Let's consider a few things

[daking]

Let's consider a few things with regards to deer ranching that have not been carefully considered:

1) The Bellar video is not a wholesale indictment of the deer ranching industry. It is the evidence gathered for the trial of Bellar. The video was gleaned from uncut promotional material being readied for Bellar's ads. The content of the tape is a matter of public record.

2) Bellar was held out as an example of how deer ranching should be done by his peers in Indiana...three weeks before he was charged with 39 counts stemming from the operation of his deer ranch.

3) The deer ranching industry in Kentucky has roundly denounced the Bellar situation and has stated that they'd never do such a thing.

4) The deer ranching industry in Kentucky has worked diligently to remove control of deer ranching from the KDFWR and to move it to ag, so that their deer can be treated like livestock. This will allow them to operate with little or no regulation.

5) Deer are native wildlife. Cattle are not. Hogs are not. Chickens are not. There is almost no resemblence between a domestic turkey and a wild turkey. True, all of these beasts are selectively bred versions of their wild ancestors, but have been domesticated to create a food source. The goal of the deer farmer is to selectively breed deer to resemble wild deer in every way except for having giant racks. They are still virtually the same animal as roams the woods today.

6) In order to protect the naturally occuring deer herd, the people of Kentucky have the right to regulate the deer ranching industry. This is to prevent disease and other malady that may well result from the commingling of native and farmed deer.

7) The Department of Agriculture is not equipped to handle this sort of regulation. The KDFWR is so equipped.

8) Deer farmers assert that they have a right to use and to harvest their privately owned deer in the manner they see fit. They also make the assertion that the government has no business overseeing their private enterprise. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the government DOES have that right. Prostitution is a private transaction between two consenting parties, yet it is outlawed. Pit bulls are the private property of their owners, but the Commonwealth has the right to outlaw dog fights. You may own your land, but don't dry out a wetland, or you'll run afoul of the law. Lou knows this better than anyone. As a builder, he knows full well the number of government agencies that have the authority to regulate building activities before the first shovel of dirt is turned. This is a fact of life with which we all live.

9) Laws have been changed in the past. Laws can and will be changed in the future. When starting a business, this is a risk that each businessperson must assess. Ask the asbestos industry, the patent medicine industry (at the turn of the century) and the liquor business before prohibition. With the stroke of a legislator's pen, these industries were turned upside down, and in most cases, not with bad reason.

Aside from all of the speeches, aside from all the posturing, the deer farm industry has put itself in a very difficult position. A great deal of public sentiment runs against it. The risk it poses (despite prostestations to the contrary) is real and must be minimized. They have resisted regulation and in the case of Bellar, shown little propensity for regulating their own actions. They have been unwilling to compromise in any meaningful manner. If and when public sentiment is sufficient to cause changes in law and regulation that will impact them, they will be in no position to compromise. It will be like asking the prosecutor for a plea bargain after the jury returns a guilty verdict.

"The rich, who are content to buy what they have not the skills to get by their own exertions, these are the real enemies of game."

Theodore Roosevelt
Principles of the Hunt


Terry Sullivan

[Taxi Mike]

Let's re-consider a few things with regards to deer ranching that have not been carefully considered:

1) The Bellar video is not a wholesale indictment of the deer ranching industry. It is the evidence gathered for the trial of Bellar. The video was gleaned from uncut promotional material being readied for Bellar's ads. The content of the tape is a matter of public record. True

2) Bellar was held out as an example of how deer ranching should be done by his peers in Indiana True...three weeks before he was charged with 39 counts stemming from the operation of his deer ranch.False his ranching was not the issue.

3) The deer ranching industry in Kentucky has roundly denounced the Bellar situation and has stated that they'd never do such a thing. True


4) The deer ranching industry in Kentucky has worked diligently to remove control of deer ranching from the KDFWR and to move it to ag, so that their deer can be treated like livestock. This will allow them to operate with little or no regulation.

Not true. The information I have is that they worked to be listed under Ag to keep from being "regulated out of business" which is considerably different.

