[Nathanael_Greene]

Much of Texas had a pretty rainy summer this year, which means that we'll probably be facing an explosion in feral hog numbers. (This is really not a good thing, in my opinion. Feral hogs are dirty, destructive pests.)

I've been reading on some other hunting forums of guys who are from out-of-state who seem to believe that the hog problem entitles them to show up and hunt in Texas for free.

The logic seems to be "Hogs are a problem; I'll kill hogs for free; problem solved."

Then, when they learn of the long tradition of paying to hunt just about anything anywhere in Texas, they're put out, some to the point of rudeness.

To be honest, this amazes me. Oh, not so much the desire for free hunting; I have that myself. But it's the sense of entitlement that some of these people have.

Sure, it would be nice to be able to hunt large quantities of tasty game animals for free (and many ranchers/farmers do allow it, though I don't know any of them personally, alas).

Is it reasonable to expect ranchers to allow strangers to hunt their land?

[2RCO]

Nathanael,
Many areas of the US do allow free hunting or at least hunting with permission and have never considered charging. It seems Texas however has adopted the European style where the Landowners own the game--or at least they believe they do. In my opinion it's your land abide by whatever rules you wish. As far payment to hunt on land, it's my belief if I have to pay to hunt on your land you better be providing me with some good hunting. Then again it's your land so you can do what you want with it. The animals unless stocked however aren't your property.

On another note I have never seen Feral hogs as a tasty game animal more a very foul scented creature I would pass on hunting because I wouldn't want to dress. I do have at least one friend in Texas that has a several thousand acre spread that will gladly let friends kill all the hogs they can just to get rid of them .

[elkhuntingfool]

Agreed - they are vermin. Would you expect to pay to hunt jack rabbits?

[countertop]

Virginia (or at least the Peoples Republic aof Northern Virginia) seems to have adopted that model too.

[lanternlad1]

Texans are very serious when it comes to allowing strangers on their land. The game has nothing to do with it, really. I'm sure the money paid allows the hunters to be on the property and not get shot for trespassing, which is legal to do here. Also, there is no respect given when no value is assigned. That is human nature. Make 'em pay, and they'll appreciate it. If the farmers want strangers to do the hunting, they make them pay. Trust me, the farmers have PLENTY of friends whom he knows well that he will let hunt for free on his land. If strangers must pay, that is the price of hunting nowadays. If I had land and a stranger wanted to hunt on it, I'd make them pay for it. Otherwise stay off my land, and hunt on your own for free. That just how Texas is.

[eastwood44mag]

I don't think it's unreasonable to charge to hunt your land, but I do think it's a bit obscene to charge a week's pay for a day of hunting.

[jeepmor]

It's up to the landowner. If he has so much demand that he can charge high prices, so be it. But don't expect me to do anything but hunt and tend to my own business if you charge me.

However, if you do not charge me, to show appreciation, I'll likely pick up errant trash and go out of my way in some other form to show thanks and sincerity for the privilege. When I'm paying dollars, you are getting my thanks right there, everything else is up to you, the landowner.

Don't get me wrong, I pack out what I pack in. But I won't be going out of my way to pick up anyone else's spent shells or anything else for that matter if I'm paying you for the hunting. My fee is to pay the landowner to maintain his own property. If he chooses not to do so, that is not my problem, I paid to hunt, not help.

On that note, I just concluded a successful deer hunt on private property from an extended family member who has a 1000 acre plot with a cabin. I left the cabin in better shape than I found it, stocked the wood box, split some more kindling, made the bed, vacuumed the floor and other little things like that to show my appreciation. It was a great pleasure to hunt on private land that was spotless in regards to trash. We didn't have to deal with any reckless yahoos, and it was quiet and isolated from the public lands a few miles away where I'd have to worry about the security of my rig and things like that. It was a great privilege and I treated it as such. And if others are gracious enough to bring me onto their land for hunting opportunities, it's the least I could do.

[Jack A. Sol]

chargeing for hunting as the NORM seems messed up to me. It also could entitle the hunter to a reeasonable expectation of success or a refund if unsuccessful. there is also some liability issue that could be raised by the acceptance and demand for payment.

charging for hunting is NOT a good idea.

[Big Boomer]

back when I was growing up in Oregon, farmers had bad problems with jacks and would even pay for your ammo or sometimes even a buck a head for jacks if you would come out and take care of them.

They could literally destroy thousands of dollars of crops for the farmers and would be considered a huge nuisance and were generally very costly to control. Farmers would solicit free hunting to have them taken care of.

If hogs were that much of a problem here in Texas and causing so much damage to crops you would think that they would welcome any help curring these vermin.

I have a friend that has 500 acres and charges a "cheap" $1500 per gun for all year hunting game animals on his land they are takers like you can't believe! That is about half price of what most charge for a hunt. It's insane. The problems that he runs into and had to take the lease away from the last family is that they just killed EVERYTHING and left them for dead. They would hunt dear and just cut the horns off, shoot the fox for the tails, kill the rabbits for sport including all the birds (even illegal ones). After a weekend he would fine corpses laying all over rotting. He warned them about only hunting game animals and not to just take the horns etc.

Perhaps I am too old but I just don't see the point in killing a deer to cut off it's antlers. I mean sheesh there is some darn good backstrap that's just left to rot! That's a sin in itself!

[Herknav]

I think the misunderstanding comes largely from a lack of understanding of the cost of hunting in Texas. I think Boomer hit it on the head when he said, If hogs were that much of a problem here in Texas and causing so much damage to crops you would think that they would welcome any help curring these vermin.

I don't think it's a lack of manners, so much as a wide difference in expectations. The hunter thinks he's doing Tex a favor by eradictaing his nuisance pests. He's not charging for his services. In fact, he's even providing his own gas (driving from out-of-state), food, & lodging in return for a chance at some feral hogs. If he pays for hunting at home, it's usually in the form of a "token of appreciation" to the landowner.

The landowner, on the other hand, thinks he's doing the hunter a favor by providing good hunting opportunities for some out-of-staters. He's used to getting paid quite a bit to let somebody hunt on his land.

The problem comes when everybody sees how big the gulf is between the two. Each side thinks the other is ungrateful, and resentment sets in. I grew up on the farm, and have lived in seven states. I think the cultural "norms" are literally that far apart.

[alsaqr]

Paying to hunt is not peculiar to Texas. For at least 40 years lots of folks in the eastern part of WV have been leasing their places to hunters.

[rino451]

They could literally destroy thousands of dollars of crops for the farmers and would be considered a huge nuisance and were generally very costly to control. Farmers would solicit free hunting to have them taken care of.

If hogs were that much of a problem here in Texas and causing so much damage to crops you would think that they would welcome any help curring these vermin.

Not to start a flame fest, but I'm now sure that destroying crops is that bad of a thing some. From the several friends that I have with leases that complain about hogs, they sure like to complain about it but they have NEVER made good on any of their invitat5ions extended to me to come take care of their problem.

[koja48]

Obviously no one likes to pay trespass fees, even the public "land use" fees some states, such as WA levy. However, the landowner does own the land and when such a practice is followed on a grand scale, such as in Texas, I can see where frustrations abound. I personally prefer "register to hunt," if an owner wants to limit the number of hunters on his/her land & know who is hunting . . . lessens the chance of damage to equipment/livestock & puts extra eyes and ears in the field providing oversight. The assumption that the landowner owns the game is wrong. What vexes me more are the landowners who refuse access, then expect the state & public tax dollars to rectify problems incurred as the result of wildlife crop depredation, fence damage, etc. Where I'm located, there so many guides & exclusive well-heeled hunting clubs/members that the majority of the goose fields are reserved & the working hunter has no access other than public land, which is generally poor quality hunting, but at least it's an option. It's somewhat about profit, I reckon, unfortunate, but real, and somewhat about protecting what one owns/limiting access . . . and if you hunt public ground, you know there are a fair share of slob hunters out there. In some regards hunters have contributed to the land access problem.

