Scoobiedoo

Atlasman,
Good points.

Also what we have not yet factored in is:

*Deer over population issues - which affect car insurance rates (esp here in New York State)

* How will New York State's Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) factor in to all this - in as:
- Number of hunters / demand in NYS decline?
- Number of NYS Hunting Licenses sold?
- The future of hunting if CWD takes off big time?
- Will having land even matter to hunters if CWD takes hold?

Lots of issues...

G2 Shooter

This thread has good points from both sides.

On one side, I believe it is a land owners right to do with his land what he pleases. He owns it. Property tax and the cost of farming keep going up. I have no idea what property insurance costs but that is needed these days. The owners need a break somewhere.

On the other side, I feel that if the land owner has given a hunter permission to hunt in exchange for help on the property, the hunter is respectful, donates meat and/or gives gifts at X-Mas, to just one day require him to start paying thousands of dollars to hunt is a little rude. That is fine if it was agreed upon up front but if it wasn't it's like a slap in the face. I kinda like the grandfather clause in this situation.

I used to have five large farms and two wooded areas to hunt on. Four of the farms and both wooded areas are now developments. On the other farm, I was one of several people allowed to hunt. One of the hunters fell from his stand and broke his leg. I guess he saw some lawyer's commercial on TV and sued the land owner. That blew it for everyone. I can also say that I have seen disrespectful hunters aplenty so I can deffinately understand why a lot of owners just say no.

Now I hunt public land about 90% of the time. It sucks to hit redial a gazillion times at 7am just to get a permit for a day but that is what it has come down to. I have seen and taken some nice deer off of public land every year. I just feel grateful that I am still able to get out and hunt. I will do whatever it takes to go out except pay a large amount of money. I think that up to $200-$300 per year would be acceptable to me to help out the owner. I am looking at a spot in Delaware for around $200 now. Any more than that and I feel like the owner is trying to make money. If that is what they want to charge, I'm sure they will find someone else to pay it. Public land is free. Most of the time I go out just to get away from everything. When I get a nice deer, that is just icing on the cake.

My $0.03

Double Creek

I'm a land owner... Well, let me rephrase that, I have a HUGE mortgageon some land that I call mine The ONLY reason I/we bought the land was for hunting. To enjoy the outdoors with my family......To control the harvest, to managment the nutrition as we see fit....

IMO, the #1 reason land is getting so hard to come by is QDM.....Known in most circles as Trophy Deer Management.... To manage deer you need land, and a pretty good chunk of it at that.... Today's hunter wants to kill a nice buck each year.. and in most cases only have a limited amount of time to invest in hunting... As such, they pay big $$$ to lease or buy land that can be controlled. It's a catch 22.... Times have changed from say 20+ years ago when people just wanted to go hunting. Now, most hunters, due to media influences, not only want to go hunting, but they want to kill big deer too..... A shift in hunter mentality which actually helps the herd, hurts the hunter in the form of lack of land.......

It's only going to get worse.... I feel for the guys that don't own land or than can't afford to paya few thousand a year to lease or join a good camp....

Scoobiedoo

In my state hunters pay in excess of $1500 per year to hunt on leased-land in the Adirondacks owned by the paper mills...

silentassassin

IMO there isn't a specific answer to that question. It is different for everyone. The market will ultimately decide what the prices are then it will up to the individual to determine whether they are in or out and that to a large extent will be determined by how much money you have available to spend on such discretionary items and how much you love hunting. You talk about those guys dropping money to whack some does and a couple of forkies well how much is it worth to be able to do that safely how about for your children to do it safely? Have you put a dollar value on your life or the life of your children lately? For me it's worth paying some money to have the security and peace of mind. If it isn't worth it for you then don't do it.

Because on a lease you put up the stands yourself you do the scouting yourself you track the animal yourself and you do everything else yourself. That would be the primary difference between the two. But I see what you are trying to get at so let's flip the coin. In your opinion is it only a trophy if it's taken off of highly pressured public ground? I take itthat is the point you are drving at?

silentassassin

So you help a guy one year and you are suppossed to get to hunt for the rest of your life? The grandfather clause don't pay the bills. If you work that year you should be able to hunt that year but next year is open season IMO!
Hmmm imagine that a farmer trying to make money off of their land what a novel concept That land is their liveliehood why should they not use it to it's maximum efficiency? Have you seen the gas prices lately? How about the lack of rain in the Mid-south and mid-west? What do you think that's doing to the farmers profits? Why do you think they should not recoup some of these costs by leasing out there ground?

G2 Shooter

silentassassin,
I expected more from a moderator on this forum. I'm not here to get into a pi$$ing match with you. Maybe you shouldn't quote others if you are only going to cut and paste what you want. Maybe you are a reporter cause I see that all the in the time in the papers. Maybe you just like to bash other forum users. Who knows?