.
5) Deer are native wildlife. Cattle are not. Hogs are not. Chickens are not. There is almost no resemblence between a domestic turkey and a wild turkey. True, all of these beasts are selectively bred versions of their wild ancestors, but have been domesticated to create a food source. The goal of the deer farmer is to selectively breed deer to resemble wild deer in every way except for having giant racks. They are still virtually the same animal as roams the woods today.

The goal of KDFWR and many hunters is also to grow big antlers. hence the unnatural planting of Biologic and supplemental feeding programs of hunters.

They are still virtually the same animal as roams the woods today

So are American Bison which are penned, herded, trucked, and shot in pens slightly smaller than the animal itself.



6) In order to protect the naturally occurring deer herd, the people of Kentucky have the right to regulate the deer ranching industry. This is to prevent disease and other malady that may well result from the commingling of native and farmed deer.

"The people of KY's inclusive of hunters not exclusively hunters!


7) The Department of Agriculture is not equipped to handle this sort of regulation. The KDFWR is so equipped.

The Dept of Ag is equipped to handle anything the legislature mandates of it just as is KDFWR. The Ag dept has many veterinarians on the payroll and are well equipped to handle animal disease and welfare issues!



8) Deer farmers assert that they have a right to use and to harvest their privately owned deer in the manner they see fit.

I have read where they want to manage and harvest their herds in the same acceptable fashion as does KDFWR! With the exception of not asking other farmers to feed them, motorists to dodge them and non users to subsidize them.

They also make the assertion that the government has no business overseeing their private enterprise.

I have not read this I have read of their concern for a government agency, with prejudice, totally abolishing them.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the government DOES have that right. Prostitution is a private transaction between two consenting parties, yet it is outlawed. Pit bulls are the private property of their owners, but the Commonwealth has the right to outlaw dog fights. You may own your land, but don't dry out a wetland, or you'll run afoul of the law. Lou knows this better than anyone. As a builder, he knows full well the number of government agencies that have the authority to regulate building activities before the first shovel of dirt is turned. This is a fact of life with which we all live.

And as gun owners, smokers, etc fear and work to keep within a "fair and reasonable context"


Aside from all of the speeches, aside from all the posturing, the deer farm industry has put itself in a very difficult position. A great deal of public sentiment runs against it.

The same can be said of hunters if you selectively define "public" as has been done here.

The risk it poses (despite protestations to the contrary) is real and must be minimized.

The risk has been minimized via sound regulation. Persecution and prohibition has never had the desired effect. It only creates black-markets, disregard for all laws, and catches the innocent up into the fray.

They have resisted regulation and in the case of Bellar, shown little propensity for regulating their own actions. They have been unwilling to compromise in any meaningful manner.

This is not what I have read, I have read a considerable willingness to cooperate with reasonable authority. In spite of being verbally abused and understanding that many of those that call for compromise have admitted that they want full abolishment. (not unlike the anti gun lobby)

If and when public sentiment is sufficient to cause changes in law and regulation that will impact them, they will be in no position to compromise. It will be like asking the prosecutor for a plea bargain after the jury returns a guilty verdict.

This is the rub with hunters attacking them and KDFWR admittedly wanting to regulate them out of business. Public sentiment and reasonable legislators will drop the hammer and we hunters will loose any and all say!

[MD501]

not to change topics but are you sure conservation officers have radar guns. please stick to the facts and that statement is untrue

[spurs]

Mike:

There are no radar guns or devices in any F&W vehicles. If you know of any I would urge you to contact the Colonel of the agency asap.

The checking of boaters and water skiers falls under F&W enforcement because of the KY Water Patrol merging with F&W.

[schuyler olt]

Mike, you said above that Bellar's ranching was not the issue. I respectfully disagree. It's all part of the same operation, whether its anywhere between the breeding shed and the slaughterhouse.

If he wasn't running the ranch primarily to feed the egos of profiteers like Jimmy, those charges wouldn't have been filed. Under no circumstance should Bellar be even remotely thought of in the same vein as our mutual friend Rick, who is now going to pay the price for Bellar's misdeeds.

