Trad Gang
Main Boards => Hunting Legislation & Policies => Topic started by: Buckeye Trad Hunter on August 18, 2010, 03:47:00 PM
-
First off I'm not sure where to post this so if it's in the wrong forum I apologize.
I have another topic posted and the issue of leased land was brought up. The property where I hunted as a kid was leased by about 20 some guys from the city and about two of them actually hunt it. This made me wonder how this affects hunting as well as game management. If the people on the lease don't hunt and no one else can hunt because then you're trespassing so then it's not possible to control the game population.
That being said, how does everyone else feel about it?
-
In my area of the state, you either own land, lease land, or hunt on public WMA land. i don't see it ever going back to how it was when i grew up..we would pick the phone up and ask if we could hunt their land. Most of the time the answer was yes. Money talks though and times have changed. You either adapt or don't hunt.
-
made it worse.
-
The hunting is better, but less enjoyable...
-
I think it has major effects on how many people actually hunt. People talk about the fact that hunting is being done less and less well, alot of people cannot or will not justify the price of a lease. I would have to say for myself if thats what it came down to I would quit also...it helped to thin the ranks and therefor the support of the sport...just my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Gottabow:
I think it has major effects on how many people actually hunt. People talk about the fact that hunting is being done less and less well, alot of people cannot or will not justify the price of a lease. I would have to say for myself if thats what it came down to I would quit also...it helped to thin the ranks and therefor the support of the sport...just my opinion.
I agree. Here in Texas, lease prices have skyrocketed during the last 30 years I've been hunting on leases.
-
Leasing by itself is not capable of making hunting "worse" or "better" as a whole. It changes the dynamics of getting access to hunting land. Some will like the new dynamic and some won't. Some will dislike it enough to quit hunting. So be it. I'm just as certain there are guys who lease property that could or would not hunt without their lease property. Some guys will pronounce leasing as "the death of our sport", but that is simply emotionally-charged rhetoric. Hunting isn't dying...despite the alarmist talk.
Very little about our sport is the same as it was 50 years ago. It is evolving and changing constantly. Landowners have discovered their lands have value in ways not previously considered...like hunting access. It's 100% the landowner's call, too. He is the master and hunters must do as he says, or not hunt there. For the life of me, I can't see anyone putting a hunter's rights above a private landowner's rights.
If a guy has a private lake and keeps it in great condition, does he not have a right to charge someone money to fish in it? Some will pay and some will walk. Either way, the opportunity remains.
As a private landowner, I am 100% for a landowner's right to decide how his land is used. I don't lease mine, but I'm okay with my neighbor leasing his.
-
It takes the guy's and gal's that don't have a bunch of cash out of the picture. I don't care for it but it life. I'll live with it and hunt pubilc land.
-
I won't say I'd never get on a lease, but I lost many good spots, to so called big shots who thought they could buy there way in and keep the middle class out. I'm against them, but also agree that a landowner can do whatever he wants with it and if I'd be in his position, I might lease it too.
-
I have really changed my mind on leasing over this past year. I don't like the idea of leases, but if I had a big chunk of land you can better believe that I would be choosy of who I let on it to hunt.
I hunt public land except for a small 40 acre farm that belongs to my father-in-law.
Bottom line is,,,,,if you love to hunt you find away to do it.
To answer the question, I think leasing is making public hunting areas over crowded.
-
I will always do what I need to to keep hunting. I hunt private & public land. IMHO the industry is changing for the worse. Hunting is becoming more & more of a rich mans game. That is not a good thing as far as I can see. That being said I agree the landowners can do what they like. Leases create cash so it is here to stay. How it effects the herd health and such will play out over the next block of time.
-
If I had to only hunt public land here in eastern NC, I'd buy a bass boat and quit hunting. The hunting dogs are pain enough on private land. I guess dogs can't read posted signs. Don
-
Leasing ruins it for the blue collar guy`s, especially in waterfowl hunting. I`m glad it`s not a problem up here..........yet
-
leasing will eventually reduce the number of young people hunting. This is not a good thing as we hunters will, in the future, be more marginalized and as bowhunters even more.
enjoy it while you can
-
Well said Kevin Dill.
It is a very simple cost benefit analysis: either you value hunting enough to pay something for it, you hunt public land, or you quit hunting.
Leasing land is the only way I could hunt where I live. The notion of having the $ to buy my own farm here? Never going to happen. Coming up with a few hundred dollars a year to lease land??? Easy to do relative to buying land. It is nice to know that I will be the only person hunting the farm each and every time I show up to hunt.
I value hunting enough to pay something for it. I could not afford to pay "big money" for a lease but landowners have made an investment in their land and if I want to hunt there why not pay? When I lease land I have placed a value on the act of hunting there and the owner has too. He won't just say "yes" to any person who just walks up and knocks on the door. He values the money and I value the access to private land.
Quit hunting because somehow I am "against leasing" or "I shouldn't have to pay to hunt?" That is a line of thinking that I just don't understand.
-
Leasing is becoming a more common occurence here in KY than it was just a few years ago. The going rate now, depending upon how close to big cities you are, is about $10-15/acre.
I had never leased land and had always hunted private (someone else's) land all my 45 years of bowhunting. However, this year I had to lease the area I've hunted for the past 8 years or lose it to some folks at a body shop who were courting "my" landowner. While I hated to cough up the price of a Schafer ($1,500)I couldn't lose this hunting property because it is right behind my house.
Frankly, while the cash outlay was extreme I have to say I'm feeling pretty good about it. 1). I don't have to go looking for a new place to hunt. 2). I have much more control over the property -- only my son and I may hunt it and we can hunt anything during any legal season we want. Before I had to stop hunting when the gun season opened, I couldn't hunt turkeys or squirrels, and I never knew until a few months before each season if I would be welcomed back.
Lucky for me, 4-5 years ago I couldn't have afforded to do this.
-
buckeye,
I forgot to answer your question. Typically leasing leads to fewer total recreation days for hunters. A typical property before leasing will have more hunters than after it is leased. The property will often have fewer deer, especially does taken off it after a lease starts.
So from a management standpoint of providing maximum hunter recreation days and ample doe harvest, many leases lower both which isn't a good thing. Its good for the hunters who can afford the lease. If you can't though you have to give it up, hunt public land which is very rare in some states, or drive long distances (hunt less). I remember a time in 1991 when I lived in Kansas I spent a month in early summer visiting farms in my area. I went to 15 different properties and was turned down to hunt every one of them. While I don't remember for sure how many, most (12+) were leased -- some by birdhunters who didn't want any deer hunting on the property.
-
Never had the need to lease land when I was growing up, at least not for cash. I always saved some choice cuts for the land owner, helped mend a fence, picked up trash, cut some wood... really anything I could do to show my appreciation. Mostly I just respected the land and the land owner which always just seemed like the way things oughta be. Unfortunately I was in the minority in my habits and my mentality and land owners began to change in response to changes in the people who asked permission (and sometimes people who didnt ask) to hunt and use the land. I can tell you if you take a rifle onto some old boys property during deer season and later he find 5 holes in his combine or several holes through a pile of irrigation pipe hes gonna shut the place down, its just cheaper to not let anyone hunt. If the land owner comes up with a flat on his tractor and it turns out its a hunting arrow you can bet hes gonna shut you down next time. Cant tell you how many times Ive heard the story of trespassers, poachers, multiple unrecovered big game animal carcasses, hardware left in trees, cut fences, lawsuits brought against a landowner for an accident that occured on his land... the list goes on and on really.
Now enter some desperate to hunt decent sort of guy whos had the door slammed in his face one too many times who feels like he would do just about anything legal to gain access to good property and you have a land owner thinking this just may work. Now you as the hunter have a financial stake in this as well as the land owner, you are gonna help him keep his land (your lease) free of trespassers, certianly you will think twice before you toss your garbage out on his land (your lease) and a multitude of other beneficial actions take form over the course of your business transactions. If the land is good you will come back year after year, the land owner knows what to expect of his tenant, he knows who to call if there is a problem and you know what to expect for your money.
Im not rich, Im just a regular blue collar guy, I dont own several custom bows, I dont have endorsements to hunt... I have a lease and I will do what it takes to hunt. Regionally here in Iowa I think the concept of leasing is only just catching on but rest assured it will continue to be a growing trend as land owners continue to find ways to maximize profits from their holdings and slobs continue to behave poorly while posing as hunters. It only takes one bad experience to convince a land owner to stop being generous for free.
I think maybe the other side of the dual sided knife that is your question might be how have hunters and sometimes their bad behavior affected the land leasing industry?
-
..."your question might be how have hunters and sometimes their bad behavior affected the land leasing industry?"
That's maybe one of the smartest comments I've ever read.
