into the "more opportunity/better weapon" crowd, you definitely had a hand in it.

I hunt mature bucks because of the challenge. I restrict myself to hunting these animals with bow and arrow to increase the challenge. I find the insinuations that fair chase trophy hunting is responsible for shooting pens to be ridiculous and extremely insulting. That's like saying the guys sleeping with beautiful women are responsible for other guys hiring prostitutes...because they can't get beautiful women on effort alone.

This^^^_^

The point you are not getting is the brown and down crowd is the average deer hunter in Indiana, not the guys on deer hunting forums. They want to kill a deer just like you do but they dont want to put in a couple hundred hours hunting or a few thousand dollars to do it. They are not dedicated trophy hunters and shoot the first deer they see because if they dont that might be their only chance of the year.

As whitetail deer increase in value so does the expense of hunting them whether its leasing, land management or equipment. As these prices keep sky rocketing the little guy or brown and downer starts quitting because hunting becomes not worth it to them. Their limited income only allows so much to spend.

There is nothing wrong with trophy hunting but when you force trophy management on the average deer hunter they start to quit. That sounds good to the trophy hunter but in time the average hunter's vote is what you need to keep the anti-hunters at bay. Dont think this will happen, just look at other states that have lost bear and cat hunting rights.

DNR controls the herd size with bonus anterless permits not opportunity. You only get to kill one buck no matter what weapon of choice you use. If you are not seeing doe on your property then quit killing them. I did this 4 years ago and increased the number of deer on my property by 3x. I went from seeing 2-5 on a hunt to 12-15.

There is nothing wrong with trophy hunting if practiced by individuals but when the state starts to do it then you start to see whats happening to some right now. How many times you see a guy on here post they lost their hunting spot because someone leased it and many times these leasers are out of state.

Like I said earlier, antler worshiping and horn porn will change deer hunting in Indiana and it wont be good for a lot of younger hunters.

At some point Im sure the state will shorten and move the gun season out of the rut. A lot of you guys will jump up and down and cheer when this happens but be prepared for what follows. Dont believe me then try to hunt some where in Pike County Illinois for free. h.h.

I think you are taking this to a bit of an extreme Paul in saying that there was an insinuation that those who wish for fair chase trophy bucks are the cause for high fence farming. My point is or was that regardless of fenced farming or fair chase trophy pursuit, both have contributed to a significant affect on the sport of deer hunting. Some possibly good and certainly some possibly bad. Whether I like it or agree with it or not, neither the trophy guy or the maximum opportunity guy is any better or worse then the other, until they unreasonably try to impose their will on the other (of course this is where subjectivity comes into play) or either does do in the manner to harm the resource. I think the foundation of wildlife management was based neither on the production of trophy deer or enabling maximum opportunity. Instead it was about the resource and the personal accomplishment of deer hunting is simply an outcome of the resource management. Too often I think today's hunters put their personal intended accomplishment and satisfaction on front of the resource. Hunting in the most sterile situation, man against deer, was undoubtedly more challenging before trail cameras, species specific food plots, mineral sups, deer farms and such.

Delaney Excellent post......now here's my take......


There's nothing wrong with trophy hunting and if that's the standard people want to set for themselves and manage their land to increase their opportunities towards that...great!

What's wrong in regards to trophy hunting is the way it's taken over deer hunting. Just about every company in the industry, most magazines, and nearly every tv show push the trophy hunting mentality. Even QDMA's message is lost to many because they feel it's a trophy hunting organization. Here in Indiana, many deer hunters felt that the few were trying to push a trophy bow hunting agenda @ the expense of those who choose to gun hunt. It didn't pass a couple of years ago, but with crossbows legal now, and bowhunting harvest numbers rising in Indiana, I agree with many that gun seasons will eventually be moved and shortened in this state.

Regardless, this push for trophy hunting has led to people willing to spend huge sums of money to kill a trophy buck. And I agree it's their money and if they want to spend it in a legal manner so be it.