Frankly, I'm very disappointed in this absolute, no-holds-barred defense of high fence hunting. It has it's place, but it needs to police itself.

What you're doing is exactly the same as if you got on here and said that every lawyer is perfect and everybody should just leave them alone. And that sure ain't right! :-)

[schuyler olt]

By the way, when you speak of going to the legislature...

I have on my desk a copy of a letter dated February 8, 2000 to Tom Bennett. It begins:

"We the undersigned are legislators who have received an overwhelming number of complaints and request to have the turkey season begin on a Saturday, rather than during the middle of the week."

It was signed by 60 legislators. It was on a state reps' letterhead out of Harlan. Now who do you think went to their legislator to put the heat on Tom Bennett?

We decry sportsmen going to the GA, but guys it goes on all the time.

[Taxi Mike]

Schuyler:

I have not taken and do not prescribe to a absolute, no-holds-barred defense of high fence hunting and I fully agree that It has it's place, but it needs to police itself.

I have spoken out and encouraged others to take action against theegos of profiteers like Jimmy which is the root of the problem.

You rightfully state that:Under no circumstance should Bellar be even remotely thought of in the same vein as our mutual friend Rick but I firmly believe it is a mistake to predict " who is now going to pay the price for Bellar's misdeeds." Several folks have flared at the idea of poachers being brought into the discussions of various federations or discussions of hunters as no innocent person or group feels fairly treated when asked to pay a price for unscrupulous misdeeds of single bad apple. It has it's place, but it needs to police itself. Fits here too


I have not been the one to speak of going to the legislature those that have are what prompted me to enter this discussion.

But as you say We decry sportsmen going to the GA, but guys it goes on all the time.and I have reminded those that have posted drastic, unreasonable, or broad and potentially dangerous measures that other interests can and do the same thing. Thus we might want to use prudence and set a tone we can live with.


Re:It was signed by 60 legislators. It was on a state reps' letterhead out of Harlan. Now who do you think went to their legislator to put the heat on Tom Bennett? When Tom Bennett first took office as commissioner he went to various sportsmen's orgs. across the state introducing himself and his proposed agenda. I went to several of those meetings and repeatedly heard him infer that increasing the KDFWR budget was a top priority, and that user fees on hikers, bird watchers etc needed to be considered.

I publicly and respectfully reminded him that as Hunters and Fishermen we view our commissioner as the shepherd of our flock. And that as such we would encourage him to leave us and go forth and return lost sheep to our flock. But that we would take issue with finding he had left us to go looking into cattle futures!

It is little secret that Tom had political ambitions and spent more time in the halls of the Capital annex than the previous 3 commissioners put together. Prior to his time for the most part the commission put together regulatory packages and they were most often rubber stamped because of general support and little specific interest as well as a fairly organized League in the wings for emergency and effect.

Several circumstances including: a commission that became egotistical and disinterested in many small but important concerns of the sportsmen, a league that became fractionated and in many instances wags of individual commissioners or special interests, and a Commissioner that expounded on the importance of his presence in the legislature, these redirected the focus of sportsmen to a venue where they might stand a fair chance of being heard.

Whether it is a pendulum swinging to an end and due to return or an evolutionary process that may bring our autonomous KDFWR into the central government as in many neighboring states is for the most part up to us as sportsmen.

We have made our points: Hunting and Fishing is big business and that we as a group are easily distracted, fractionated and pitted against each other. This seems to be a ripe for the picking situation by a variety of political bodies.

When the legitimate cervid ranchers and high fenced preserves were attacked and their existence and stability threatened they in many instances (as I pointed out in a previous post) naturally but foolishly became belligerent, or took up postures of absolute defiance. With some discussions I discovered they were reasonable and prudent business men with fine manners and good moral values.

I do not see how we as sportsmen can prevail in our endeavors through similar over reactive and shortsighted posturing.



Sailing is an ancient way to cross a huge impasse. In the art of sailing one quickly learns that the harder the wind blows in one direction to stay upright and on course the sailor must lean equally hard in the other.

[schuyler olt]

Mike--I was speaking of our friend Rick in Indiana.

