Been many places (Africa - 11 trips, NZ 2 trips, Canada 5 trips, Alaska 4 trips, Europe 3 trips, Asia - 2 trips). Some fenced, some not. I really could not tell the difference. I saw more animals in Uganda than anywhere else - no fences. I saw the fewest in Cameroon and Alaska - no fences. I like Europe as it is controlled and managed but does have fences. Same in NZ. Same in most of the USA.
The debate is about animals that bought, dropped into a paddock, then shot. Not for me. Not hunting. However, if you hunt the Crow Reservation Montana for Bighorns, guess what? Very controlled and a drive by shooting.... So, do your research, hunt what works for you.
Lastly, one poster said RSA has low ethics. That has not been my experience. They are ethical and do what they say. The question was about how the canned hunting (especially lion) was done. Common sense prevailed and those places are gone or soon will be.
On the "other Africa hunting site", the host/owner goes to TZ once a year and shoots any and all he and his party can. They pay for it, but it is a bit of blood bath as many buff, zebra, eland and the occasional lions/leopards are taken. Yes, it is all unfenced. Yes, the animals are wild. The meat is not wasted. But the reality may be that the area is lightly hunted until his army shows up. The off take is high. Does this hurt the population of animals? No, not likely. Is it something I would enjoy or do? No, blood lust is not for me. After you have hunted and killed several hundred buffalo, what is the fun or thrill to do it again and again? Not for me. Having talked to a couple of PH's on those hunts, they prefer less volume and more hunting.... Me too.