If you took the time to read my whole post, you will see that I first said that it is the land owners right to do what he wants. I guess you missed that part? I also said that if they wanted to charge a small amount, I would be willing to contribute towards their expenses. I said that if they wanted to profit from their land by charging thousands of dollars, someone else can pay for it cause I'm not going to. I have plenty of public land to hunt on. Bagging the monster buck of the world is not what I go out hunting for.

If I work on someone's property or farm for the spring and summer and then they tell me I have to pay to hunt, I would be super pi$$ed off. If you don't see anything wrong with that, then you have issues. Hunting on someone's land is a two-way street. You have dis-respectful hunters and you have dis-respectful owners. If I have a relationship with an owner, I would expect them to talk to me in advance about their thoughts to lease land. If they don't, they can go somewhere. I don't need to associate with people like that.

I think people are too quick with their quote, bash and posts here. After all, it's just my opinion and this IS The United States of America. Last time I checked it was one of my rights to express my opinion.

silentassassin

I assume you entered into this debate willingly. If so then you should be prepared for someone to disagree with all or parts of your posts. I am not trying to start a ****** match nor was I "bashing" you. I merely pointed out a couple of parts of your posts that I didn't agree with and commented on them or asked you questions concerning them. Did you make that post with the expectation that no one would respond or did you assume that everyone that responded would agree with you 100% or was it the fact that a moderator disagreed with you that threw you? Just curious.

Ok well my point was if they can let you hunt for a little money or someone else for a lot of money then why wouldn't they go ahead and get the extra money?

OK, well other people are paying for it and they are willing to so no harm no foul. But we all have different goals when we go hunting. For some folks a big buck is a major part of the hunt,IMO that doesn't make their opinion right or wrong just different than yours. To you it's about getting outside in the peace and quiet while to others that is but a part of the overall landscape of why WE hunt. I was just pointing that out.

No, I agree with you there and I even said so in my original response. Here is the quote:
[quote]If you work that year you should be able to hunt that year but next year is open season IMO

Well them talking to you would be a nice gesture but since you have made it clear that you wouldn't pay over 200-300 for land and they had an offer to lease it for considerably more but didn't say anything to you because you had made it clear that you wouldn't pay that kind of money then would you still be mad or would you not assume that had already declared that you were uninterested?

It's both of our rights to post whatever we want so long as it is within the forum rules. If you are going to stay on the message boards you should probably prepare for people not agreeing with your opinion and having opinions of their own.

hillbillyhunter1

silent assassin wrote:

first off there Silent, I didn't ask for an apology from you or say you were doing anything wrongfor leasing land to hunt on---sounds like you have some kind of chip on your shoulder.

secondly, Your reply to me has overtones that assume I might be jealous of your little lease(s). My family and I actually own about 500 acres back where I grew up (WV) and I have access to thousands more thru friends and extended family members. Meanwhile, here in the west, there is more good public land then you could hunt in 20 lifetimes. So, I personally am fine. I just didn't think that was relevant since I was just making a general statement about how the alleged "greed" of the landowner might actually have been initiated by fellow hunters instead of the landowner himself.

Thirdly, although safety is a consideration, I don't believe it is ever the primary reason for people to lease. In fact most incidents where someone is hurt while hunting is either a pure accident or results from someone else already breaking the law in the first place, like poaching, tresspassing, or drinking. (take that Vang case in WI last year). By the way in my exampleI mentioned that the hunters were respectful. I also meant (although I didn't state) that they were safe. So if you want to lease, it is your right.But the main reason to lease is either to access land that you could'nt have otherwise and/or control the access of others to that same land. I can remember a time when hunting wasn't about maximizing profits and time etc.

btw--your first sentence sounds like an ad for peta.

silentassassin

You were the one saying that hunters that wanted to lease land were just greedy and that we corrupted the landowners. When you say that you should be prepared for the retort.

You mean kind of like you assumed that anyone that leased ground was doing it to be greedy without waying all of the reasons why someone may choose to lease ground?

I don't know what the statistics are and I would be willing to wager that you don't either but what I do know is that I have far more control over land that I lease or own than I do over land that I don't. At least when I am hunting on leased land for the vast majority of the time I don't have to wonder about somebody that is up romaing take a shot at a deer they jump and shooting me instead and I don't have to worry about someone beeing on the property that I don't know about accidentally shooting me. I am sure most accidnets are in deed accidents but I also like knowing that I don't have worry about who else has permission and where they are hunting and I like knowing that I have more control over the variables. So whether or not safety is someones primary consideration or not it is still a consideration. But I agree with you that most hunters are good hunters and those are the ones that I will allow on my lease as opposed to being forced to share the woods with hunters that aren't or with hunters that I don't know if they are safe or not.

The unfortunate truth however is that it is true. No more so than it is when it comes to people and automobiles but it is true. There are slobs in every walk of life, including hunting. So when I get a chance to seperate myself from them why should I not do that?