[schuyler olt]

And I think that it has become very clear that the ultimate economic driving force behind cervid ranching is high fence, big antler ego shooting. Take that out of it and the semen straws market, the breeding stock market, etc., go away and we're left with leather, meat and doe pee. And those won't even begin to replace the tobacco patch.

Not that ego shooting is wrong--but let's be realistic.

And since bringing a trophy animal to its demise either with a rifle bullet or a broadhead is the driving economic force of the industry, logically the primary regulatory agency should be the KDFWR.

Seriously and honestly--Lou and Papaw, if the shooting would be outlawed, would you stay in it and if so, why?

[elkguy]

schuyler,

Please shoot me an e-mail so I can send you something. It is COMPLETELY UNRELATED to this topic. I just can't find your contact info. I need a secretary to keep me straight.

Dave

davidrmef@alltel.net

[Taxi Mike]

And I think that it has become very clear that the ultimate economic driving force behind cervid ranching is high fence, big antler ego shooting. Take that out of it and the semen straws market, the breeding stock market, etc., go away and we're left with leather, meat and doe pee. And those won't even begin to replace the tobacco patch.

Not that ego shooting is wrong--but let's be realistic.

And since bringing a trophy animal to its demise either with a rifle bullet or a broadhead is the driving economic force of the industry, logically the primary regulatory agency should be the KDFWR.

Seriously and honestly--Lou and Papaw, if the shooting would be outlawed, would you stay in it and if so, why?

AM I RICH? You better believe it!
I run 3 cervids per acre, Have 50+ cervid males of which I harvest and sell antlers from. They produce approx. 950 lb of antlers a year. Until 4 years ago I sold all antlers to the Chinese and Koreans at prices from 36.00 to 85.00 per pound. 3 yrs ago I added a value added product from the antlers and received 80.00 per lb. Because of New Zealand supplementing their farmers, competition and not having a CWD program in place has caused our prices in the US to drop to 12.00 to 16.00 per lb. to the Chinese and Koreans.

Because of the depressed prices I started selling hard antler to Light fixture and furniture manufacturers, Deco-Art dealers(Yes fellows all antlers are not used for trophys or glory of Killing), Arrow head chippers, and knife makers. The prices have been from 8.00 to 12.00 per lb and large shed pairs I have gotten from 360.00 to 650.00 per pair.

I have 80+ females that I raise babies from to restock my farm, sell breeding stock,meat, hides and their Ivory teeth for jewelry from the slaughters animals. I butcher and sell for meat 3 yr old females that have a hanging wt of approx 335 lbs and a average price of 5.75 per lb. Breeding stock sells from 450.00 to 750.00 for baby females and 600.00 to 900.00 for the baby males. Older females price range from 600.00 to 1500.00.

The average out of my pocket cost per animal is less then 140.00 per yr. which includes feed, minerals, worming, testing for TB & Brucelosis and Vet.

You have the figures now you decide if I make money and utilize my acreage or not! I am not going to show you my tax return and don't get carried away when you figure things out as you cannot get into the business if you wanted too.

AM I RICH? You better believe I am!I get up every morning breath good clean air, enjoy observing and checking my animals, going down in the cattle pasture and seeing your deer, turkeys with my cattle, seeing the geese land in the cervid pasture, seeing the mother coon and her babies eat under the cervid feed bunks. Oh I admit I don't make the large amount that Doctors, Lawyers, Magazine writers and many professionals do. I HAVE RICHES THAT MONEY CAN't BUY including 3 children, 9 grandchildren and 5 great grand children and a life style that many of you have missed. Farmers are sportsmen, conservationist, naturalist and feeders of the hungry. No cervid farmer wants CWD or any disease in the wild or domestic herds. This post has gotten to long. If you want to know the history behind the situation with the cervid farmers and KDFWR I will be glad to meet with you in a plubic forum as most of you only know half the story.

[Papaw]

Schuyler come on down to the farm. I have invited you on other post. You can hand feed the males, brush the females but I can't let you milk one now. They are dried up but you can feel their tits if you want. In the years I have been in business I have sold only 1 male that I think was shot. He was used first as a breeder.