[redneckrepairs]

In some regards hunters have contributed to the land access problem.

There it is in a nutshell folks. Lease or trespass fee hunting is not big in my area of Colorado . What is becoming increasingly common however is to close access to the " public " . This comes directly from the " overhead " of allowing access that you incur as a landowner . We have had livestock shot , equipment shot , irrigation wells apparently used to sight in rifles , irrigation pipe run over , fences run tho or cut, gates left open , crops driven over , parts and tools stolen , ect.. just to name the problems we have had in the last few years . IMHO it gets worse every year .
Tho we have never charged for hunting and likely never will, in the past pretty much anyone who asked was told to go ahead and hunt a piece of ground , it is reaching the point that several thousand acres of private habitat ( that supports turkey, phesant , duck/goose, deer, antelope , and about any varmint you would care to name will be pulled from public access and its no ones fault but slobs with guns and or vehicles/4wheelers.

Allow me to suggest that if you think fee hunting or locking off access is so wrong. Why dont you go buy or lease a few thousand acres and put up hunter welcome signs ? You too can then have the joys of being a Landowner and attending to the cost and matienence that others on your property seems to bring sure as night follows day .

[ID_shooting]

Hunting upland game, turkeys, pheasnt, ducks, geese and such is becomming harder and harder here. There are some really good public lands and so far we are doing a good job of not spouting off where "no tellem creek" is, but there are also some WMA lands that are stocked but are getting way too crowded. Private land owners are beginning to think Texas style but since they all seem to be recent transplants form out of states, they are mistaken about how much to ask for ($500.00 for a day of hunting) not today.

Now, for a story. We drive down by the river, see a good sized flock of turkeys ona back field, ask the owner to hunt and he wants $500.00 a head we bring off. We say no thanks and move on our way, back in the truck, we look at teh maps and notice a small canal that borders his land is marked as public owned. We park at the canal, has 15-20 feet wide banks, we drive down, set up decoys and call off the turkeys off the land owners land, shoot our three and attempt to leave. Mr land owner has blocked the road and is demanding money for shooting his turkeys. We just laugh and walk by. He threatens to call the cops, we offer him a cell phone :)

Now, I am sure he has a hatred for hunters but what were we to do? I think things will become much more problematic in the near future, at least in my area.

[redneck]

Now that a guy can get people to pay a couple hundred bucks to kill a hog or what not, the argument of crop damage and doing a service doesn't really hold anymore. When you start putting that kind of a price on the hogs, they're worth about as much as the crops they destroy. And unlike crops or livestock, they feed, and breed, and grow all by themselves.
The hogs are already there and the farmer/rancher has to suffer their damage as its not likely to erradicate them anytime soon. So in the long run its probably more profitable to charge for hunting and offset the damage they do cause than let people hunt for free and hope the hogs go away.


Its sad thats its going this way, but folks really need to appreciate that there is any hunting available at all. In my area its getting pretty thin. Instead of going to lease/hunting fees, you see no hunting signs going up. Urban sprawl is eating up hunting area fast. Metro parks are going in as a means of keeping green space, but don't allow hunting of any kind. And landowners are getting more and more reluctant to give permission.
Farmers in this region don't own ground anymore. Its cash rent whatever acreage they can get ahold of. Then you have the hassle of whether its the owner, or the farmer who gives permission to hunt. Hunters fighting over who was out first, and who's permission stands and who's doesn't, and expecting the farmer to stop cutting beans and play mediator. Folks wind up pissed off, and signs get posted.

[eliphalet]

We say no thanks and move on our way, back in the truck, we look at teh maps and notice a small canal that borders his land is marked as public owned. We park at the canal, BLM maps are a must if you live in the Western US and hunt outside the Natl Forest. Cheap very accurate and easily available at BLM offices or online.


Texas land owners wouldn't get a dime of my money, I have hunted on public land all my life and I'd be d^%*ed if I pay to shoot a state owned animal. To each his own and y-all do what ya like, but it would take the fun out of hunting to me. I have yet to see the deer worth $1500 to me much less the goat sized deer I have see from some Southern Central areas of the country.

If I want or need game meat and want to pay, a cow elk can be bought for around $400, according to a fella i work with, it ain't hunting but it's game meat.

[22-rimfire]

Pay hunting (as in expensive leases) seems to be a tradition in Texas. In most cases, it's cheaper to just go to the grocery store and buy beef and skip hunting if food is your objective.

I have mixed feelings about paying to hunt on ranches in general. Hunting has become a major source of income for rancher owners. It also takes money to keep the places more convenient for hunting and building stands and so forth. Again, I have mixed feelings on the subject. Lets say I'm neutral at best on leases.

I lived in Texas for 12 years. My hunting stopped completely because I had the same attitude at that time. Time passes and you simply don't hunt anymore if you stick to your guns on the lease issue.

[Rembrandt]

Charging or not should be up to the land owner....not the hunter!. If you want free hunting find a public hunting area.

After investing half a million for property for myself and family to hunt, I'm in awe at how many jerks think they have a right to hunt it because the DNR's game is on it.

[MCgunner]

Many areas of the US do allow free hunting or at least hunting with permission and have never considered charging. It seems Texas however has adopted the European style where the Landowners own the game--or at least they believe they do.

Now, they don't own the game, but they control access to the land. If you just cross the fence, start hunting, and get caught, you will be charged with felony criminal trespass. The felony part was added a few years ago. I think the King and Kennedy ranches had a lot to do with that. They charge the big bucks for big bucks, nilgai, etc, and have a problem with trespassers. Used to be guys go in there and never be heard from again, but the state sorta frowns on killin' a trespasser now days unless he's tryin' to kill you.

So, you either pony up, get a APH permit and hunt east Texas for the "experience" and maybe actually kill something in your lifetime, maybe, or buy your own place. I have a very small place with a lot of deer and hog on it. It's only ten acres and I'm pretty well stuck with feeder watching it. But, it beats nothing. I was on a hunting club for a while. I had mixed feelings about that. When I got on it it was $760 a year. It was up around $1500 when I dropped out. The eastern leases they had were over-hunted, 1 hunter per hundred acres usually and the ranches got a LOT of hunting pressure. They had a deal, 12 slots, with Larry Gore Eagle Lake Katy Prairie Outfitters out of Katy, Texas that was good for goose, dove, or duck hunting. I used to goose hunt with them a lot. They normally charge 150 a day, so if you hunted with 'em much, didn't take long to justify the dues. Then, they had a 13,000 acre lease at Pumpville, 13 miles west of Langtrey, Texas on Hwy 90. That was fantastic hunting and you didn't have to feeder watch. It was so far out there, it didn't get a lot of pressure during the season. It'd fill up opening saturday and everyone would go home sunday after the morning hunt. If you stayed, there might be 4 people on the whole place mid week. You could spot and stalk out there. It was as if you had the whole of west Texas to hunt just on a section, LOL. I really enjoyed that place and they managed it for big bucks and it was with a heavy heart that I let that club go only because of that west Texas ranch, but it was a 7 hour drive for me. There was one local ranch at Blessing, Pierce ranch, 2500 acres and the ol' boy that owned the place was a descendant of ol' Shanghai Pierce himself. It was SO over-hunted that if you didn't score the first day, you didn't see anything rest of the season. They all hid in the woods and went nocturnal. I killed a couple of doe off that place, but never shot a buck. It was 8 points or better and biggest I ever saw was a 5 pointer with a narly rack that looked pathetic. One ol' boy shot a nice 9 pointer over there one year, but bucks were few and far between. It was year around and I used to just go over there woods bumming off season and shoot squirrels. It wasn't bad squirrel hunting and I think I was the only one in the club that hunted 'em. Never saw anyone down there off season.

