|
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
I was wondering if someone who has land in CRP orany type of subsidyprogram is now allowed to lease it out for hunting. If so, that would seem to be a bit of double dipping.The issue of having the lease amount deducted from their subsidy check would seem worth pursuing. As for permitting public access (not involving leasing), I would think that those involved in things like CRP should be strongly encouraged to do so, but it seems like it would open a can of worms to try to mandate it.
|
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
"Forcing" land owners to allow hunting on their land will never happen, and I don't think it should. It'd be like forcing me as a home owner to take in the homeless. I don't know these people, I don't know how they will take care of my stuff etc. etc. There is no way to "police" unknown hunters and make sure they are following game laws, respecting your land and any property that may be on it. This will never fly.
I do agree to the opening up of more public land, and even purchasing new land. |
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
First of all I would like to say thank you to the landowners out there who let me and othershunt their property.
Solocam, i respectfully disagree with you it's not a good analogy. As a homeowner I assume the Govt. is not paying you a subsidy correct? Ie.. the Govt did not help pay your Mortgage or is not currently doing so. So, of course you should not be forced to house the homeless. ORIGINAL: solocamcan "Forcing" land owners to allow hunting on their land will never happen, and I don't think it should. It'd be like forcing me as a home owner to take in the homeless. I don't know these people, I don't know how they will take care of my stuff etc. etc. There is no way to "police" unknown hunters and make sure they are following game laws, respecting your land and any property that may be on it. This will never fly. I do agree to the opening up of more public land, and even purchasing new land. |
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
ORIGINAL: mustang17936 First of all I would like to say thank you to the landowners out there who let me and othershunt their property. Solocam, i respectfully disagree with you it's not a good analogy. As a homeowner I assume the Govt. is not paying you a subsidy correct? Ie.. the Govt did not help pay your Mortgage or is not currently doing so. So, of course you should not be forced to house the homeless. ORIGINAL: solocamcan "Forcing" land owners to allow hunting on their land will never happen, and I don't think it should. It'd be like forcing me as a home owner to take in the homeless. I don't know these people, I don't know how they will take care of my stuff etc. etc. There is no way to "police" unknown hunters and make sure they are following game laws, respecting your land and any property that may be on it. This will never fly. I do agree to the opening up of more public land, and even purchasing new land. There is no easy solution, we can all agree on that. My own thought is that this all started going down hill once the outfitters moved in. Why let normal people hunt when I can charge X-amount, usually in the thousands? Therefore landowners stopped allowinghunting, hoping that the deer would get big enough to attract outfitters to inquire about leasing it out. |
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
No problem. I'm just trying to figure it out. I'm a hunter, you're a hunter. To me, that's a brotherhood.
But, on the CRP I think the layout per year is $16-18 Billion dollars nationwide. That's some serious cash. I'd like to get something out of it. Now I know it will preserve habitat and therefore encourage game animals to flourish, but what's the point if I don't have any access to it? |
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
ORIGINAL: mustang17936 No problem. I'm just trying to figure it out. I'm a hunter, you're a hunter. To me, that's a brotherhood. But, on the CRP I think the layout per year is $16-18 Billion dollars nationwide. That's some serious cash. I'd like to get something out of it. Now I know it will preserve habitat and therefore encourage game animals to flourish, but what's the point if I don't have any access to it? But it seems like all these farms that had been in the family for decades are being sold off, or too old to fix up so the farmers auction off the land, and mostly land developers buy it up and create 5 acre lot sub-divisions out of hundreds of acres. Close to my home (Champaign, Illinois) I am stuck with hunting a few hedge rows close to some U of I land, or public places (clinton lake) if I have a few days I have some privatearound Martinsville and Robinson IL that I hunt. Where are you from? |
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
Actually, there already are precedents for requiring landowners to allow access to their land, I think. For example, I have always been told that, at least in the past,the state would provide people with free fish to stock their pond but they would be required to let other people fish there. If they didn't want to do that, then they would be required to pay for their own fish to stock the ponds. Like i said before, I think that trying to force people to allow public access to their land can open up a big mess. But at the same time, if you are a landowner accepting government subsidies, you are kind of opening yourself up to that possibility.
I think that the realsolution would be for Illinois to adopt a prgoram like South Dakota. They lease land from farmers andthey utilize it the same way other public access hunting areas are operated. Sure it is gonna cost the state money to lease, but it also generates a lot of money since you have many people using it rather than just a few. |
RE: IL Deer Task Force Final Recommendations.
Yep, there are very good ideas out there. I will hope and pray Blago is out this week. Then Quinn takes over and appoints a qualified person to the DNR. Then in 2010 we elect a conservative governor who supports Hunting and Fishing.
I think if these steps take place, then we could actually have meaningful discussions on Hunter Access. It's not beyond the realm of possibility:eek: ORIGINAL: Lanse couche couche Actually, there already are precedents for requiring landowners to allow access to their land, I think. For example, I have always been told that, at least in the past,the state would provide people with free fish to stock their pond but they would be required to let other people fish there. If they didn't want to do that, then they would be required to pay for their own fish to stock the ponds. Like i said before, I think that trying to force people to allow public access to their land can open up a big mess. But at the same time, if you are a landowner accepting government subsidies, you are kind of opening yourself up to that possibility. I think that the realsolution would be for Illinois to adopt a prgoram like South Dakota. They lease land from farmers andthey utilize it the same way other public access hunting areas are operated. Sure it is gonna cost the state money to lease, but it also generates a lot of money since you have many people using it rather than just a few. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:34 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.