-
I talked to a fella from Illinois who lost about 2000 Acres to Cabelas & their TV Producers, wasn't his land, but land he's hunted since childhood, Alot of what ya watch with these "Hunting Shows" today {no I don't watch them} and with some of the People Posing on the front cover of their Catalogs, Yeah, it hurts the ones with little $$ I doubt there are many on this Site or even small groups of individuals that we all know with that kind of $$$$$ ...
-
I lease 200 acres every year and the landowner only gun hunts; I am the only hunter allowed on his property because he knows I will take care of it and police it as the same time;
To answer the question, it's becoming a rich mans race for sure; the "big boys" who are able to shell out the dough are getting most of the land that's out there; but here in Arkansas there are literally millions of acres(yes I said millions) that are public land and some pretty good hunting as well;
-
That being said, how does everyone else feel about it?
Leasing = limited / exclusive
There's a lot more people loosing out than winning with this trend.
When our working class no longer has reasonable access to quality hunting areas, we will loose a huge foundation of support for conservation and our hunting heritage.
I feel it will eventually erode the hunting establishment in this country. You just need to look at some of the European countries to see how it has already played out.
Obviously, I'm not a fan of leasing. One of my pet peeves are guys who get on these hunting forums and whine about loosing their lease to another hunter. If ya play that game......be prepared to loose.
-
"There`s a lot more people losing out than winning in this trend"
That pretty much sums it up.
A slippery slope.
-
Working class? What exactly does that mean? I go to work every day and work hard for my paycheck just like everyone else on this site does.
Every year I am happy to pay for access to hunt good quality farmland close to home. Does this make me a bad guy? Does this make me some sort of "big guy" stepping on the "littles?" I'm somehow hurting the sport of hunting???
Leasing does not always = big money.
-
Not many folks gonna pass up that basket racked 8 on public land, or the cowhorn for that matter. At least where I live. Only way to have a chance at seeing some decent bucks( I say that with tounge in check, cause out area has never produced any) is to get into a situation where there is some control over what is taken. I know it's expensive, but some folks golf, bassfish, motorhome and what ever. I paid my club dues this year,almost with aluminum cans (most picked up on public land roads). That said, I got out of another club i was in when the dues went up. I think I'll be fine hunting wise though.
I often thought that the money Ive spent on club dues would have been better spent just to take one big trip away every year. Don
-
Lost my best turkey ground to it and all they do is deer hunt gun season. BUT maybe if I'd made different choices I'd have had the cash to do the same. I don't dislike them for it. I still have good turkey ground and half of that is public so hopefully it won't go anywhere!
-
"the hunting is better but less enjoyable" Now that is an interesting statement and to me really gets at the core of what is wrong with hunting these days. We measure the success of of being outdoors in pursuit of game by what and how many we bag. In my book the above statement is an impossibility. I think that the business of hunting has caused far more damage to hunting than a thousand PETA's. We have lost our way in an attempt to turn a lifestyle into a sport. I think it is sad that a guy of modest means cannot take his kid hunting because of the cost of a lease or lack of public funds. Sadly I don't think there is much we can do about it because I think most hunters would rather count a score than the hours of being in gods nature.
-
Wow this is a good one. I lease 300 acres me along with 8 others started out at 1$ an acre 15 years ago it up to 10$ an acre now. Why am I a bad guy for wanting a good place for my son to hunt, yes us leases’ can take are kids hunting we only turn into monsters after they go home. We also post the land, oh wait we are told by the land owner we must post, so as he doesn’t get sued again.
Come on guys enjoy the sport for what it is, I hunt our lease. I hunt NY, MD, PA, private land, did I have to hunt? oh yes land and permission. That is it, was it hard no not really. Knock on some doors it can be done I did it. Hunting is what you make it, but I wanted my son to see some game. State land here what a joke just ask anyone who hunted state land last year a week, 3 to maybe 6 deer that’s crazy. How will that keep my son hunting with me? I know some of you are saying your son would have to hunt and not just kill then. Think, what do you want, this is what I want, we are truly not the same not all of us. Does it help the sport? It makes a difference to my son and that is what I want him to do hunt.
Would he hunt if we went out and hunted for weeks and saw little amounts of deer? We hunt archery he uses his long bow me my recurve, we hunt rifle together and muzzleloader “am I bad” just a thought.
Bruce
:dunno:
-
One thing I constantly hear..."They took my land away from me." If you didn't own it, it wasn't yours. Nobody took anything away from anyone. The landowner made a concious decision to use his property as he saw fit and right. Who can argue with that? Who would have the gall to tell a landowner he can't control what happens on his land?
If you let a guy pasture his horse on your land free...another guy comes to you and says "I'll pay you $2000 a year to pasture my horse"...would that not cause you to think?
-
i myself would NEVER pay to hunt land. thank God i live in an area with alot of public land. as had been stated you will se less and less younger people hunting which is a shame.
-
I think leasing can be good for the wildlife. I see people on leases willing to put in food plots, plant hardwoods and do other improvments to the property that will improve hunting for future generations. The people who lease are also in some cases more selective about what they shoot and will hold other member accountable for what they shoot. On public land most people are not going to let a legal animal walk because of the competition. To me it is similar to owning the land and wanting to improve it rather than just using it. If you can't afford to own it maybe you can lease it. There are always reasonable leases for those willing to look hard enough.
-
In my area mosts land is private and what gets me is when one person owns 500 acers which contains 150 to 200 deer and they shoot mabey two deer per year. All the farms around them feed the deer all year but are not allowed to harvest any and of course only the two largest bucks will be taken. Not good management.
-
Chuck, that's an awful lot of deer on 500 acres. Mild winters?
I went the club/leased land route after giving up on public land because of the slobs and thieves.
Down South, much of the leased land is owned by big timber companies. They lease out the land in large tracts to control liability, and require the lease holders to put up gates, patrol the property, manage the game, buy insurance, etc. It can be a good deal for both sides. The land is usually leased by a club, and the fellowship afforded by the club can be very rewarding, too. Here in MS, the State will supply a biologist to help with game management for qualified clubs.
However, prices are getting so high that it's rapidly becoming a wealthy man's game, and the average guy/gal may not be able to afford to participate. Bummer.
-
In my opinion leasing is a bigger danger to our way of life then PETA or crossbows.And fellas this is not a sport.Thats the whole problem the hunting industry has sold that sport crap.And when you get right down to it competition is what drives leasing.As far as kids hunting i'd bet most of us started on small game.This is where we learned to love hunting.If some guy hell bent on killing a (MONSTER BUCK) every year because thats the only way he can enjoy hunting anymore.Has every thing leased up and cant stand the thought of letting a kid on HIS place to hunt.Because he will mess up the deer he has 300 trail cam pictures of.I'm sorry guy's but this is my pet peev.And i think we see the truth in the matter by how defensive the lease guys are about this topic.It's not really about the hunting it's about being able to control the perameters of the hunt.For these guy's and is that what hunting really is?Thank's for letting me vent.Jim Preece
-
Double edged sword from my perspective. We manage better than ever and the quality of our hunting is very good. BUT, it now comes at a big cost - both time and $$.
I really miss the simple old days when it was a simple matter of just going hunting. Ww are fortunate to have a small close knit group in my lease...I have less fortunate buddies who have to deal with a lot of politics and frustration.
Also, leases & big game hunting has lead to a decrease in small game hunting in our neck of the woods. That spells bad news for youngsters & the future.
-
The property that we used to hunt on was owned by a very well known paper company and was open to the public before it was leased. The paper company maintained and improved the land and such. Being that this wasn't privately owned land does that make the situation any different?
To clarify I wasn't saying they took my land away or whatever, I'm just asking how everyone else feels about the lease situations. By the way when 20 people are on the lease and only 2-5 of them hunt it does reult in poor game management. What's up with that anyway? Why spend the amount of money these guys have spent only to take up a spot on a lease that you haven't hunted in the 12 years you've been leasing it?
-
Just my two cents…
The change in hunting/ land access is due more to the fact the society has changed from a rural/agricultural one to a city dwelling/technology driven one. In my area leasing is less of a problem than the building of houses and erosion of habitat. I can’t tell you the # of farms that my father hunted that are now nothing but houses and roads.
Also what I have seen is the older generation is who owns the farms but they typically stop farming it and pass along the responsibility to their children who typically don’t want anything to do with farming so the land is either sold or rented for crop production and these folks don not want to deal with letting hunters on the land.
I can see leasing being a problem but the bigger problem is a societal one.
-
When I was growing up, you could stop most anywhere along any road and hunt. Why? There weren't any deer.
My dad and a friend of his bowhunted in the 60's and they never saw any deer, because there just weren't any deer. Very few people bowhunted, and there were way fewer deer hunters in general.