In Texas you do what you have to do. Heck, for a few years before I got on that hunting club, I was driving to New Mexico and hunting mulies, came out a lot cheaper than leasing something and the hunting was fabulous. No feeder watching, all spot and stalk, and I enjoyed the scouting as much as the hunting. I have gone up to east Texas. The squirrel hunting is so good up there I usually just ditched the deer hunting idea and pulled the .22 pistol and went after squirrel, LOL!

There are a few areas I'd like to explore in east Texas and if I lived up there (have been tossing around maybe moving in a few years), I'd have a lot of fun just scouting and back packing the woods and hunting squirrel and mallard on the lakes. There are APH WMAs up there as well as lots of national forest lands. Most counties are one buck and no does, though. On my place it's 3 buck, two doe. In Texas, it's county by county on limits.

I'll tell you this, I used to lament that the poor man like me had no place to hunt. I bought my little 10 acres of deer heaven. I hunt it, use it to recreate on. If I caught someone down there I'd be REAL POed. Why? Because that place costs me 400 a year in TAXES not to mention it was MY money and sweat that paid for that place! What the HELL gives you the right to set foot on it???? Well, you won't be hunting in PRISON, feller, can tell ya THAT much! I carry a cell phone an 911 ain't hard to dial. And, when I'm down there, I'm always armed. After buying your own place, you sorta get the land owner's side of things and I don't even run cows. I'd imagine if you lost a few cows to "hunters", you'd be more than a little miffed.

There are states with lots of public land. Texas is not one of them and property rights are strong in this state. Don't like it, move to New Mexico, pretty simple. Been thinkin' of doing that myself, but I'd miss my duck hunting. :D

[Art Eatman]

You look at the profitability of ranching in today's world, and you get a different picture of the Texas hunting deal.

Even with the tax break for "agricultural land", taxes aren't cheap. The return per acre on livestock is relatively low, particularly with today's costs of food, transportation and utilities.

Say you're in country where you run a cow/calf per twenty acres. You sell the calf for $400. $20/acre return. School tax is $1/acre, or 5% of your gross income. Then there's the cost of winter feed, and then income tax.

Deer leasing really got going after WW II. City folks' rising salaries meant that ability to pay increased, so demand grew, so lease prices went up. I saw all that coming, back in the 1970s, which is why I bought into my deal back then. And bought other land as cheap as I could, just so I'd have a place to hunt no matter what the lease market did...

Nowadays, a lot of ranchers would go broke if they couldn't sell that trespass fee. That's just life in the country, folks.

And then add in what redneckrepairs said. I've seen all that, too.

Back when my bunch was leasing over near Uvalde, it was a matter of honor to help fix fence or help doctor screwworms or whatever the rancher needed. Just part of the deal. The rancher never asked for any help, but when you were raised around farming and ranching, you don't quit on someone...

Art

[MCgunner]

On the subject of hogs, to irradicate hogs, hunting is NOT the best way. Get someone hunting your place with dogs and you'll thin 'em out and use traps. It's not smart to let any redneck with a rifle trapes around on your place or some city slicker idiot that don't know a cow from a hog. Think about it, if it was YOUR livelihood on the line, YOUR cows. Cows ain't cheap now days. My best friend just leased some grazing land and is buying cows to put on it. The cost made me choke. LOL He owns some land his brother-in-law plants. He runs an insurance agency and has real estate. He's just doing the cows for "fun". Go figure, but he just wanted to do it. He knows he ain't gonna make much, if any, other than maybe his investment back and have the fun of working with it.

[dracphelan]

Texas land owners wouldn't get a dime of my money, I have hunted on public land all my life and I'd be d^%*ed if I pay to shoot a state owned animal. To each his own and y-all do what ya like, but it would take the fun out of hunting to me. I have yet to see the deer worth $1500 to me much less the goat sized deer I have see from some Southern Central areas of the country.

Well, part of what you are paying for is safety/lower hunter density. With the nitwits we get on public lands here, you could completely cover yourself with hunter safety orange and still risk being shot at by people who shot at the slightest movement. I use the following as an example:
http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2007/09/top-dove.html

[alsaqr]

Do you hear all the railing on message boards about mothers with kids being on welfare?

Well, big farms and ranches are on federal welfare. 70 percent of federal farm welfare money goes to 10 percent of recipients. Find out who the farm welfare king in your county is. Maybe the receipt of farm welfare money should be tied to allowing hunters on their properties.

http://farm.ewg.org/farm/top_recips.php?fips=48000&progcode=total

[koja48]

Unfortunately, idiots abound . . . but we CAN police that.

[eliphalet]

Well I do agree a land owner should have complete control over who and or what happens on their own property. That said, if the game is public owned or state game not privately stocked he should in no way be able to "charge" the public to hunt or shoot what is public in the first place. Pick and choose who or what happens on his land but not to charge money for what is not his in any way shape or form.

What other activity can you sell what is not yours and remain legal?
How can you "sell" what is not yours in the first place?
Somthin ain't right here.

I guess I am splitting hairs as he could then charge to have access to his land which I see no problem with, but not the ability to sell game which is in reality what is happening. That IMHO is wrong, unethical, and should be illegal.

But then I don't write the laws. Big money seems to control that and in a way as stated in a earlier post does lend it's roots from European ideals. At this rate soon if not already in many areas hunting will or has become a rich mans game, again Wrong IMHO. I see it in a way as more freedoms lost to the ordinary average guy.

[redneckrepairs]

Well, big farms and ranches are on federal welfare. 70 percent of federal farm welfare money goes to 10 percent of recipients. Find out who the farm welfare king in your county is. Maybe the receipt of farm welfare money should be tied to allowing hunters on their properties.

Or possibly the .gov should stop subsudising your grocery bill and let the market control the price of food instead of paying farmers enough that you can buy meat , bread , milk , ect.. without a thought .

[Geno]

This is one of those yester-year hot-bottom topics. Those who own significant land would never think of paying to hunt. Those without significant land can't understand how the "haves" can be so heartless?!

Objectively viewed, some landowners no-longer farm, therefore derive precious little "income" from the parcel. These people may lease the land to other farmers, or lease it for hunting to off-set the cost of property taxes. It's not like owning land is free, even if inherited, or in Michigan especially if inherited. Some pretty big inheritance taxes...in some cases I believe close to 50%!

Now, when it comes to blocking family from hunting, so others can pay to hunt, that's where I draw my line in the farmland. A former cousin of mine decided to lease hunting time to his buds, and thus turned away the family. Now this after I had already been told by another cousin that I could hunt it.

So, yeah, you're right. It's your land, and you can do as you danged-well-choose. But, I think we can all add the "names" of stinkers on both sides of the bidding.

[birdv]

Is it reasonable to expect ranchers to allow strangers to hunt their land?
No

I even worry about the families of good friends suing you if something happened. AKA my son was gored by a boar an died... give me money

I was almost sued by my health insurance company when someone under my plan flipped a four wheeler. The insurance company wanted to recover the $1200 ER bill. Complete BS. So I got to pay the premium and the ER bill.