The problems start when it prices the average deer hunter out. Many will say..."tough, can't afford it, go bowling". And that's all fine and good until the sport of hunting loses enough participants that their power in the state house and Washington is diminished to the point that no one listens. Throw in the touchy subjects of preserves and game farms and many non-hunters who supported hunting in the past are liable to look @ hunting in a whole new light and are much less likely to support "trophy hunting". And with fewer hunters in the game and non-hunter support going down, plus the loss of license revenue and taxes from sporting good sales dwindling, I doubt hunting will have much of a future in this country.

As far as high fence preserves and deer farms go, they are gaining a larger foot hold in deer hunting every year. And while many trophy hunters say they wouldn't step into these places for free, it sure isn't the "brown and down crowd" or "joe average deer hunter" keeping these places going.

The other point I would make is, other than those involved in the hunting industry to make money how often do you see those with a lot of money who lease large tracts of land or take expensive outfitter hunts show up in person at legislative events or get in the trenches to defend or protect the sport. I'd suggest, not often. If they become the only folks hunting, hunting is doomed, albeit years away.

This makes for a good story. However the data just don't support this notion that the middle class is being priced out of hunting or hunter numbers are being reduced.

Big jump in hunting license sales
http://www.nssf.org/newsroom/releases/2010/020110-hunting.cfm

jjas:

Check your data man, Indiana license revenue is UP, PR monies are UP! IDNR is flush with PR money, buying land with it as fast as they can. Thank Obama for the PR money his anti gun agenda is causing folks to buy guns and ammo at record rates.

The gloom and doom of people leaving hunting just isn't true. Becoming an Outdoors Woman filled in less that 5 hours. Individual license sales are down for deer,why, just could be because people are buying land and no longer need a license. Want proof? Over 50% of deer taken are by landowners in Indiana.

Yes the landscape of deer hunting is changing.....

Someone said when was the last time you saw a person who could afford to go on expensive outfitted hunts at the state house or DNR meetings just as good a question is, when do you see the "brown and downer" at either place?

It'll always be an issue of how to spend discretionary income for recreation and in the future whether the young people will value hunting as a recreation and how big the middle class will be. The question might be the how the average age of a deer hunter is trending.

I don't disagree that things aren't too bad in Indiana right now but it is changing.

I know a guy in Texas that hunted his whole life and finally quit as he couldn't afford the leasing rates anymore. Same thing with a friend I have in Iowa. He's in his early 50s and has never had issues finding land. He had to start leasing a few years back and now he can't afford that as he's been priced out. Same thing with a friend of mine that lives in Illinois.

The point is, what's happened in Texas and Iowa and Illinois is starting to happen here. There will be a lot of hunters on the outside looking in as they can't compete for properties.

And those dollars you're talking about coming in from gun sales and what not. A lot of that money was spent on ARs and pistols, not sporting arms. And the people spending the majority of that money?

White guys over 40....

How long do you figure that will last?

This is what perplexes me the most about leasing...

Why spend the big money on a lease when you could just buy a cow (or half a cow even) and get more meat for the money spent...

If you are in a big lease with other hunters and your share is minimal then I can see the argument... But, if you are paying a lot of money for a lease then it doesn't make any sense in my opinion.... But it is not my money so what one does with theirs is none of my business....

The guys I'm referring to are lifetime hunters. Buying a cow would make more sense from a meat standpoint but they loved to hunt and hung in as long as they could.

Since I'll be hunting whitetails out of state this fall, I spent a few days last week scouting a couple farms that my friend owns there. That state has arguably the most favorable season structure in the whole country for managing their deer herd for mature age structure. One of a few states with zero firearm pressure in peak rut. With harvest results for ALL weapons & seasons that speaks for itself. And yet their DNR sold over 350,000 deer permits last year. Perhaps this is because an exciting product yields exciting demand?

.

I should add though, maybe this topic should return to it's original intent, and something most of us can agree on....that being the problems posed by the pen-hunt cervid operations?

.