Deer population goes up, demand to hunt them goes up.
I live in a place where there is a lot of public land around, and a lot more leased up land in clubs etc.
I have only been to one club in my state that doesn't bait deer with corn or whatever. I go there a lot (18 years) because one of my best friends is in it. I do not deer hunt there too much because I am technically a guest. But it is the best deer place I have ever seen - it will spoil you for wanting to hunt anywhere else. It is the only lease I have ever seen that is worth it.
I've been approached to join various clubs over the years and for deer hunting I don't think it worth my while. You are forced to hunt the way other members hunt in the ways that matter (you have x number of stands, in x area, etc...).
However, because of Cabela's and Bass Pro, and Hunting on TV, people put less pressure on public land than ever in my part of the world. It's difficult to implement complicated stand set ups, feeders not allowed, trail cams not allowed, bait... not allowed. No food plots of your own. Lots of times you can't find a 4 wheeler trail where you want it, or you aren't allowed to ride on it. Public land is a pain in the ass for people who have lots of high tech hunting products, and therefore they say screw it and join a lease where they can hunt using all the proper products. Where I live, if there is a piece of public land with limited access by truck/ATV, then it's not overly pressured because people just aren't going to work that hard when there are easier ways to kill deer.
Personally I would rather hunt where no one else wants to go. On public land where they soil quality is such that no bucks can grow to trophy size, etc. Where no one is baiting, and no one has cameras strung up all over the woods, etc. No deer farmers allowed. I have been in the woods and seen and killed big bucks. In the right place it is not hard. I value solitude and a challenge, so I seek out thos kind of places. Where I live, that is public lands usually.
-
Here in Kansas there has been an increase of leased hunting land. I know a large farm up the road is leased to an outfitter.
The state also leases land and that allows it to be used as walk in hunting only public land so it goes two ways...
-
Honestly Im surprised that this is such a divisive issue, haves and have nots it seems. As stated before Im not rich, I dont own a single custom bow (to be fair my wife owns one) I build my own from staves I cut myself or buy at reasonable prices. I buy used equipment whenever possible, I mend the torn, I fix the broken to save a few bucks on my gear. I save relentlessly to afford and justify my lease. I am blue collar, I am in fact the little guy that is suppose to be losing out because of the big fat cats leasing all the land. Ive never even owned a brand new vehicle, Im the poster child for just your average guy. I have a lease because Im willing to compensate a land owner for the use of something I cant afford to own, to do something that Im extremely passionate about. I let friends and relatives hunt for free, I take my kids and friends kids onto the property for youth hunts etc. The "good ole boys" using the land for FREE for all the years before this lease was established threw garbage all over the land, left hardware in the trees, drove 4x4s all over the place with guns hanging out the windows, shot at but didnt bother tracking game, they trespassed after the lease was established and were extremely unapologetic for their lawless behavior, shot deer out of stands that were obviously not theirs, tore down signs posting the land, stole stands that I had put up!!! Now I dont know about all of you but I can tell you while I hunted public land with all of these so called little guys, I had people sit in my stands, Ive had shots with guns so close to me that I needed a fresh pair of shorts, had game animals claimed that were with out a doubt mine, picked up more trash and put up with more rude behavior than I could tolerate. I want my kids to love hunting as much as I do, I want them to see some game, I want them to know that at the end of a long blood trail we arent going to just find a gut pile indicating that some slob stole their animal, I want them to be safe... my lease ensures this.
Honestly leases havent ruined hunting for anyone, anyone can save for a lease or create a group to get a lease. You can find deals out there, its like finding a job, you work at it, you network, you pool resources etc. Why exactly would you expect a land owner to offer a product for no compensation? What protects the land owner from rude and destructive behavior on his property?
I lease because I expect everyone that hunts around me to be an ethical hunter, to hunt safely and to be respectful of the land and animals. Its not that much to expect really and I think we all probably want that, now try to find it on public land or while trespassing on private land. People have changed, behaviors have changed, these changes have forced a change in the game. In my experience the loudest opponents of leases in my area are the biggest reason for land owners to shut down free access to their land.
On a side note: Hunting is a sport, yes I said it is a sport. I dont, you dont, we dont need to hunt to survive the winter (on average, Im sure that there are exceptions). Store bought food is much much much more economical than wild game even if it isnt as nutritionally sound. Figure out how much you spend to get that deer in the freezer(time, travel, gear, licenses) and you absolutely could afford some of the best food in the super market on a per pound basis comparison. If you spent the same hours working overtime at your job as chasing game you could probably have the same volume of food prepared for you by a master chef.
-
Baseball is a sport at the end of the game the partisipants are all still alive.Hunting is not a sport.Jim Preece
-
Oh, it's definitely considered a sport by the absolute majority of hunters...and non-hunters. As stated above, we don't hunt because of a need anymore. We hunt because of a DESIRE and challenge. It is...in essence...a game. We even call our quarry "game". Using any other words to describe it is simply a matter of semantics. Is bullfighting not sport? Of course it is...and the bull dies in the end. Who NEEDS to kill groundhogs, carp, starlings, prairie dogs and squirrels in order to survive. It's done for pleasure and satisfaction...little else.
I too am not wealthy, yet I can lease anytime I desire. I can't afford a Harley...a Ranger Boat...a huge 5th wheel...etc. I can afford a lease though, because I'll work, save, struggle and prioritize toward it. I have no problem compensating a landowner for the use of his property, either. If another guy is opposed to spending the money, let him go argue his case to the landowner and see if anything changes.
Is leasing hurting hunting as we know it? Don't ask me. Just look at any active group of leasers in TX, IA, MO, MS, IL, KS, KY, TN, GA, LA, AL, OK, MN, WI.... These guys are hunting hard and they sure aren't busy worrying about those who won't spend the money.
Finally: A lot is made of "If we keep leasing, we won't have any places to hunt!" How much private property is leased to hunters in your state...on a percentage basis of total acreage? I'd be totally shocked if any state had more than 10% of total lands under hunting leases. There is a huge amount of potential hunting land out there...waiting to be hunted. Free. Pay. It's an individual choice.
-
For me it's not an issue of spending money it's the issue of what the lease means.If a couple of guy's from Toledo come to central Ohio. And decide to start throwing money at a farmer who is a business person.He will take their offer for sure.The guy's from Toledo will hunt this property the first week of November and thats it.Why because they heard that Licking county has alot of big bucks.And the hunting industry dictates that if you dont kill monster bucks then you aint much of a hunter.Now the farmer that use to let his neighbor and nephew hunt his place cant because two guys from Toledo cant enjoy the act of just hunting anymore.It has to be about their ego's or their sense of competion.With a guy back home that always kills a big one.Over the years i have developed a friendship with a farmer about two miles down the road from me.It's about 217 acers i'm always welcome there and so are alot of others in our community.It is prime habitat.I've got a buddy that i love dearly but is sure hunting is about nothing more than succes.When i showed him the place his first response was lets offer to lease it.That way we can be the only ones hunting it.I explained to him i would never do that.Because of all the other folks that hunt the place would be left out.He doesnt understand that line of thought at all.I guess thats my whole hang up with leasing.The guy's that are involved with it in my area arent hunters they are competators in a game.To see who can kill the big one.And to me that totaly perverts what i love.We dont have to hunt anymore but we do.And we are the only ones that can decide why we do it.Thanks,Jim Preece
-
For me it's not an issue of spending money it's the issue of what the lease means.If a couple of guy's from Toledo come to central Ohio. And decide to start throwing money at a farmer who is a business person.He will take their offer for sure.The guy's from Toledo will hunt this property the first week of November and thats it.Why because they heard that Licking county has alot of big bucks.And the hunting industry dictates that if you dont kill monster bucks then you aint much of a hunter.Now the farmer that use to let his neighbor and nephew hunt his place cant because two guys from Toledo cant enjoy the act of just hunting anymore.It has to be about their ego's or their sense of competion.With a guy back home that always kills a big one.Over the years i have developed a friendship with a farmer about two miles down the road from me.It's about 217 acers i'm always welcome there and so are alot of others in our community.It is prime habitat.I've got a buddy that i love dearly but is sure hunting is about nothing more than succes.When i showed him the place his first response was lets offer to lease it.That way we can be the only ones hunting it.I explained to him i would never do that.Because of all the other folks that hunt the place would be left out.He doesnt understand that line of thought at all.I guess thats my whole hang up with leasing.The guy's that are involved with it in my area arent hunters they are competators in a game.To see who can kill the big one.And to me that totaly perverts what i love.We dont have to hunt anymore but we do.And we are the only ones that can decide why we do it.Thanks,Jim Preece
-
I have to respectfully disagree that hunting is not a game. To me hunting is not about competition with anyone else. Would I shoot the larger of two bucks if giuven the chance, sure we all would, but I could care less if my deer is bigger than anyone elses. Also, as stated earlier, nothing dies at the end of a game and a lot of hunters, myself included, a far from being highly tuned atheletes so, no, hunting is not a game or a sport.