I have never charged anyone to hunt; however your asking the rancher to risk $4 million dollars. For your week of pay. Or paying an umbrella policy your week of pay.

[Kimber1911_06238]

since it's their land, it's their choice. If you aren't willing to pay to hunt...then don't. If the landowner wants to reduce the hog population badly enough they will allow hunting for free or at a reasonable cost. If not, it's their choice and their problem.

[Clipper]

I guess I am splitting hairs as he could then charge to have access to his land which I see no problem with, but not the ability to sell game which is in reality what is happening. That IMHO is wrong, unethical, and should be illegal.

If the landowner is not charging a 'Trophy Fee' for each animal killed, he's not selling game you claim is public property. He could just as easily tell you to beat it and not allow any hunting at all...

That being said, up here it's rare to be asked to pay to hunt private land unless you're leasing exclusivity to a particular tract.

[Nathanael_Greene]

What other activity can you sell what is not yours and renamed legal?
How can you "sell" what is not yours in the first place?

I can think of one--mineral rights.

It turns out that my house is sitting on a pretty good natural gas field, and an exploration/production company is in fact paying me to access what's a long way underground. I've never seen it, and will probably never even see the well. But I'm getting money for it anyway.

I'm not going to get rich (unless they drill the most productive gas well in world history), but I'm happy to take the money and run (or sit, as the case may be).

That's just the way it goes sometimes.

[alsaqr]

"Or possibly the .gov should stop subsudising your grocery bill and let the market control the price of food instead of paying farmers enough that you can buy meat , bread , milk , ect.. without a thought ."

Did i hit a sore spot??

[redneckrepairs]

Did i hit a sore spot??

Not really with me , The wife and i run cattle and raise a bit of cow feed while mom and the stepdad both farm and run cattle, . Last winter cost us right at 50% of my calf crop due to weather loss and i count us lucky in comparison to the death loss many neighbors had . We received not one red cent from the .gov on this . My point is that You quote it as welfare and in a sense it is , but its welfare for your benefit as the farm program consistently depresses the market not raises it . Townfolk reap the benefit in cheap food , and yet like most who get an " entitlement " tend to whine for more ( forced access to private land for free ) . Now if someone wants to throw a keg party in your backyard complete with spinning donuts in cars , motorcycles , ect.. leaving trash and burning down the garden shed i bet you think your property rights are more important than you profess to believe the farmers/ranchers are .

alsagr, Attitudes like you expressed go as far to get land locked off from hunters as the slobs do . You have NO right to be on my ground without expressed permission for any reason, and with your expressed entitlement attitude you would be best not to be found on it . Whereas Id Shooting's story on turkey hunting i frankly thought was a great inventive solution to the problem they perceived as hunters .

[El Tejon]

What I don't understand that if pigs are such a problem, why doesn't the state pay a bounty for them? Or, why don't ranchers and farmers pay or allow people to shoot on their property?:confused:

[alsaqr]

"You have NO right to be on my ground without expressed permission for any reason, and with your expressed entitlement attitude you would be best not to be found on it."

i would not want to hunt on your place or any other place where the owner/s get farm welfare money. i have access to over 40,000 acres of property any time i want to hunt there. Much of it is mine. "entitlement attitude," huh.
Just as i thought, folks who get farm pork money consider it an "entitlement" just like military retirement or social security. What a way to go.

[Nathanael_Greene]

What I don't understand that if pigs are such a problem, why doesn't the state pay a bounty for them? Or, why don't ranchers and farmers pay or allow people to shoot on their property?

I for one can't see taxpayers supporting a bounty; they'd say, "If people want to hunt them, let them pay, not me." Besides, in places where bounties have been tried (like Louisiana, for nutria), the money gets spent instantly and the animals repopulate.

As for why landowners not allowing access, I see it like this: Hogs may be a problem, but allowing strangers with weapons free access to the property isn't a good enough solution.

alsqr: i have access to over 40,000 acres of property any time i want to hunt there. Much of it is mine.

Then I guess we're all welcome to drop by anytime and bring our buddies, beer, and guns, right? Great. Email me a map, okay? I'll see that everyone who wants one gets a copy.

[koja48]

alsaqr,

You obviously haven't farmed/ranched, have never been in the military, and may likely be a troll (excuse my un-Highroad presumption). Folks who have safeguarded the freedoms of this country and worked to provide food for same are NOT on welfare! You owe a lot of folks a huge apology. You are WAY off-base.

[22-rimfire]

You definitely need landowner permission. In Texas, if you are caught hunting without permission, you are trespassing. Sounds rather obvious, but some states require the posting of "No Trespassing" or "No Hunting" signs every so many feet.

I just joined a new Texas hunting forum. Maybe some of you all might like participating in the early stages of a forum. Take a look. http://www.huntingtexasonline.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm

[Art Eatman]

Y'know, I never, ever, have seen anybody forced to go to any state and hunt. I've never seen anybody forced to buy a hunting license, for that matter. And a booklet of pertinent law is free.

Lotsa stuff in this old world that if you don't like the rules of the game, you're not forced to stay there and play...

:D, Art

[koja48]

Art ~ Ain't that a great thing about America . . . you have freedom of choice. Very well stated, my friend.

[eliphalet]

Only problem I see is when a fella that wants to hunt is forced out of the game because he can't afford it, and someone else if profiting from public owned animals. I have no good answers just somehow doesn't seem right.

[22-rimfire]

It really depends on your perspective. If you farm and the deer eat your crops or you have feeders, then you sort of "own" those deer so to speak. I was dead set against leases for years. Now I wish I would have gotten involved early. I frequently worked the ranches in my job back then and many offered to allow me to hunt if I wanted. I was a fool and turned them all down.

[Art Eatman]

Texas has a very active state program to increase access to hunting lands. Various WMAs are accessible through drawings, just as are non-resident permits in many of the western states with public lands.

TP&WD has worked out deals with timber companies, in east Texas. The prices are reasonable; actually, darned cheap. It's best on weekdays, of course.

One thing about non-resident hunting in Texas: You buy the license and away you go. No add-on for this animal, another add-on for that animal...

Regardless, the state government says it owns the deer, no matter how much of a farmer's corn they eat--and the state doesn't pay him. :D And deer compete with a rancher's goats for herbs & forbs.

So farmers and ranchers aren't "selling public animals". They're just getting repaid for damages. Clever folks, those state government people. :D:D:D

Art

[yesit'sloaded]

I don't think it's unreasonable to charge to hunt your land, but I do think it's a bit obscene to charge a week's pay for a day of hunting.
First of all your week's pay is not everybody's week's pay. If someone makes money and wants to spend it hunting on my property they can go ahead. We run a hunting club on our "spread" and most people have no clue what all we have to do just for that. Landowner's insurance, making sure our stands are safe and won't drop you 15 feet out of a tree, maintaining roads on the property, paying taxes every year for land my family has had for over 100 years. Compared to buying land it seems like a pretty good deal to pay a few thousand a year to hunt in a nice place without having to do upkeep work and worry about some of the yahoos that hunt on public land(no offense meant to the responsible hunters that use public land). And yes, I do invite friends to hunt pigs for free. We killed 63 last year and probably didn't dent the local population one bit.

[eliphalet]

Regardless, the state government says it owns the deer, no matter how much of a farmer's corn they eat--and the state doesn't pay him. And deer compete with a rancher's goats for herbs & forbs.
Completely different here. If you want compensation for damages from wildlife you have to allow depredation tags or hunts on your property. Seems much more hunter friendly to me but I am not up on Texas. Hard to judge another's without walking in his shoes.
The turkey mention earlier was the first I have heard of paying to hunt private property in Idaho with the exception of private hunting clubs or for birds that are released, pheasants etc. It may be the coming thing, I just hope not.

