I’m a Californian living in Michigan who’s had the opportunity to hunt black bear over bait for the last couple of seasons in Canada. For those who may think of bait as unfair, consider the following: terrain; method of take; and function of the hunt. I believe these three factors may make the use of bait challenging enough to constitute fair chase if practiced in some parts of the Continent, while being less challenging in others.

Unlike out West, Ontario is a flat and heavily wooded country where glassing for black bears and planning stalk to within bow or rifle range is nearly impossible. The alternative to bait (dogs) will lead to shooting a treed bear, which does not make us look good on film.

Hunting over bait in Ontario is about an 18 to 20 yard proposition. As Hank said, above, through in a longbow or a muzzleloader, and the situation becomes much more interesting. As with any stalking hunt, the bear might not show up, or he might not be a shooter. The bear could wind you just as easily from a stand over bait as from a ground stalk. A sow might show up with cubs, the bear might not turn broadside. You get the idea…

Unlike many parts of North America, in Ontario, black bears are plentiful to the point of over-population and nuisance. Hunting from stands over bait is challenging enough and serves the purpose of culling the population to the point where bears are no longer a threat to residential neighborhoods and garbage dumps. If bears were hunted from the ground only and without bait as some would suggest is required for fair chase, then hunting could not accomplish this yearly culling.

I’m working on a follow-up post to continue this “conversation”, and will have it up ASAP.

If you choose to use a long range, big bore rifle with scope to harvest your deer then that is your freedom of choice to do so. There are some hard core hunters who would say, that is an Unfair advantage and would rather use a long bow with homemade arrows and stone tipped heads to accomplish the same feat. Neither method of take is better nor less fair than the other just simply “A Personal Choice”

As far as C.W.D. being a probable source traced to Fenced Game Ranches/Preserves, this would be highly unlikely because each animal that is placed within a preserve/game ranch has to be blood tested and “Veterinarian Certified” before introduction into an enclosed area and as a result of that particular “legality”, the animal herds which live within these enclosed areas are of good sound health and disease free.

Some people believe that the use of dogs is not fair chase while others continue to vigorously fight any proposed legislation which would outlaw big game hunting with dogs.
Some people like to fish the sure catch ponds while others would not even step near such a place.
Some people would not hunt in an enclosed area no matter how large it is ie: (South African Hunting Preserves) while those very same people have not the slightest objection to hunting a small 200 acre island in Alaska, even though the only way for those animals to get away would be to swim for it.

In closing I must reiterate something which I have said time and again, The anti’s love nothing more than to divide us and, subjects such as, High Fence Hunting Preserves, stirs up so much controversy that, the antis WILL get their way simply by dividing us upon such silly things as ” FAIRE CHASE”.

Just as a classical trained musician feels compelled to follow a certain set of standards, does not mean that the self taught hard rocker is any less of an artist just because he does not adhere to a rigid set of rules like standard key or how the instrument is to be played.

It is all a matter of what feels right to the individual! The “blessings of liberty” and all you know.
The antis and their buddies “the extreme left” are knocking at your door to take away those rights and we ought’ not make their job any easier by fighting amongst ourselves.

“Fair Chase”, as defined by the Boone and Crockett Club, is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.

What is free range for a fair chase? T. Michael quoted Arkansas’ and Texas’ 500 and 1,000 acre minimums for fair chase. I’ve personally chased bucks in MO that roamed off a 1,000 acre farm during the rut. One buck we had on game cam film only to hear he popped up 15 miles north of us. We went up and found him at night with the jacklights (back when that was legal) to see him with our own eyes.

I’ve watched and tracked big loner bucks that lined straight out for private CRP farms when the shooting started in rifle season, they can’t do that in fenced in property.

Another huge reason the fenced operations are not good in my opinion is CWD and other animal diseases. The CWD hot zones have all been around the put and take elk and deer ranches. It’s not natural for game to congregate in big numbers in small areas, when they do we’ve seen the disease rates go up.

We have other rules for fair chase the need to be in place like no shooting game while swimming in water. No live decoys etc. When MO floods up some years the MDC will stop hunting in certain counties since it’s nothing more than shooting fish in a barrel when the deer group up on high ground.

The bottom line is the game we hunt needs to be able to use whatever they can to escape the hunter. When the balance is tipped in favor of the hunter then it’s no longer fair chase.