-
I lease and wasnt aware I was rich. If I am dont tell my wife! Rascal's post has a lot of my same beliefs experiences and reasons for leasing.
In southern Michigan there is not a ton of state land and a ton of hunters do I have a issue sharing public land? No, I dont. But I didnt feel safe that I wasnt going to get shot, by less responsible hunters or druggies cooking meth or growing weed that I bump into. I did state land for myself but didnt want to bring my kids into that.
So I lease I am probably viewed as the rich city slicker who only hunts periodically and has ruined it for the locals. (Which as a side note is sad when did in America a guy who works hard and has some discretionary income to make things better for his family become a loser! And it takes 2 to tango the local farmer put it up for lease! Why dont you hate him!) Back on point sorry. But all leasers are not trophy freaks. I am not about antlers at all. Would I like to shoot a 30 pointer!!!! Absolutely is it the reason I lease and hunt. A resounding NO!
God has blessed me to make a great living so I am not complaining but to support my family and being a parent I need to live in a city to make a living. So I have to drive over a hour to two hours to hunt so I cant get out there every day (believe me I would love to and get out of the city but not in the cards til my youngest is through college). I use it all 12 months of the year to scout, stump, camp with my kids and hunt from Sept. through March as much as possible. If I had to eat peanut butter sandwiches everyday to make up to pay for the lease I would its about priorities for me and I want a safe environment to hunt and share the outdoors with my kids and leasing works for me!
-
One thing I'm completely amazed at...
In Ohio, hunters did very little leasing in the 60s, 70s and 80s. In the 90s, along came the leasing program by Mead Paper. They didn't just concoct this leasing plan on a whim. They researched it and they absolutely knew it would be a slam-dunk hit with hunters. Everywhere leasing begins, it inevitably receives overwhelming support from hunters. The hunters didn't start the ball rolling. They didn't have to popularize it. They could've said "Hell, no! We hate it!"...but they don't hate it, and many prefer it. Unfortunately, like politics, as soon as they announce which side of the issue they're on, the mudslinging and negativity begins.
These hunters aren't always the stereotype often portrayed by others. They aren't uniformly "rich"..."city dwellers"..."no clue"..."trophy hunters"...ad nauseum. Many of them are working fathers and mothers, with limited time and resources to get outdoors. They want a more pristine hunting experience...fewer slob hunters...a partner who shares their objectives...safety for their treestands...a good place to camp...a happy landowner. If money will buy that, why not?
Doesn't money buy licenses, tags (expensive ones!) stands, bows, guns, camo and literally almost everything? Who paid for the land? The landowner did of course. Does the same landowner owe hunters a free ride/free access policy? Of course not. You may have gotten some things cheap or free...a bow...a stand...anything. Some guys paid big money for their bows. Does that make them wrong? You can still hunt on the cheap in every state...or you can compensate a landowner. This is the equivalent of playing moral/ethical cop on fellow hunters...just because they don't share a like viewpoint.
For the anti- lease folks: Do you have an objection to visiting a landowner and saying "I'd like to show my appreciation and support. Can I help you pay a year's worth of taxes?" If the landowner asked you to work 40 hours of sweaty labor for the right to hunt his land, would you do it? Would you prefer to tell a landowner "I really like to hunt here, but it's not worth any money to me. I think you should be satisfied with a handshake, few pounds of venison and a Christmas card." ?
very interesting thread
-
I can see both sides of this issue, I never had to lease when I lived in Michigan. Abundant public land options and I knew everyone from Hell to breakfast back home. I quit hunting public land during deer season for all the reasons I mentioned in my earlier posts but I continued to take advantage of those areas for small game. When I moved to Iowa I didnt have those resources, public land is minimal and its over run with "hunters", not to mention I knew exactly no one in the state.
I can tell you Ive lost more acres to owners shutting the gates due to bad behavior than leases. Ive lost more acres to land owners or their kids selling property than to leases. I dont begrudge them closing the gates or selling the land, its theirs to do with as they see fit. I dont hear anyone bashing land owners here for having the audacity to actually own land and have complete control over its use, why then is it so distasteful to imagine the land owner wanting compensation and ultimately more control over the hunting rights on the land. Why is it so horrible that Im willing to pay for the use of the land and then wanting to control exactly what Ive paid for? Would you feel the same way towards people who lease if they owned the land? Do you hate the land owner who respectfully denies your request to hunt his fields and forests because hes had his share of misadventures with others who he has willingly granted the same permission?
I may not like the idea that I cant go door to door and get permission to hunt hundreds and thousands of acres for the small price of politely asking the owner but I respect a no as well as a yes. I generally get to hear a few horror stories that accompany every refusal and it paints a pretty clear picture of why this trend is taking place. I would love to think that it could be as it was when I was a kid going to the state land by my house. Clear streams, open fields, and tall woods free from rampant new ATV and Jeep trails, piles of trash and destroyed gates. How would it be to go out again without seeing all the bullet holes in every state game area sign and gate post and tree at the parking area? If people dont respect the places they hunt that are publicly owned do you really expect they will act any differently on property they can just walk onto for free?
-
Sorry about the double post back there guy's.Let me say it again to me personaly it is'nt about paying to hunt.I had a chance last month to hog hunt at Ray Hammonds place.Did it cost something yes it did.I understand haveing no accses to a place to hunt haveing to go on a lease.I have no place in ohio to hunt hogs fair chaise,so i went to Ray's.But i also understand that in Texas or Europe you pay or you dont hunt.How long is it till someone decides to lease all state land in Ohio.Then we become Texas.If we dont create a market some politican doesnt get that ideal.I think everyone gets the idea that anyone that is opposed to leaseing just cant afford it.Thats not the case.It's about trying to leave something for the people who come after us.And please excuse my spelling.Thanks Jim Preece
-
A lot of folks seem to forget that the landowner has to deal with overhead and expenses on the land that they own. Farming is a business and even land that is idle is taxed so it makes sense that if the farmer can generate some income from a lease, well, it is his land...
I am allowed to hunt a neighbor's place but he was running so many cows last year that it was too crowded to hunt. Going to be the same this year from what he tell's me too. Does that mean that I won't give him a hand around the place when he asks...?
Heck no, we're neighbors and that's what we do out here.
-
this is a great topic. I have not hunted at Rays place. thinkin about it.
But I do hunt SC..Did u know that theres an open season on hogs in SC with no limits...Thousands of acres of public land. near Rays iam sure. Deer leases have become very popular here along with many other states for many reasons...Bad hunters, Habitat loss, Economics..i would have to say that most leases across the country are within reach of the common man...Same as pay hunts...If you can find a farmer to let hunt with a handshake, a lease ,or a barter type agreement isnt it all the same?? Do the people that lease land take there children hunting with them and there childrens friends also, i do...Hunt the way you prefer ask, pay for it, or lease it or hunt public land...But no matter how its always best done with family and friends...
-
Lots of good thoughts - definately lots of ways to look at this.
Leasing hunting land has come about MOSTLY due to land taxes and landowner liability. From that point on it gets uglier or prettier depending on your own perspective. Kids: Lots of kids hunt leases - it is safer and game is in better shape than public land since individual greed is controlled on leases. I know guys who only hunt public land and would never pay to hunt - great - more power to em - in fact when I have hunted only public land many years we took more game in many cases. Leasing is here - some of us are just trying to stay above water and continue to hunt. Landowners call me all the time trying to "lease" their place. Without exception I turn them down - I am not interested in farms, neighbor squabbles or the fact that many landowners feel they deserve "more" from the hunters they allow to hunt on their place. I only work with timber companies and we do create opportunity that would not exist otherwise. Managing land is very rewarding but I have days where I want to dump the whole thing and get a boat like Don and "just go fishing"!!!- might happen some day. Till then I'll take our leases AND the hunting we do on public land (a ton) until the opportunity fades.
Thanks guys - Good Luck this fall<><
<-----------------------<<<<<<<<<
-
Here is my take on the leasing. If a landowner wants to lease his/her land that's fine. I have no problem with that.
However when that same landowner is taking in several government subsidies from the state or federal subsidy account. Then I have a real problem with it. Those subsidy checks that farmers get are paid for by the people that want access to that property. I would say a farmer can select two of three from the following.
Lease money
Subsidy money
Government funded crop insurance.
It is unfair to be able to triple dip from the tax payers. I know life isn't fair but the aspect of leasing will eventually cause hunting to become obsolete as the states will be forced to step in and control the animal numbers for the hunters because the majority is losing access and keeping the numbers below critical mass.