[Wheeler44]

If you farm and the deer eat your crops or you have feeders, then you sort of "own" those deer so to speak.
I call Bull Chips. If you own them "so to speak" just harvest one out of season and then report it to the state game commission or whatever.
My son hunted nuisance gophers in Sasatchewan this year. I reckon the farmers he hunted for would be glad to have him back for a deer hunt that they "fed" all year.
Agricultural welfare is still welfare. It does not in every case benefit the "city slicker" any more than the hospitals, airports and shopping centers in the "big city" always benefit the hillbil er excuse me rural dwelling folk. The fact is that a lot of the agriculural welfare is given to folks that live in the city but own Ag property in the rural areas.

I am glad that I live in the far west where there is still a goodly amount of public land.

Wheeler44

[Double Naught Spy]

But it's the sense of entitlement that some of these people have.


Sure enough, including members of this forum...

Agreed - they are vermin. Would you expect to pay to hunt jack rabbits?

chargeing for hunting as the NORM seems messed up to me. It also could entitle the hunter to a reeasonable expectation of success or a refund if unsuccessful. there is also some liability issue that could be raised by the acceptance and demand for payment.

charging for hunting is NOT a good idea.

Wow, if you pay, you expect the land owner to be responsible for your hunting prowess? Except in a few contracts, most are geared simply to letting you lease the opportunity to hunt, not how well you do it.

That said, if the game is public owned or state game not privately stocked he should in no way be able to "charge" the public to hunt or shoot what is public in the first place. Pick and choose who or what happens on his land but not to charge money for what is not his in any way shape or form.

Once again, they are not selling you a tangible item, but an opportunity for you to hunt and procure that tangible item on his/her property.

The hunter thinks he's doing Tex a favor by eradictaing his nuisance pests. He's not charging for his services. In fact, he's even providing his own gas (driving from out-of-state), food, & lodging in return for a chance at some feral hogs.

If the landowner wasn't asking for a favor, then don't expect him/her to view the hunter's expectation/desire to hunt for free as being a favor. Instead, it just sounds like mooching. If you want to hunt hogs for free, buy your own land.

If you farm and the deer eat your crops or you have feeders, then you sort of "own" those deer so to speak.

Not by any law you don't. Feeding wild or domestic stock does not make it yours.

-------------
I don't think it's unreasonable to charge to hunt your land, but I do think it's a bit obscene to charge a week's pay for a day of hunting.

Naw, it is just obscene of you pay it.

----
It's up to the landowner. If he has so much demand that he can charge high prices, so be it. But don't expect me to do anything but hunt and tend to my own business if you charge me.

All you need to do is comply with the contract or rules established by the landowner.

[Art Eatman]

Hey, Heinlein came up with "TANSTAAFL" a bunch of years ago, and it's as true today as it was when he wrote "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress".

Art

[cpttango30]

I am kind of up in the air on this one. I am not much of a hunter.

If it is your land I am not entitled to anything from or on it. If you have a bunch of people beating feet to your door offering lots of money to hunt your land I say charge why they are willing to pay.

As far as farm subsidity being walfare. I totaly disagree with that stand. I am not a farmer never was a farmer never wanted to be one. Long hours little pay and if you get too much rain your done for if you do not get enough rain your done for.

I think that it is your land do what you want with it.

I had one range that was 7500 acres where all we had to do was call and let the guy know we were going to go hunting a day or two ahead. I had another rance of 6000 acres that I had worked on and was allowed to hunt on the owner then changed her mind and would not let anyone but family hunt on (I was very good friends with her oldest son. But she said I do not want to take the risk even though she had known my family for years. I said no problem. It sucked because she had some prime hunting land bordered a river for about 3 or 4 miles.

[22-rimfire]

DoubleNaught: Not by any law you don't. Feeding wild or domestic stock does not make it yours.

Of course I know that the land owner does not "own" them, even so to speak. I was speaking figuratively. Landowner does not own the surface water in Texas either.

That aside, farmers and ranchers can take deer out of season that are a nuisance with permission from the game protectors (wardens). You do own domestic animals, cattle, goats, sheep, and so forth; but not because you feed them but because you bought them or they were created by animals you do own. You do not own deer even at a high fence operation, I believe. You can have exotics on your land and hunt them when you believe it appropriate. You can't do anything you want to, but you do own domestic animals. I'm not a lawyer either.

[john1911]

Private land is just that, private. It's for sale everywhere. Pony up your money and make all the rules you want.

For all those "subsidies=welfare" people, I'll tell you how to get your own "farm welfare":

You take your first million dollars and buy some productive farmland. Then, you take your second million and buy all your equipment. Next you take $250,000 or so and buy your fuel, fertilizer and seed. Then you plant and hope and pray for a good growing season. If the weather cooperates, you then get to work 25 hours a day for a few weeks harvesting. After all this, you carry your crops to market. While there, they will tell you what you will be paid for your crop. It may be enough to cover the fuel, fertilizer and seed and make a payment on your land and equipment (or it may not). Now (stick with me, this is where the "welfare" comes in) if you've filed all your paperwork, followed all the rules and ask real nicely the gov. may send you you a check for pennies on the acre. See, anyone can do it.

[Nathanael_Greene]

john1911: My sentiments exactly.

[308win]

Some of my hunting friends believe that since the state (public) owns the wild game pay to hunt is wrong. Some of my hunting friends believe that since the land owner has no choice but to feed and 'house' the wild game, fee to hunt is a reasonable trade-off. I agree with my hunting friends.

In the Midwest the pay to harvest model is catching hold and I believe that is generally a good thing. After all, if a land owner's fee is too high you can shop around and you will find something. My wife's oldest brother owns 250 or so acres in southwest central Illinois about an hour from St. Louis. Some tillable, some in mature hardwoods that has been logged in the last 10 years. The offers he is getting for that land per acre from people who only want the land for hunting is amazing - seven figures for the land and going up every year. It is prime hunting and he knows what he has; so far he lets a few friends hunt and has it posted not that that stops people as he has run-ins with often the same people every year and these encounters keep escalating in intensity. Someone is going to get hurt of these days and I just hope he has his ducks in a row when it happens.

[MCgunner]

In the Midwest the pay to harvest model is catching hold and I believe that is generally a good thing. After all, if a land owner's fee is too high you can shop around and you will find something.

Just hope it don't get to the point that leasing has in Texas, a rich man's endeavor. While I certainly support property rights, (after all, who pays the taxes on the property?) the price of a decent deer/hog lease in Texas is way out of the working man's budget, at least if he wants to retire and have anything to retire on. It's simple supply and demand. There's enough demand out there from the rich urbanites and corporations with corporate leases and such and land supply is finite even in Texas. But, there are alternatives, and even though I didn't buy what Art has, I, too, saw the writing on the wall and bought what I could when I could. And, I mean, I looked upon it as an investment. It has tripled in value, too, so not a bad investment even though you'd have to figure the taxes I've paid over the last 20 years, but hey, better taxes than five times as much per year leasing a deer lease, right?

Gripe about it all you want, but facts are facts, you wanna play, you gotta pay. Hell, I'm going to book a December goose hunt today for me and a buddy, 1/2 day, $175 a person. It's not about the meat, can tell ya that! Add to that 2 bucks a round for hevi shot, hell, but we'll have a LOT of fun I'll bet! You gotta do what you gotta do if you wanna hunt. We have a lot of free and good duck hunting around here, one reason I got into duck hunting, but you need land to hunt on for anything else you wanna do.