First thing to remember is: What we do is entirely “legal” and, until they outlaw hunting, we should make no apologies for doing what has came natural to “The Human Carnivore” for thousands of years now.

Just take a look at what John McCain did, he pandered to his own party and tried to “not” offend anyone and wound up losing the most important race of his life!

Be honest about what you are and what you do and you will succeed in any endeavor!

I think “Fair Chase” is a concept that hunters have used over the past century to set a standard that shores up our image among non-hunters. It’s a noble intention, but I think more often than not, it is used against us. HSUS pretends to care about fair chase; it only does so because it can say, “See, these fine hunters agree with us.”

In reality, hunting is a spectrum in terms of challenge, and I don’t think there’s a bright line between what’s fair and what’s not. Me as a new hunter, I want as much ease as I can get because I’m not that good. But I’d like to graduate to more and more challenging hunting as I improve. I’m pretty sure most people do that, except most people start as kids, not 41-year-olds.

I think the only thing that really bothers me … well, two things. No. 1 is hunters who hunt under less challenging conditions (over bait, in small enclosures) and pretend they actually went on some big challenging hunt. I really think it’s that sense of fraud that upsets the people the most – that’s the undercurrent of all the HSUS propaganda against high-fence hunting: Big bad hunters who have to have an animal effectively trapped before they can shoot it and brag about it. And this is a social problem, not a fair chase problem.

No. 2 is hunters who act like morons in any sense – littering, trespassing, taking heads and leaving carcasses behind, killing callously – kill after kill without regard to personal need or the resource. I think they’re in a tiny minority, but they do far more damage to hunting than people who hunt over planted pheasants (which I’ll be doing Saturday morning), people who hunt inside fences (which I did three times this summer) or people who hunt over bait (which I’d do if civilization collapsed and getting the most meat while expending the least calories becomes really important).

If this is a question about what should be allowed, I think we have to fall back on the bedrock question: Should it be allowed for humans to take the lives of animals for consumption? I think the answer is yes, and since 96.8 percent of the population eats animal flesh, I don’t think the answer can ever be no.

For some people who have made the personal choice to follow Pope and Young or Boone and Crockett rules, that it is just what it is and only is, a personal choice.
For others, those rules are just a hinderance that will complicate their goals towards putting meat on the table.

Farming for wildlife is not an entirely new concept and Fish & Game Departments all over the world have been practicing this method for years.
As a matter of fact here in California our Fish and Game raise fish in hatchery’s and release them into the wild and also sell their (our) fish to “Sure Catch Ponds”.
But also here in California, (Totalitarian State that it is) they want to corner the market on this and try to thwart any attempts by the public/private sector to do exactly what they have been doing for several decades now.

I do not know all of the ins and outs of C.W.A. or D.U. but I can imagine that there are plenty of restrictions in what they do (State Imposed of course) but the end result is that the waterfowl populations are most likely ten fold now, as opposed to just a short 20 years ago!
And this can be directly attributed to Habitat Enrichment and our Sport Dollars at work.

Method of take is strictly limited here as well and most of the laws are set into place mainly for the humane aspect of the harvest and nothing more than that alone.
All, other States for instance, do allow Wild Hogs to be taken by: Baited Areas at Night by any means chosen!
Here, we can’t do any of those things and must use 30 calibre or above firearms or Archery only.
And this is again, a personal choice, albeit State Imposed, someone still made the choice to make these decisions and place them into law!

What’s good for the Goose is not always good for the Gander!

To me the point of fair chase hunting is to see how few technological advantages you can use and still have a reasonable chance at getting your game. For some it’s a longbow and wooden arrows, for others it’s a Hawken rifle. Others may use a rifle with iron sights, or a regular rifle with a scope. Pistols, crossbows — even knives.

If it’s a high-fence place and you think you can easily bag something with a scoped rifle, trade down to something more primitive and the situation alters completely.

On bait, I am not a big fan. Yet I support “farming for wildlife.” To some, there is no difference. For me, making a hospitable environment for wildlife is different than putting a bag of corn grain under a treestand.

I am pretty sure no one gives Ducks Unlimited or California Waterfowl a hard time because they build marshes. Food plots are similar: You have created a space for wildlife that exists all year long, yet you hunt it — in the case of deer — once or twice a year. Seems like a fair deal for the critters.

Anywho, that’s my $0.02 at the moment.