Leasing needs to be stopped especially the lease groups that lease from a farmer then advertise to hunters at prices well above those lease agreements with landowners. That is criminal and in many states, the laws read that the game animals are indigenous to that state. Therefor they belong to the citizens of that state. Leasing groups need to be stopped.
Thats my take.
-
Dustin, unfortunately, makes alot of sense.
What it comes down to, is simply this. If you can afford it, leasing is great. If you can`t, it`s not so good.
I truely believe that leasing is here to stay. Anything valuable, people WILL pay for. I have lost access to private land because someone came forward and offered money, and I did not. It stings, and it was a wake up for me. I also KNOW the landowner recieved government subsidies. MY money...and YOURS!!!
Rastaman was the first to respond to the question. These are his last two sentences. "Money talks though, and times have changed. You either adapt or don`t hunt."
Eventually, MOST of us on this forum will no longer be able to adapt.
Our ability to hunt, is the ultimate statement of TRUE freedom.
-
On a place we hunted, I gave them about $150 worth of gifts a year. Prime ribs being the most often. given at the holidays. One wealthy new comer gave him $50 dollars and thought that the rest of us needed to take a hike. Now a group of gun hunters have offered them $400 to keep all of the bow hunters off the land, because they claim the bow hunters are shooting all of the big bucks and not taking any does. When we hunted there we shot does mostly and when we lost the doe tags in this part of the state, we asked that the land owner apply for crop damge doe tags, so we could keep shooting does. The place rarely had anything but a passing large buck, but it was a real nursery of of does and fawns. Now they are worried they are going to get run over by does again. Tough petutties for them, I have moved on to less troubled grounds. The idea that all hunters are nice people that are always courteous and considerate of others is absurd. Most places it is a greedy land grab, but then greed seems to be the national trend. A get society, as opposed to a give society.
-
Its bad no question.In hunting there is already a low number of hunters.In missouri they changed the limit on squirrels from 6 to 10 because of lack of hunters.Leasing is just one more way to fase out hunting all together.Eventually hunting will be only for the rich.Isn't it like that in other countries now?
When I was growing up in my teens we lived right next to a bunch of woods that was "no hunting". Just about everyone I knew would sneak onto the land to hunt.It was either that or you didnt get to hunt...Everyone I knew would not be hunters today.
And look at rabbit hunting.The only place here to get rabbits was the railroad tracks.Which everyone knows its illegal to even be on the railroad tracks and they have signs.Everybody hunts it anyway and the railroad don't botherr you.Now just think what would happen if the railroad decided to enforce their "no trespassing" on the railroad?...No rabbit hunters.
Greed is the real problem here.
I personally let people hunt on my land and encourage all land owners to do the same if you care about the future of hunting.As long as they don't cut trees down or something I deem destructive in which case I do my best to find the individuals that did it and NOT punish EVERYBODY else for something THEY DID.Alot of times the land owner will use the excuse of "Someone chopped down trees" " someone did this or that and now I have no choice but to keep everyone out".Which is complete BS.What your doing is punishing everybody for something someone else did.
Landowners if you care at all about our hunting heritage then let people hunt on your land.Its the best thing you can do to support hunting.
And another thing everyone that hunts on my land doesn't have to kiss my a$$ to do it and they know it.I don't ask for anything.
"The US lost 1.5 million (11%) of its hunters from '96-'06. We lost 25% of hunters age 16-17. From '96-'06 the US Population grew 14%; age 16-17 grew 17%. TAKE A KID HUNTING!"
-
Just before the economy went really sour, I was on the verge of picking up a prime piece of deer hunting/farmland. My plan was to kick all of the lease hunters off and open it up to be a no tree stand refuge for longbow shooters only. As things went for many others our investments were cut by a major percentage and the finances of the family took precedents. It would have been fun to be able for any trad gangers, with longbows, to come and hunt on my land. Maybe someday, but I promise it will be longbow only, you would have to shoot pheasants with your bows..
-
Ive had permission to hunt a lot of private land over the years and have seen more of it closed off due to bad manners than leasing. Why should a land owner be held hostage to police his lands to prosecute guilty individuals so that the self proclaimed "honest hunter" can continue to take advantage of his property? Chances are the land owner would not be able to easily find the culprit who tossed garbage or cut a fence or cut a tree, generally the path of least resistance in this case is just close down the access to all. Its amazing to me to read stories of wanton trespass, people breaking the law with full knowledge and then calling out someone who leases as greedy or worse yet to proclaim that any land owner who closes his land off as not caring about our hunting future.
I have a great neighbor who lives next to some public hunting land, we often talk about the problems hes had and continues to have due to trespassers. Would you really want someone shooting at your house, your buildings, your live stock simply because they decided to trespass? Every one of them claim to still be on the public ground which is very very well marked with signs at its borders or they claim they have hunted on "this property" forever and of course that they had no idea there were houses over there. Its common knowledge that as soon as the deer season starts and the woods get flooded with restless hunters wandering around the deer relocate to the neighboring private property, the criminals simply follow. Everyone around pretty well knows its a waste of time asking for permission to hunt there, hes fed up and worn out trying to protect what is his from criminals (trespassers, poachers, vandals...) and the easiest solution is to close the gates permanently.
This is not the Kings Woods and not the Kings Game. You arent the noble Robin Hood robbing the rich and giving to the poor simply because you dont lease and Im not the evil Sheriff of Nottingham because I make sacrifices and save my money to compensate a land owner for the use of his land.
-
"And hunter numbers continue to decline this year.....yaddayaddayadda " on the 6 oclock news
-
Despite the supposed (imagined) "Golden Age of Hunting" when a man could hunt anywhere he pleased and at no cost...try to see the reality.
Hunters (legal and otherwise) have a decided history of going wherever they dang well pleased to get the game they wanted. They trespassed. They left evidence. They did damage. They angered landowners.
States have spent decades getting hunters to understand that they cannot legally trespass and hunt on a landowner's property. They must have written permission. A legal document must exist. Still, no guarantee the landowner won't revoke the priviledge...or put his son-in-law on the ridge YOU like to hunt.
For some landowners, the damage was done. They've closed their properties to all hunters. That's their inalienable right as a landowner and I support their rights 110%.
Enter leasing. Pay a simple fee...have complete hunting rights...safety in the woods...dump the trespassers...eliminate the insane competition...no worries about sudden eviction...etc. Play by the rules and you hunt as aften and as much as you wish. No slob hunters to tolerate. No constant search for another place to hunt because of a hundred various reasons. The hunter (who is serious and will pay for rights) wins. The landowner wins.
We as hunters have had to pay for practically everything associated with our hunting. Everything. Unless a guy has gotten everything for FREE, I have a lot of trouble understanding how anyone can argue against compensating a landowner for the priviledge of hunting there.
Would you do 1 hour of physical labor to earn 4 hours hunting a great farm?
Would you offer to just help a man pay his property taxes in exchange for gaining hunting priviledges there?
Would you prefer to tell a landowner that he has no right to lease his land?...no right to stop people from hunting there?...no right to charge money to use what belongs to him?
For those opposed to leasing, 3 options exist:
1) Find unleased private land and hope for a free ride.
2) Hunt public land. Thousands of acres in every state.
3) Spend money...like any good landowner...and acquire your own property.
-
um again..."And hunter numbers continue to decline this year.....yaddayaddayadda " on the 6 oclock news
When hunting is against the law in 100 or 150 years maybe you'll get it.
Quit saying "your land".You don't own it.
-
You advocate trespassing on private land in a couple different statements and you say that a land owner doesnt own his land? You and I obviously dont share the same ethics or respect for the law or concept of ownership. If you dont wanna own your land or possessions Im sure some neighbor will plant crops on your property and park his equipment there as well, as for most of us we control what we LEGALLY own.
You might want to check out some more obvious causes of declining hunter numbers by the way, ever hear of urbanization, xbox, girls? Kids dont just naturally fall into hunting as a sport these days because many of their parents arent hunters and they are never introduced into it. I dont think advocating trespassing as a way to introduce a new comer to this sport is a direction that most honest hunters would want to take. If you teach no respect for the laws governing society why stop there, who do they think they are telling us hunters there are bag limits and seasons anyhow? In your world I may not own my land but I can assure you that the law and the rest of polite society agrees I do and trespassing on MY LAND or MY LEASE will get your butt in trouble. I make every effort to get others involved in hunting, trad and otherwise, but I absolutely will not tolerate breaking the law. I personally teach respect for law as a minimum requirement and encourage ethical and moral standards that are even higher. If you advocate trespassing to hunt how about stealing a deer someone else shot, or shooting them at night with a spot light out of the bed of the truck? Its all the same to me if you are breaking the law you are a criminal. Im LEGALLY maintaining MY LEASE and owning MY LAND check with a lawyer they may know about this land ownership theory and legal lease concept. Might also want to check to see if this trespassing thing is above the law as well.