I can guarantee you one thing, you can go to Austin and lobby all you want from free rights to hunt land, but you'll find you won't get too many ears to listen to you on that, and rightfully so. :rolleyes:

[Double Naught Spy]

22-rimfire said,

If you farm and the deer eat your crops or you have feeders, then you sort of "own" those deer so to speak.

then said,

Of course I know that the land owner does not "own" them, even so to speak.

Gee, I wonder how I could have not fully understood your meaning. :rolleyes:

[Herknav]

If the landowner wasn't asking for a favor, then don't expect him/her to view the hunter's expectation/desire to hunt for free as being a favor. Instead, it just sounds like mooching. If you want to hunt hogs for free, buy your own land.

I have my own land, thanks for asking. :) I was just trying to look at this in an unbiased, academic sort of way.

[Vern Humphrey]

As a land owner, let me point out that there is an expense connected with allowing people to hunt on your land. The land owner has to pick up their trash. He has to repair the ruts they leave to wash. He has to find his livestock they let roam when they left the gates open. He loses the occasional animal to some hunter's mistake.

Now, if a perfect stranger showed up at your home, asked to use your house for a few days for free, and then left it a mess, left the doors and windows open, damaged your rain gutters, and shot your dog -- would you welcome the next strange who knocked on your door?

[Nathanael_Greene]

...would you welcome the next strange[r] who knocked on your door?

Nope, but I probably wouldn't have welcomed the first ones, either.

This gets to my basic point. I think landowners are not only right to charge for access, they'd be crazy not to.

It's not just a matter of hunters, either. If had rare butterflies in my back yard, I'd charge people to come take pictures of them. Not because I'm greedy, but because long after the butterflyophiles (or whatever they're called) have left, I'd be stuck with their Dorito bags and Mountain Dew bottles, and have to pay to fix the fences, windows, and whatever else gets trashed along the way.

Because, sure as I'm sitting here, no good deed goes unpunished.

That being said, if I had paying "regulars" who had demonstrated their respect and good manners, I'd not only welcome them back but give 'em a call when something new showed up and let them drop by for free. They'd have crossed the threshold from "stranger" to "friend" by then.

But would I let just anyone invite themselves onto my property? Not likely.

[Double Naught Spy]

I was just trying to look at this in an unbiased, academic sort of way.

You might have been trying to look at it in an academic sort of way, but the guys who want to hunt for free aren't doing it as a favor to me, a land owner. They are doing it because they want some place to hunt for free because they want the enjoyment of hunting, the bounty of the meat, etc. On top of that, they want to hunt what they want to hunt, not necessarily the game I consider to be pests.

Nobody showed up at our place in NM, wanting to hunt mice and rats so as to help slow the spread of hantavirus. Where were those kind hearted good Sams then?

No, they are not wanting to hunt hogs on my land for free just because they want to do me a favor.

[Vern Humphrey]

No, they are not wanting to hunt hogs on my land for free just because they want to do me a favor.
And when I want someone to help me by hunting the deer, bear, turkeys, hogs, squirrels, rabbits, and so on on my land, I'll ask them. Until then, no point in coming out and volunteering.:rolleyes:

[308win]

In Ohio I believe the legislature has passed an indemnity law (may not be exactly the correct term) that protects a land owner from law suits if a land owner allows the public to hunt. In Ohio a land owner can apply for and get nuisance permit(s) (except during deer season) if the land owner is sustaining crop damage.

Edited to add:

I don't know if this protection is extended to pay-to-hunt operations. Logic would tell me it isn't.

[.41 magnum man]

Virginia has passed the same law .308 mentioned which allows landowners to invite hunters onto their property without fearing a lawsuit if someone gets hurt. I think that is a good thing for those who do allow others on their property. Me, I don't allow anyone except some family members.

This topic is a pet peeve of mine. So this allows me to vent a little. A land owner is KING of his property. He can do anything he wishes and what anyone thinks about it is not even relevant.

Some guys were complaining about posted land, and when they heard mine is, they started giving me a hard time. I asked them if they leave the keys in their cars for anyone to use it that comes by. Of course, they said, no. Well, it is the same thing. And everyone isn't like this, but many people think that the people who have something they don't ought to give it to them. Yes, some people are greedy, uncaring louts, but there is a difference in giving a starving man some food and letting someone have a vacation on your land.

Everyone can't afford land, but everyone can decide what their priorities are. If you like to spend all your money on booze and running around every weekend, then don't feel like you have the right to bitch at someone who put their money somewhere else. If your atv payment is more important than a land payment, who's fault is that? I recall a queer singer who looked down on his friends for buying food instead of blowing their money on male prostitutes and drugs like he did. But after he got what he wanted most, he tried to mooch the food!

Nothing wrong with asking, but no use in being mad when turned down either. Hunting has been such a major priority in my life that I made sure I lived where I could hunt. I bought a cabin in the heart of National Forest when I was 19 years old and lived there until I was 28. (I worked every day and made payments.) When it was time to get married and move, my wife knew before hand that having hunting land close by was important to me, and we bought 45 acres in the country. My land is geared 100% to my hunting pleasure. I have 1 creek that runs all the time, 2 wet weather branches, and 2 springs, and 2 small food plots. I have old logging roads all over and a deer never has to be dragged any farther than 50 yards. I can still hunt on the trails or sit in one of my several ladder stands. Yes, I am bragging, but I am paying for it. Not only that, but I have worked my tail off cutting shooting lanes. planting stuff, making fields, and keeping the trails drivable. That was before an accident and a condition that left me only able to do piddly stuff now, which made all that work even more of a pay off for me.

I like seeing other people enjoy hunting, and I don't like the idea that hunting may only be available to the rich and elite. Still, it isn't my responsibility to give that ability to every one that comes along looking for it.

You know, I have my own business, and I have a lot of customers who ask me if they can hunt on my land. (And though I would turn them down, I've never been invited to hunt on someone else!) I've always said no except once. I had one guy that I had done a few small jobs for, but said he was going to bring me a big job, and he asked if he could hunt. I appreciated the big job, but I just liked the guy. You know what I mean? I thought I would be good to him and let hunt. He liked to bow hunt, so I told him he could come during bow season and I would show him a stand he could sit in. Do you know what that sucker said? "No. I'll come during rifle season and sit where I want to." There is no way in my life time he will ever set foot in my woods, and I don't care if I get that big job or not.

Done venting now, and back to being happy. :)

[pete f]

its different from one place to another, up in minnesota, it used to be that all the logging land from the paper companies and pulp mills was open for hunting, now they are charging for leases. all the state land was good land for hunting for years, but now we have so many loonies out, you have to go a long way to get away from the city folk and the Hmong, who have a different set of values about what works in the woods.

The paper mill started charging because they are getting squeezed by revenue seekers and stockholders, who seem to think that everything must have a price.

I think the whole issue has gotten out of hand, with state forests now being leased out to lumber companies, who in turn lease that lands hunting rights out. you all of a sudden get a sport that is supposed to help the environment getting Elitist and cost driven, cutting the amounts of money raised by licenses and taxes on the supplies, in turn decreasing the opportunity of new hunters to get a start.

[Monkeybear]

In Texas your land is your land.

Do the land owners also own the wildlife? No. Do you get to go on another person's land and shoot yourself a critter because you want to? No. Do you got to like it? No, but you do have to stay off of private property unless invited.