Thanks Mike for moving my post to this thread.

I will sell to Shooting preserves the males when they no longer can produce. The males are a renewable income source for approx. 9 yrs. and then they are worth more as shooters than burgers is why they are sold. Maybe someone will start a nursing home for them, After all it seems many old folks are put in nursing homes and forgotten. Just shoot me.

[Taxi Mike]

worth more as shooters than burgers

I have heard of no shooting preserve that didn't utilize the whole animal. Lots of preserves sell their lesser animals to folks that enjoy the meat.

Papaw understated the fact that in most instances the big boys (shooters) generally do go into burger and serve a greater good. For example almost 2/3rds of Texas' enormous Hunters For the Hungry Programs meat comes from the generosity of "high fenced shooting preserves."

Needy Kentuckians should be so lucky as to have a thriving industry that massively feeds the poor at the credit of "Hunters".

Interestingly: Virginia and several other states have adopted the name "Farmers and Hunters Feeding the Hungry" giving some credit where it is due.

[Skipper]

Mike,

While it may make people feel warm and fuzzy inside to know that they are donated their unwanted vennison to the "hungry" or whatever, the fact is, the venison from a buck shot on a shooting preserve costs way too much money to raise v's something much more economical, and that is an old dry dairy cow. The old cutter cows are worth about 50 cents a pound or less, they are about 4 times the size of a deer and will yield about 6 times the amount of meat. So if your goal is feeding people, why not go look for something capable of getting the job done instead trying to convince me to accept canned hunting based on the notion that there is no more effecient way to feed homeless people.

Skipper

[BUCKHEAVEN]

Mike,

While it may make people feel warm and fuzzy inside to know that they are donated their unwanted vennison to the "hungry" or whatever, the fact is, the venison from a buck shot on a shooting preserve costs way too much money to raise v's something much more economical, and that is an old dry dairy cow. The old cutter cows are worth about 50 cents a pound or less, they are about 4 times the size of a deer and will yield about 6 times the amount of meat. So if your goal is feeding people, why not go look for something capable of getting the job done instead trying to convince me to accept canned hunting based on the notion that there is no more effecient way to feed homeless people.

Skipper

Skipper,

Your statements mean nothing unless you define what you are referring to "canned hunts".

[Taxi Mike]

Skipper__________________
Skip's Outdoors Magazine (http://www.skipsoutdoors.com/)

I've moved way beyond trying to convince you of anything. It is the real people out there, the ones with their eyes and minds open, that can be reached with a variety of common sense messages and issues that I'm interested it.

Though I will admit that the "rage red" and "brazen orange" stuff makes for a great contrasting background!

I'll grant you that While it may make people feel warm and fuzzy inside Hunters for the Hungry has done more to upgrade hunters images and create a public tolarance for deer than anything else we have going for us.

Perhaps you can use your exceptional rallying skills to raise your constituency interest in purchasing "old cutter cows @ 50 cents a pound" and donating them, it might help your districts image but it won't say anything about the "worth of wildlife."

[Skipper]

Skipper,

Your statements mean nothing unless you define what you are referring to "canned hunts".

Let me guess, you are one of the people still waiting for Bill Clinton to define "is".

Mike,

I didn't say Hunters for the Hungry wasn't a good idea and something that has done good in a lot of cases. I am saying that it is relatively inefficient if that's what you want to rely on to feed hungry people. You keep hunting and fetching for things to justify the existance of canned hunting, and it's honestly getting rather ridiculous. When I think about producing food for the purpose of feeding people, the production farms I've been on that produce tractor trailer loads of cattle, hogs, chickens, corn, maters, or milk come to mind not some tinker toy farming operation that donates a couple excess animals that it has no profitable use for.

Skipper

[BUCKHEAVEN]

Let me guess, you are one of the people still waiting for Bill Clinton to define "is".

Skipper

No Skipper it is not that difficult. Just tell us are you talking about hunting in 2 to 3 acre pens drugging animals "canned hunts" like you have been talking about? It is simple Skipper.