wihunter32

Definately private. You can manage the habitat and structure of the deer herd.

MO-KS_hunter

Private land for sure.
Fortunately (for me) my family owns 1800 acres in NE Missouri. My father and I exclusively hunt a 160 acre plot. I've seen what it's like during rifle season on public land in NE Missouri, not pretty. All I can say is "keepur head down".

djschuett

I hunt public land, though not by choice.
It's worked out well for me, however it gets a bit old when you see 8 hunters on opening day all within 100 yards of your spot tromping through loud as hell and no deer! Also, when you hear a slug hit a tree 20 yards from you and there are no deer in sight, it's a bit un-nerving!

That said, both of my public land deer were pushed into my area by pressure from other hunters, so it can be helpful at times to have other hunters unintentionally helping you out!

peakrut

I voted public due to the private I hunt has 4 other guys allowed to hunt it and a few tresspassers once in awhile. My otherprivate spots mostly tresspassers.

IL-Cornfed

I vote for PRIVATE and by that I mean private land, not farmer Bobs back 40 where he lets 10 other guys run around all season... that in my opinion might as well be considered public. I hate public land for that exact reason, the over crowding and complete lack of ability to control any aspect of the experience including safety! If I couldn't have the private land that I do then I would prefer to lease property just to limit accessby others.

kevin1

While I hunt both private and public land, in many ways I prefer public. I live in a state that is a meat hunter's dream, and our publics are chock full of antlerless that my more antler focused rivals routinely pass up. I usually hunt smaller out of the way tracts that I've located via satellite photos, and more often than not I'm the only one there. This generally gives me anywhere from 200-400 acres all to myself since my rivals tend to either shun publics, or are unaware of their existence in the cases of the smaller tracts. There's also a vast tract of national forest within an hour of my house that's rich in deer and other game, and usually the only tracks I see are those of the game I'm pursuing and my own as I'm leaving. In contrast, nearly every piece of private land to which I've been granted access has been so overhunted that I rarely see anything but squirrels, so if I'm not hunting my own 10 acres of woods I head for a public parcel and enjoy the quiet.

ihunt1975

MY PRIVATE LAND IS MORE LIKE PUBLIC LAND THAN REAL PUBLIC LAND. FARMERS WHO LET YOU HUNT HERE LET EVERYONE HUNT HERE. 10 GUYS ON 10 ACRES. AT LEAST ON PUBLIC THERE MAYBE 10 GUYS ON 1500 ACRES.

trailer

Being that I have 410 acres out my back door, I guess private land gets my vote...

superstrutter

I have 200 acres of deer rich land, so there is no need for me to hunt public. The only public land hunting I have ever done is for ducks and since 1995 I have been doing that on private land. I did have some really good years duck hunting public land though. That's when we had lots of ducks, but that's another story.There are alot of good WMA's in north La., but there arealso a lot of hunters. I really don't think I would deer hunt on public land if I didn't have my own. I would get in a lease.

trekker1

I am split on public and private. I love hunting with friends during the Ohio slug and muzzleloader seasons. We push woodlots in the NW part of the state. Most woods are less than 20 acres, and we see so many deer it's crazy. I also love getting back in on the big wilderness public grounds. Toss-up.