[jeepmor]

Wow, what a thread.

I can conclude a few things from this thread.

1. Some people feel entitled that shouldn't, both landowners and hunters alike. However, landowners have paid for their land, there are some nice perks that come with that.

2. Texas is becoming the elitist rich man hunting ground and edging out the regular joe. Go figure, the gap has been widening for a long time, no big news here.

3. The West is a much better place to live for public hunting opportunities than nearly anywhere else.

4. A lot of hunters are just plain slobs and seem to forget why they lose their privileges. You trash someone's land by leaving garbage, tearing up trails with your truck or atv, and leave gates open (or closed), then don't cry when you lose the privilege.

5. People are dumba$$es, this thread has reiterated that fact over and over. Not that I'm calling any posters such, but you have all shared plenty of anecdotes about them.

6. I don't think I would ever ask to hunt on anyone's land personally unless they were family, and probably not even then. I'd wait for an invite and I got one this year. It was quite a privilege and I did as much as I possibly could to show my appreciation for that privilege. I had another fellow that was going to join me but landed himself in some hot water from a legal issue between him and his girlfriend. He is a safe hunter, but takes his drinking after the fact too seriously IMO and I feared he would ruin my chances of future return trips. I don't have to worry about that now and I figure if the land doesn't sell, I might just get invited back. I will not be adding this fellow onto any more party hunt tags though.

7. Decent folks are hard to find, when you do find them, treat them well. Trust me, I know, I have in-laws with denial issues you would not believe.

[Skoghund]

I don't own the game on my land. Its only mine when its dead. I invite people to hunt because i own the land. If you want to hunt for free spend the money and buy your own land or use public land.

[Deer Hunter]

It keeps gung-ho idiots out of your property. Just read through this forum's threads pertaining to those crazy/dangerous hunting situations that were initiated by someone's blatantly stupid mistakes. If we know the person, then yeah we let them hunt. New people earn our trust, but after that we let them hunt on some of our land all the time. It's like that all around East Texas.

[Steve Wynn]

308Win... Ohio has had the law to protect landowners should people hunting their land get hurt for a very long time. I printed off some copies some years ago and had one laminated to help open up a few doors.

I'll dig up the ORC # if you're interested.

Steve

[Steve Wynn]

Ohio Revised Code 1533.181: Exemption from liability to recreational users

This comes off of an old Ohio "Permission for Hunting or Trapping on Private Land " published by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

[org]

"Allow me to suggest that if you think fee hunting or locking off access is so wrong. Why dont you go buy or lease a few thousand acres and put up hunter welcome signs ? You too can then have the joys of being a Landowner and attending to the cost and matienence that others on your property seems to bring sure as night follows day . "

If you're talking about leasing privately owned land or state trust land, I must agree. If you're talking about grazing leases on federal lands (BLM or NFS), then you're dead wrong. Grazing leases on public lands are just that: grazing leases. They include nothing else and anyone attempting to exclude the public from those lands should have his leases cancelled.

[redneckrepairs]

Org I was speaking specifically to private land . Since the stepdad has a grazing lease on the Commanchie National Grasslands i am well aware of the lease conditions, and wouldnt even want to change access to that land in any way . It is after all Public land that we lease to graze calves on , not land we own and pay taxes on .

[org]

Clear enough, Redneckrepairs. We're on the same side, then. Thanks for the reply.

[xd45gaper]

i have never herd of paying a land owner to hunt on his land, usually permission written or verbal, and some of the meat from what ever you kill!
and maybe a xmas card at christmas lol

[Art Eatman]

xd45gaper, you can learn a lot at this forum. :)

Leasing has been common in Texas since WW II, that I personally know of. It's more common in the south, SFAIK, than in northern private-lands states. The custom is growing, though, as farmers/ranchers have come to need more money to cope with the reduced profitability of tradional on-farm/on-ranch efforts.

Art

[Double Naught Spy]

1. Some people feel entitled that shouldn't, both landowners and hunters alike. However, landowners have paid for their land, there are some nice perks that come with that.

I am having trouble figuring out how it is that the landowners are feeling entitlement they should not feel. They aren't the ones begging off for a free place to hunt and aren't asking strangers to come hunt for free.

[yesit'sloaded]

And increased taxes on landowners to make up for the fact that freeloading system riders don't pay any and only consume.

[eliphalet]

as farmers/ranchers have come to need more money to cope with the reduced profitability of traditional on-farm/on-ranch efforts.
Why aren't the farmers in states with massive amounts of public land going broke then?
Sounds more like greed or poor management to me.
It is basically using public owned animals and selling them to the public, what a farce.

[john1911]

They are basically using public owned animals and selling them back to the public, what a farce.

They are not selling "public" animals, they are "selling" the use of their private property to hunt these animals. It's not that hard to understand.

[eliphalet]

It's not that hard to understand.No it isn't, It is real simple without the critters no one would come in the first place.
I think we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Zoogster]

Good old Texas, where most land in the state is owned by someone.

I would never pay to hunt pests, that people are willing to create a market for it is thier problem. The tags to hunt actual game animals are expensive enough as it is. I view the hunt as a chance at free food, the game tags usualy cost about as much as that much meat would cost to buy since one is doing all the dressing and butchering themselves. That means I break close to even and get to hunt. I can live with that. Now to pay some insane fee to hunt on land? I just wouldn't hunt plain and simple.

At the same time I would not want strangers on my land (especialy if I actualy lived on it) roaming around shooting guns. How am I to know how responsible someone will be with a lethal weapon in an unstructured recreation.

The main reason I could not live in Texas is the lack of much public land. When almost every spec of dirt is owned by someone it is hard to feel like a free man.

For the amount these people are supposedly charging though I would like to see if they are claiming it as income on thier taxes (tax evasion). Do they need a business license to be profiting like that? I think you could quickly bring an end to the market if you enforced those things. That would bring back free hunting, as well as cause hunters to hear lot of "no" when they ask to hunt on private land.

[308win]

I grew up in South East Central Illinois. We had hunting privileges on 3-4 sq miles as did the neighbors. Everyone understood the rules and we all looked out for each other's property - fences down, livestock out/in distress, etc. All were also considerate enough not to hunt near houses, where livestock was running, etc. Never any problems except when someone showed up from outside the area and decided they were entitled to hunt - fences down, shooting to wards buildings, hunting in fields where livestock was running, shot dogs and cats; you name it, it happened. Everything got posted and all of the owners and immediate family and guests still hunted when and were we wanted. Everyone was happy except the people who didn't own land.

Cover crops were planted and the marginal land was usually in the land bank which required planting in forage that couldn't be harvested and sold (basically the agriculture version of welfare) but it sure made good hunting.

The State leased ground just west of us and put in a pay to hunt pheasant preserve - pen raised, dumber than hell, easy shooting. We used to hunt the neighbor's property right across the road from the preserve and shoot the birds that flushed onto his ground. Kind of upset the pay to hunt sportsmen as we usually did a lot better than they did.

A lot of the land in that area has changed hands now and I imagine if I went back I would have a lot fewer choices about where I could hunt but I would still have a few spots.

This was in 50's and 60's and early 70's.

I have heard that hunting privileges are leased in that area and I expect that everyone should be doing well as lot of deer, turkey, rabbit, the pheasants off of the preserve, a few quail (I used to see an occasional prairie chicken but I don't imagine that is the case now; never shot one as they were protected even then and are now). I don't know what the leases go for but I know they aren't at Texas prices yet. The land owners in that area have or at least had a culture of stewardship even when they weren't leasing hunting rights so I expect that the wildlife has an environment in which it will thrive.