"When hunting is against the law in 100 or 150 years maybe you'll get it."
When it is illegal because of criminal activities such as trespassing that have pissed off enough land owners "maybe you'll get it".
Teaching the next generation of hunters how to do it illegally is not the answer to bolstering hunter numbers.
-
When property tax time comes, I'm 100% certain that it's "my land" and so is the government, since they send me the entire bill.
-
What happens if we all say no to leasing?
-
Or food plots or trail cams or four wheelers or baiting? Then what happens?
-
Or paying to hunt with a outfitter that lease their properties?I think if as a goup we say no to all of it it doesnt survive.And how many guy that scratch and save their pennys to pay for a lease belong to state or national orginazations that protect all our rights as hunters?
-
No one owns land in american except maybe some small parts in texas,nevada.
Taxes=Another word for rent.
You don't even own your car out right.The bank is co owner of your car.
-
I pay cash for trucks. I own my land too, the Texas special forces op's flew in the deed on a black helicopter. :p
-
I've helped a friend out with covering taxes in exchange for hunting privileges but I've never leased per say. With that being said, I'm in favor of whatever the owner of the land deems is appropriate for his property.
I'm a blue collar guy and that excuse doesn't fly. I saved up some money and bought a small farm in Ohio because I got fed up with public hunting in Pennsylvania. I have blue collar friends who buy $50,000 pick up trucks every 3 years and they scratch their heads wondering how I bought a small farm in Ohio. My $11,000 used Suburban is long paid for.
It's all about priorities. I'm a bowhunter. I sold my fishing boat, have not played golf in years and I don't eat out very often. But I have a beautiful place to hunt that I try to keep improving for my friends and family.
Not that it's any business of ours what people do with their property but times are tough. A lot of folks are tapping into leasing their land for hunting so they can pay the bills. Taxes and upkeep on property are not free. I just don't get the entitlement mentality of folks today. I see people who live on an 1/8 acre buy their kid a quad and get mad when their kid gets picked up for trespassing. They don't understand why people are "so selfish" with their land and its "not hurting anything". Really? How about I come over to your house and help myself to your beer and television when you are at work?
-Brian
-
I'm sorry but in Ohio leaseing isnt about haveing a place to hunt.It's about a haveing a certin kinda place to hunt.If you cant find a place to hunt in Ohio you either have zero social skills or you cant stand the thought of shareing.A guy buying a place so he's got a place to hunt is diffrent.We would all like to do that.But it looks to me that most leases in Ohio are about trophy hunting.Thats where i have a problem.And i go back to my question what if we say no?
-
I couldnt agree more with your statement that: It's about having a certian kind of place to hunt (versus just having a place to hunt). I drive 4 hours to get to my lease and I have public land literally 200 yards from my front door. The public land is devoid of almost all deer from the beginning of youth season in mid-September to the end of late antlerless season in January. I can tell you though that Ive heard of some real nice bucks taken there during the firearms season when they get pushed around from one piece of cover to the next. For the most part it turns into 6 second encounters with a deer running frantically through the brush only to run into one person after the next that is all too happy to unload his or her shotgun in the general direction of said deer. The human participants arent much better off than the deer for the most part and have no idea where the other people are. Once a deer does get killed its a toss up who actually made the shot and there is a fair chance its gonna end up in an argument with guns present. Three guys pointing at the extra butt hole in some ill fated deer claiming only they could have shot it at that angle and only their particular guage/gun/slug combo could have caused said hole.
Now as charming as that scenario sounds in my "certian kind of hunting" mentality I would like to spare my kids and wife and self from this less than sportsman like display. And before you think that this is some made up story contrived to make a point trust me it is not I have first hand knowledge of this kind of hunting and this scenario. You see I spent a good many years hunting public ground before "THE CHANGE", when people forgot manners and sportsmanship and stewardship of the land and the resources. Truth is my hunting time was being spoiled by the bad behavior of others and for the first time I wasnt enjoying myself anymore. I stopped hunting public land the day I had 3 bullets rip into the ground not 2 yards in front of my feet in an area that I was intimately familiar with and knew that the shots had to have been taken from a line of sight position. In other words someone could clearly see me in full blaze orange against a snow covered back drop and wanted to send a message... I got it loud and clear. It was only marginally better on private land open to just anyone. People hunting my stands with the mentality that they had gotten there first, stealing my stands, messing up the place with no regard for the owners because they likely wouldnt come back anyhow. Had a sweet gal take issue with me for NOT trespassing on some land they had sole permission to hunt after her husband let me know in no uncertian terms I was not to cross the property boundry with out his permission. He let me know incidentally after crossing the private property I had sole permission to hunt to get to his stand. You might wonder why the sweet gal took issue with me, well you see I had shot a deer that crossed their field and didnt run right after it. Turns out I didnt have to because just before I was confronted they, without firing a single shot, proceeded to drag the deer I had just shot, that they knew I had just shot, out of the field with their tag on it. I was less than thrilled to be taken to task for not wantonly trespassing by someone who had just tagged a deer they clearly knew I killed. I even pointed out this minor ethical/moral/legal mistake and got not so much as an OOPS out of her.
Now we could all say no and wish on a star and blow out candles on our birthdays hoping to wake up 30 or 40 years ago when leasing was all but unheard of but I would say a better idea might be if we all started acting like our momma's would want us too... with manners and morals and common sense. My kind of hunting does not involve putting my family in harms way because some goofball insists on shooting from the truck window at deer running across some open bit of ground simply to fill his tag. Or people that would literally take a deer from someone else with nothing for proof but the fact that they emptied their gun at it (or not) and one of my all time favorites is the good old empty the gun but the deer didnt fall so obviously I didnt hit it so why track it mentality. Until there arent any rude, stupid and morally deficient folks out there posing as hunters stealing my stands, harassing my family or worse putting my loved ones at risk I think Ill just keep my lease.
My leasing absolutey affects hunting, mostly mine and my families hunting in a positive fashion but it also affects others who could have put up the money and paid for access same as me. Ive met a lot of those people who still insisted they had some sort of right and in fact were entitled to hunt there simply because the owner hadnt explicitly thrown them off. Met most of them driving field edges in 4x4 trucks with guns hanging out windows as I politely informed them I was leasing this land and asked them to leave. Charming fellows really and Im sure they feel the same about me.
As for purchasing land to hunt I have a small issue with that, Im too darned poor you see. Leasing affords me the liberty to hunt much more land than I could possibly afford without all the other complications of ownership. Since all I really want to do is hunt the land its just financially much more responsible to use my limited resources to secure hunting rights via a lease contract I hold.
-
How did people ever pay the bills without leasing?Oh thats right THEY DID.
-
I do love the catchy one liners but I have offered up several legitimate reasons why I am in favor of leasing. I agree it does affect hunting for myself and others but the fact remains the land I lease was closed off to hunting before my lease. Oh people were there with the intent of taking game but they were not hunters they were trespassers and poachers and vandals. I cant turn back the clock and frankly I dont care to anymore because it would simply be for the benefit of the slobs that drove me to leasing in the first place. The same slobs that caused the land owner to close off his land to hunting. The same slobs that make the paper every season for their ill deeds and give every honest hunter a black eye in the process. The same slobs that honest hunters could do without in their ranks. It is regretable that hunter numbers are falling but they arent plummeting strictly due to leasing. In fact I would wager that if you could procure factual numbers they would make up an incredibly small percentage of the causes for waning hunter numbers. I would also submit that they would be substantially off set if not completely nullified by the number of new hunters who start out hunting on leases. Simply because many leases allow for a certian number of school age children of a primary lease holder to hunt for free. People who pay for leases and do habitat improvements in my experience show a level of commitment to the sport that tends to manifest itself by them bringing family members and friends into the sport the right way. I dont see that same commitment in the people who feel entitled to hunt any place they please free of charge even if that means trespassing. I dont have anything against people who get to hunt private property for free, I dont have anything against land owners who refuse to grant access for hunting. Im glad I was able to open up several hundred acres to hunting for my family by compensating a land owner. Im absolutely tickled that I bolstered hunter numbers by 3 boys and one wife and one friend (not to mention others who already hunted and perhaps continue to hunt due to my lease) and they all hunt my lease safely, legally and with the utmost respect for the sport I love.
-
They did pay their bills? That's funny, 2 nearby small dairy farms recently sold off their herd and their land to get a "regular" job in town, because they couldn't make it anymore. Both farms were dairy farms since at least the 1940's.
Their kids all left to get city jobs because the small family dairy farm is almost impossible to keep afloat anymore.