Good point Joe about who does and doesn't show up at the statehouse. But, in the past when things got tough, full well knowing that the involved numbers were extremely minimal, it was the probably more so those who don't or didn't have significant financial resources that tried to help. With 50 percent of the harvest being taken by the combination of landowners, youth, lifetime and military it leaves you to wonder how many deer the landowner and lifetime guys are shooting per guy. The landowners still appear to be buying licensed since 14 percent of the harvest was taken by landowners and military that didn't buy a license, if I read that stuff right. The issue of the future is how the 40 and under guys respond to these changes and the use of their income. The DNR needs to stratify the numbers by age group and average harvest by age group. That's really the issue looking 10 years plus.

Yep......

Hunting the bone is great but it is not natural to hunt inside a pen. Much less the genetically altered big horn things that come from that kind of environment. Real hunting is from the challenge of our intelligence against nature. That means scouting out your game & truly doing a proper free ranging hunt on it. Not paying big dollars to have someone stand one up for you to shoot. My guess is if you lack intelligence & have a pocket full of cash this is the only thing you can do!

the price of antlers/lb is much higher than meat per lb.

Who leases ground to only meat hunt??

They should just head to public land and pop a forkie and a doe or two and not spend a penny to do so

comment on the indy star about this article...

===============

What are you people thinking about? Front page after page about so called “canned deer hunts,” which appease only a few tree huggers when the real front page should be the recall of General Motors! Thirteen people died as a result of defects in these cars and who knows how many people were injured due to the company’s lack of concern for the general public.

How about getting off your left-wing agenda and report some real news? If anyone is stupid enough to pay $38,000.00 for a antler rack, let them alone.

Bob Haines

Indianapolis

Canned deer hunting is not that much different from prostitution. If he can't get his gun off by using his hunting ability, well he'll just pay for what he wants.

Canned hunting IS the same as prostitution, both are for the lazy and poorly skilled. I have zero interest in either but im not certain either should be illegal.

Pope and Young Club weighs in on high-fenced hunting

By Conor Harrison on April 8, 2014 in Texas Hunting
1


Well, this should get some Texans fired up.

The Pope & Young Club released a statement on what the club considers fair chase.

The club says they are proud of the “Fair Chase” ethics they have implemented, fought for and defended since 1961. The Club and its membership steadfastly support and promote the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.

The Pope & Young Club official position statement:

“The Pope and Young Club and its membership strongly condemn the killing of big game animals in artificial situations. An “artificial situation” is defined as a situation where animals are held in captivity, game-proof fenced enclosures or released from captivity. These unethical practices are often referred to as “canned hunts.” This shall be considered an unethical practice devoid of fair chase hunting ethics as the animals are not free-ranging.

These canned shoot situations present further concerns that impact the future of bowhunting. They weaken the public acceptance of legitimate fair chase bowhunting, provide possibilities for transmitting diseases, and corrupt the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. Animals held, or bred and raised for the purpose of trophy harvest, in these facilities are not considered wildlife. The killing of these animals is not managed by the authority of a wildlife management agency and the killing, itself, is devoid of any values embodied by legitimate hunting.

The Pope and Young Club does not accept into its Records Program any animal taken under any captive scenarios and considers these practices extreme examples of unethical hunting. The Pope & Young Club also considers this practice unethical treatment of North American big game animals.”

Leave us your comments and tell us what you think about the statement.

Why on earth would anyone have assumed otherwise?

P&Y is extremely stringent regarding fair chase.

sounds right to me. I don't see how a true hunter could see it any differently. thanks P&Y for sticking to your guns

Agree with P&Y 110%...."NOT considered wildlife"....yep, nothing but farmed critters.... and REAL hunters/conservationists dont utilize these places....

Bingo!

Pope and Young got it exactly right.

Well done P/Y!!!

And then there's the Safari Club who list anything from anywhere...

I heard SCI even has a category for trophy Chipmunks ...

...maybe even moles for Keith...

Tiz the season and I've got some dandy ones on mole cam!