I know one of the farmers well and he said he got up at 4:30am every morning to milk, rain or shine, 100 or -10 and at the end of the last few years, he made about $10-15K a year, after expenses and taxes. Instead he got a job in town at a local hotel, makes twice as much, works half as much and has full insurance benefits.
All this AFTER he had leased his land to hunters for the last 5 years.
-
In case no one has noticed, people will trespass whether the land is privatly owned or leased, it's one in the same to a trespasser. Besides, when you do catch a trespasser the law won't enforce it.
-
It is as simple as this. If you can pay, it is not a problem. If you can`t, then it IS a problem.
I do not pay to hunt, except in my income taxes.
Until my kids college education is paid for, I do not have a single penny to pay for hunting rights. (and I firmly believe it is the right of every American to hunt)
Paying to get access to private land IS going to negatively affect hunting, in my opinion.
Some state auction tags for big game...same type of thing. Exclusion by reason of economics.
-
my opinion is that a man owns his land and should be able to post it if he wants, BUT he doesn't own the game animals on the land they are public property so he should not be able to lease it for hunting period.
Its just another form of market hunting.
I especially have problems with people " guides" that lease land they dont own for the express purpose a limiting access by the public to publicly owned game animals so they can make a business out of it. They are selling something they dont own and anywhere else that would be called stealing. I'll quit hunting before I'll ever lease or pay a guide for access.
Anyone that steals public property in this manner should be ineligable for taxpayer funded farm or ranch subsidies.
so post your land and keep it for yourselves thats fine, but dont sell hunting tradtions out to the higest bidders
JMO
-
Leasing and limiting access to private land will affect hunting in a very bad way. Take a look to Europe, what leasing and other things did to hunting there. It is a rich mans sport, hunters are politically as unimportant as they can be and young hunters are in their mid 30ies or even older. The young generation is left out and will probably never pick up the sport. This will lead consequently to much less license sales.
I perfectly agree with bobman, that you can post your land, but not lease the hunting rights. Market hunting destroyed the game populations, sportmen invested a lot of money to put populations and habitat back up. Landowners, who receive any kind of subsidy(tax break, crp etc.) should not be allowed to lease hunting rights.
They then sell something which was financed by others. If they keep it for themselves, this is fine, but no monetary gains...
-
Originally posted by tecum-tha:
Leasing and limiting access to private land will affect hunting in a very bad way. Take a look to Europe, what leasing and other things did to hunting there. It is a rich mans sport, hunters are politically as unimportant as they can be and young hunters are in their mid 30ies or even older. The young generation is left out and will probably never pick up the sport. This will lead consequently to much less license sales.
I perfectly agree with bobman, that you can post your land, but not lease the hunting rights. Market hunting destroyed the game populations, sportmen invested a lot of money to put populations and habitat back up. Landowners, who receive any kind of subsidy(tax break, crp etc.) should not be allowed to lease hunting rights.
They then sell something which was financed by others. If they keep it for themselves, this is fine, but no monetary gains...
Sure hasn't hurt hunting in Texas.. folks been selling trespassing rights here for the last 50 years or so.. The price has sure gone up over the years because of competition for the best ranches, but the concept is the same.. I can't (read that as won't) pay the going price for a spot on a ranch, I'd rather go pay my money to someone in Illinois, Nebraska, or Kansas but there certainly isn't a shortage of folks willing to take my place in line..
-
This has been beat to death, and it always comes down to a matter of opinion.
There is no statistical proof that leasing harms hunting or hunters as a whole.
Some guys will b!tch and say it has cost them a hunting area. So have malls, roads, and landowner's relatives...but I don't hear anyone saying we must outlaw any of these.
-
I am thankful that I am living in a time when hunting opportunities are as plentiful as they are. I was always taught " you get what you earn, not what you deserve". I hunt family land,leased land and public land. I usually spend more hunting one week on public land out west than I do for a years lease to hunt locally. There is much more game now and we are so much more mobile now, you can leave your local airport in the AM and be hunting anywhere in the US or Canada before the sun goes down.Exception:no fly rule in Alaska. Dwight Isenhour did more for America with the Interstate Highway system than has been done since. I can remember when a drive of 50 miles was long trip. Mobility is a huge factor in what has brought us all the hunting opportunities we have. Fellows, I think we are living in the golden age of hunting and we should be thankful for it. Complainers can always find things to rave about. My answer is that in my 50+ years of hunting,it has continually improved and leases are not a factor overall either way but could affect an individual. I havn't been able to go to Africa yet but I don't begrudge the folks that do. But I'll keep saving!
-
Everything that shortens hunter numbers will sooner or later lead to a spiraling effect. Game departments and habitat programs will no longer have the same level of funds.
The game departments will then usually jack up their license prices to level budgets. Consequently, even less people will buy licenses.
To give you a little idea: the german hunting education takes about six month and costs you about $2000, with this education you can buy an annual license for about $75-100. In order to hunt you need a piece of hunting land. All private land under 200 acres does not have the hunting rights with it. The land is put together in (mostly) small hunting leases by the jurisdictional administration.These leases are auctioned off in secret auction to the highest bidder. Hunters usually sell the meat, to be able to pay for the leases.The hunter is liable for crop damages if he doesn't fullfil the management plan.
Matter of fact: In some areas, there are not enough hunters anymore, which are willing to invest this much money and time to go hunting.
Wild boar populations explode in some areas, due to more corn beeing planted.In order to hunt pigs effectively, you need a good number of hunters to sourround a field, and even then the kill numbers are not high.
Historically, the development of the hunting was quite similar. A limitless hunting decimated populations, regulations were put in place, similar than they are today in th US. Then the trophy aspect took over, the opportunity to hunt was started to be limited by this system. The democratic way to limit opportunity is a lottery system. The undemocratic one is money. Money in the form of trophy fees, license fees and hunting lease fees.
Without equal opportunity, hunting will decline even more than it is today due to the effect of urbanisation. At the same time, game populations explode in urbanised areas. Now will the lease holders feel responsible to manage the population?
-
My best friend called me yesterday to let me know he was drawn in the spring turkey lottery. First season...before the birds get wary. (good news) The bad news is, the owner(s) of the place he HAD permission to hunt called him a week ago and told him that if he wanted to hunt it was gonna cost him $200.00. "Thats the new going rate". $200.00 dollars to hunt for ONE turkey!
We have LOTS of public land, but there are very few if ANY turkeys on public land anymore. Trapping efforts by our DNR to relocate them to southern counties have reduced their numbers. Coyotes and birds of prey have kept them down.
Now comes the "hunt" to find another piece of property within his hunt unit that (1) has turkeys, and (2) will let him hunt.
-
It's also part of our democratic ways to allow free enterprise and honor landowner's rights. A landowner should and does have the right to use his land to generate income. As far as private land goes, the landowner has the undisputed legal right to charge money for access to do anything on that land. If he does not allow hunting, that's his right...and he has no legal obligation to deal with game populations. To my knowledge, no landowner has ever been forced to allow public hunting.
This argument often goes to “what happens as a result of leasing?” but it usually ignores the legal rights of landowners, hunters and our state's laws protecting them. You will never ever stop or control leasing unless you institute a set of laws that override a landowner's current rights to use his land as he sees fit. I doubt you'll ever see that happen as long as this is the United States of America.
The root of this (I think anyway) is our disposable money combined with landowners offering less free-and-easy access. Hunters have money, and will spend it. Landowners want it, as costs of ownership continue to spiral upward (checked your property taxes over the past decade?). The precedent for leasing has been established and leasing is here to stay. At least it's staying until it is no longer seen as an attractive option by many landowners and hunters. Until then just remember: It takes two to tango.
-
How does the level of liability change for a landowner that charges a fee or lease as compared to allowing access with no fee associated?
-
I'm no legal beagle so take this with the proverbial grain of salt.
If you lease your land to someone, or if they pay you to hunt there (assuming it's traceable payment) you are in a business transaction to some extent. Both parties have obligations to meet, and these should be contractually spelled out to minimize confusion and disputes. Offering a "free" hunt theoretically eliminates the liability risk, but not so fast: If you have a known danger on your land, you have a reasonable obligation to disclose the information and prove that you did so...otherwise you're still at risk.
"Reasonable" is what matters and would be judged in any court under a civil suit. The best way to protect your interests is to always have everyone sign a complete waiver of their rights to sue you for anything that happens on your property. An attorney can prepare this (master copy) for a reasonable cost.
Also, if you own land, you have (or should have) an insurance policy that contains liability coverage. The limits of this coverage may need to be scrutinized in order to assure you have enough protection.
Bottom line: Protect thyself always.
-
I know there are some states that have laws protecting landowner from any liability from hunters given permission to hunt on that land. Now, when you lease that would open up a different set of circumstances. Check your state laws.
-
It has taken away alot of opportunities here in WV.
-
You can have the hunters sign a landowners permission slip, this in effect makes the hunter repsonsible and liable for all damages incurred. the landowner cannot be sued or held accountable in any way. this is providing of course that access is free.
-
Maybe one of the issues is interpretation. I know a considerable number of landowners who simply won't have anything to do with hunters, and they often cite the risk of liability or lawsuits. No matter how you explain it to them, they're not buying it. Release or no release, some feel at risk with people using weapons and climbing trees on their land. They do believe a lawyer would find a loophole and get them in court.
Reality or not, if a landowner believes this, no hunter is going there. Correctly done, a lease contract legally spells out and releases the landowner from ALL liability r/t the use of his land. In today's litigious world, some landowners see the lease as win-win. They make money AND they solve their liability risks.
-
NYS has a General Obligation Law that protects landowners who allow hunting, fishin, and trapping on their land by NON-Paying persons.
-
So the landowners buy "the private lease contract agreement" but not their own state laws?
But they "buy" all the other state laws who gives them tax breaks, lower taxes or offers them grants to improve habitat etc.
There is an easy fix to this problem. No tax breaks or grants for landowners (all tax payers money) for those landowners leasing out hunting rights. The legislative could easily put that into the regulations.
They already got their share by accepting the tax breaks or the grant money, improving the value of their land (in case of a sale).
And I bet any good lawyer would make the "lease agreement liability" disappear much faster than overthrowing an existing state law.
The state laws were put in effect after some liability cases surfaced.
As a result of accepting grants or special tax breaks, the DNR should not pay for crop damages either or issue depredation permits if the hunting rights are leased out.
What good does it do to the majority of tax payers
improving something with their money, then seeing the benefits destroyed or auctioned of for monetary gain by someone else.
Whoever wins the most votes in democracy wins...
-
I own an interest in my family's farm, but have precious little time to hunt - or work - on it. I enjoy sharing the hunting there with a few long-time friends who police the place rather than leasing it. That said, I know a few folks who actually try to make a living farming their land, and leasing is just one aspect of that enterprise for them.
-
Correct on the premise of most votes winning within a democracy. That applies to all things up for vote. Property owners carry way more weight at election time than do hunters. Like it or not, property owners have always held the gate key to hunting their lands. They control hunters on their lands, and not the other way around.
The landowner doesn't own the wildlife, and he's not selling it. He's simply selling access to his property. The laws protect his right to do so, and likely always will...unless we become a socialist state in the name of hunting.
-
I'd like to add that my post regarding 'what landowners believe' isn't necessarily based on laws and legalities. It's a matter of perception to the landowner. If he doesn't see one single benefit from letting a hunter in...and if he feels that liabilty is possible...well, you can forget hunting there. I've seen it and felt it. A number of landowners don't have much faith that "some law" will keep them out of court, or from being dragged into a suit, whether it's tossed or not. It's just a lot easier to say "sorry, but no" to a prospective hunter.
When money and contracts hit the table, most non-hunting landowners will at least consider it. They have nothing to lose and something to gain. By the way...most farmers look at wildlife and say "Hey...these creatures eat off my farm 365 days a year. Why shouldn't I make a buck off a guy who wants to go chase them"?
As far as tax breaks and subsidies for landowners and farmers: These were instituted to maintain and encourage production of food crops, timber and other essential products. Tax breaks are not typically given to produce a wildlife-friendly landscape for hunters to enjoy.
Personally, I've always thought we could have a program of additional tax relief for landowners who offer FREE hunting. Give them absolute immunity from liability...cut their taxes...hunters get access. It's the carrot, and not the stick.
-
Kevin, that's a good point about farmers looking at crop damage from over abundant wildlife. If a farmer is convinced that a hunter will help control the population by harvesting does, he might be more receptive to requests for access. If a hunter sits on his property, watching his crops get eaten and waiting for a trophy to present itself - why blame him for trying to get something back for his investment. We can't expect our interests to be the same as the landowner's, and we need to do what it takes to overcome that.
-
In my experience land owners view "liability" in a very broad spectrum. Ive had farmers tell me about finding piles of aluminum irrigation pipe shot through several times by rifles, combines shot full of holes, fences cut, trees with hardware left in them, etc. Ive heard land owners tell me stories about some fool getting hurt while on his land with out permission and trying to file suit against him. I think if people are honest most any hunter who has tried to secure access to private land has heard the horror stories. Why on earth would you expect a complete stranger to go out of his way, put himself at risk, just so you could go out and have a little fun? I grew up offering help fixing fences, cutting fire wood, working on the barn, doing some hay or other chores, giving game taken from the land... It was a way to open a door and let the people paying the taxes know I wasnt just there for my own purposes. Its not so big a step to offer compensation in the form of cash payment.
This issue will always be one of those glass half empty or glass half full scenarios. You may see leases as a way of closing off acres to hunting while I see it as a way of opening up acres to hunting. Its just a little added expense in my opinion and worth every dime, to each his own I guess.
-
Well said GreyGoose and rascal!
I've been in many of these discussions. For some reason, "money" gets the blame. We could easily refer to other kinds of compensation, and they don't get the hornets stirred up.
I have said this: How much is your labor worth?
What if a landowner said "Sure I'll let you hunt. You can hunt here all season, anywhere on my land. I have several big bucks living here, and you're welcome to try and kill one. Lots of turkeys too. I'll ask you to work for me, though. You'll be digging post-holes, cutting brush on fencelines and roadsides, mowing my lawn, and other menial chores. You work for me just 2 hours each week during the growing season and you can hunt unlimited days for a full year. That's about 60 hours of your labor at $12/hr or $720. I guess you could pay me the $720 though...that would work too".
I'd like to know what most guys would do. 1)Work...2)Pay...3)Walk away.
Keep in mind...the landowner isn't getting many freebies these days.
-
Originally posted by Kevin Dill:
I have said this: How much is your labor worth?
What if a landowner said "Sure I'll let you hunt. You can hunt here all season, anywhere on my land. I have several big bucks living here, and you're welcome to try and kill one. Lots of turkeys too. I'll ask you to work for me, though. You'll be digging post-holes, cutting brush on fencelines and roadsides, mowing my lawn, and other menial chores. You work for me just 2 hours each week during the growing season and you can hunt unlimited days for a full year. That's about 60 hours of your labor at $12/hr or $720. I guess you could pay me the $720 though...that would work too".
I'd like to know what most guys would do. 1)Work...2)Pay...3)Walk away.
Keep in mind...the landowner isn't getting many freebies these days.
Keep in mind we have a horrible economy at the moment and there is no job market at all. High school kids can't even get part time jobs now because adults who have lost their jobs are working two of these jobs to try to make some kind of income. Now more people probably would do the work because they don't have the money to pay.
The conversation does turn to money alot. It's because most people don't have the extra to pay. This was started to ask how people thought land leases affect hunting, The sport overall as a whole, not so someone could go on a three page rant trying to protect their own self interest.
Oh wait, there is the answer to the question, most people don't have an answer because most people aren't worried about the sport as a whole any more, they're worried about how it affects them and screw everyone else.
-
Al-Dente, would you please be so kind as to send me a copy of,"The Hunter obligation Law" I am one that had to either quit hunting or continue to pay and/or kiss a--, I got tired of doing both.
I am from N.C. and our stupid leaders payed $15000.00 to find out why we were having a drop in hunting license sales.How ignorant can they be? I am to old to fight anymore, I just lay on the porch and growl but I do want to send a copy of your states law to our illustrious,
so called leaders.It just might save hunting in our state.
-
In Michigan, there are laws that protect a landowner from liability when allowing hunters on their property. If you hunt my land and get hurt, I am NOT at fault.
If you come on MY property to WORK, you MUST have an accident/property liability policy and I must have a printed proof of the policy before ANY work is performed...otherwise, the liability for injury/property damage becomes MY responsibility.(insurance policies can and do state that the issuer of the policy must be notified of anyone performing work on your property who does NOT carry their own liability/injury policy) In other words, even a fifteen year old kid mowing my lawn becomes a possible liability when he is on my property.
The idea of working to gain access SOUNDS great, but in reality it won`t work where I live.
Forgot to mention, the bigger farms in my area pay the workers who are on the payroll, running huge tractors, planting fields, harvesting, mowing hay, running the milking operations ect... minimum wage, with NO overtime pay. $12.00/ hour to perform ANY labor type job is probably about $2.00/hour over the average.
-
Well just think when the day comes that you have to lease to fish.
Leasing is very bad for hunting and its obvious,common sense.
If I had to lease I just wouldn't hunt and Its not that I don't have the money.