[jmorris]

FWIW I’ve never charged a nickel to my friends for hunting any game at our ranch and have invited many to get rid of the hogs (that can ruin a hay meadow in a blink of an eye). However, I can tell you this; they certainly don’t get to hunt for free. There’s a lot of work to be done on even a modest size ranch (fences, roads, mowing, brush cleanup…this could be another thread in itself). What’s that they say about scratching backs? I would much rather have someone on my place willing to put in a little sweat, than one who wants zero responsibility for a few hundred dollars. If they didn’t have to clean up after you a hotel room would be a lot cheaper too.

[MCgunner]

I don't understand why people don't understand that land access is not the "sale of public critters". After all, I got paid for access to my land when an oil exploration outfit wanted to come in there and seismograph survey the area. They paid me for access to the land. I could have had them arrested if they'd just driven in there. If someone wants to drill on your place, even if you don't have mineral rights, they must pay you for access and damage they may do to your land by drilling there. If they don't pay you, they can go elsewhere. So, if someone wants to come into your place to hunt animals, they must pay you for access. If you don't like it, sit at home a play with yourself because it's THEIR land and they control who walks and drives there, period, case closed.

I can see someone cutting the fence, driving in, hitting a tree stump on their ATV, breaking their neck, and SUEING the land owner for the tree stump being there. Yeah, it could happen. You think I'm going to agree to you hunting on my land without paying and signing disclaimers and a lease agreement? You're full of it, fella. Don't like the system, move to New Mexico, plenty of public hunting there. There are alternatives. You can get the heck outta Texas, probably make the place better to get rid of some freeloaders.

Hey, I ain't rich, don't own much land, certainly don't ranch, but I understand property rights. I'm not a socialist. This is a capitalist society. There's always Russia or China if you don't like that.

[Art Eatman]

Back in the 1970s I was living on the old family place outside of Austin. Right at 200 acres; I ran about 20 head of cows, bringing around $8,000 a year from sale of calves. Gross, then, of $40/acre/year.

We had deer and wild turkey on the place. Benchrest and 100-yard backstop in the back yard.

Since I made some $20K from my town job, I wasn't eligible for the agricultural exemption on the land. That meant that my school taxes were $34/acre/year.

That ain't what you'd call real profitable. 40 - 34 = danged little.

Since you can make a lot more money raising condos than cows, that land is now all paved over and rooftopped.

And the hunting is just really, really poor.

Now, "way out in the country" ranchers aren't hit that hard by the school taxes, but you better believe that if you want to trespass on their land with permission, you're not gonna get a free lunch.

TANSTAAFL: An eternal verity.

Art

[Nathanael_Greene]

Do they need a business license to be profiting like that?

Yes, though your term "profiting" is probably an overstatement.

"The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department would like to remind landowners that a hunting lease license is required for certain hunting operations, and that such lease licenses must be renewed each year."

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/newsmedia/releases/?req=20060424f

[Double Naught Spy]

They are basically using public owned animals and selling them back to the public, what a farce.

Nope, not selling the animals....just selling the opportunity to hunt. I sure as hell don't have to let you come onto my property to hunt public-owned animals and if I do let you in my property, then you will only be allowed to hunt what is legal and what I say you can hunt and only in areas where I say you can hunt. You don't get to hunt amongst my livestock and if you are there to hunt deer and hogs, you don't get to call in and shoot predators, not without permission.

Hell, you don't get to come into my house and drink my water and use my toilet. Sure, it is public water, but that doesn't mean you get access to it on my property, now does it? I don't own the water in my house, but I do pay for the access to it and own the facilities through which access is granted. I don't own the wildlife on my land, but I pay for the access to it by owning the land.

I'm not a socialist. This is a capitalist society. There's always Russia or China if you don't like that.

No doubt.

[redneckrepairs]

They are basically using public owned animals and selling them back to the public, what a farce.

Ok how about the vaunted public pay for all that the game eats throughout the year ?

We had a rough winter here in SE colorado , Feed and fuel prices went thro the roof and i still dropped bales nearby for antelope and deer. as well as kicked grain out near cover for the small game .

Ill tell ya this I didnt see any of " the public " out there chopping ice , or dropping bales in pastures with no cattle , only wildlife . Nor did they approach to help defray the costs of it . Its alright folks tho , ill be dammed if ill see a critter starve or freeze to death if i can do anything about it . That is part of being a rancher i guess . Now granted the wildlife conservation was a small part of it and done for the most part as a course of feeding cattle , but costs for feed and fuel from jan 1 thro march 1 this year was over $15,000 . Half the calf crop still died . We faired better than many of the neighbors tho, as some of them could not get to stock and lost herds that were literally generations in the making .
Now that its hunting time some of the " public " are bravely stepping foreward to demand the " State owned game " they feel they are entitled to for free .
As i stated before we have never charged for anyone to hunt on us , but its getting dammed close to just locking off our acres from hunting . Honestly this thread and some of the attitudes expressed here are leaning me even more towards that choice . Oh ill still hunt it , and enjoy the wildlife out of season its no real loss to me to close all access . Some of the city folk who dont own land will sure miss it tho . I guess times do change tho , and as long as hunting was appreciated as the great thing it is i was glad to enable folks to peruse the hobby . Nowdays it seems that it isnt worth the hassle between the damage and the attitude .

[eliphalet]

I applaud ya Redneck and several others on this thread. This one has gone away from guys making a living selling game, charging high dollars to hunt, to a rancher/farmer and what is his and he has to pay for. There is a whole buncha difference between the two.
I was born on a farm and have lived/worked in ranching country enough to see what fools the public can be and in no way feel any animosity toward anyone that has a keep out or no hunting sign posted, just don't say "yeah you can hunt, and shoot yourself a deer, just gimme a 500 or 5000 dollar bill first".That kinda so called hunting is ruining the sport, again just my opinion.
IMO these " game huntin ranches" are out of control and unless I am mistaken Texas takes the lead. Moves are being made against them here, but money talks and what I or the majority of the general public in this area thinks don't amount to a hill of beans, wolves are a prime example, it is just my/our opinion.

[redneckrepairs]

just don't say "yeah you can hunt just gimme a 500 or 5000 dollar bill first"

We have never charged to hunt , and never will . Our choice as landowners . We may well and as it looks today are likely to stop all " public " hunting on our ground tho. you cant buy your way pass my pissed off lol .

I had to edit on reflection . No matter how i lock the ground off it will be open to some hunters , handicapped , the kid's first hunt ( him not his party ) ect.. I am a sucker for hard luck storys .

[Vern Humphrey]

just don't say "yeah you can hunt just gimme a 500 or 5000 dollar bill first".
There is a big difference between "controlled hunting," where animals are stocked for "hunting" and renting land or the hunting rights thereto.

[eliphalet]

There is a big difference between "controlled hunting," where animals are stocked for "hunting" and renting land or the hunting rights thereto Yep, and a big difference in charging whats necessary to repair a fence or cover costs and leasing hundreds or thousands acres at $10 an acre apiece with a minimum of 6 hunters too.

Did some searching on hunting leases and/or paid hunts it wasn't a pretty picture.
Maybe that's my fault for not being able to afford for such hunting and living all my life where public land abounds too.
I don't need to worry I have had good hunting but I do worry about the kids or young guys that can't already or in the future because of costs and it becoming a rich man's game.

[Vern Humphrey]

Yep, and a big difference in charging whats necessary to repair a fence or cover costs and leasing 1000 acres at $10 an acre apiece with a minium of 6 hunters too.
Where is it written that a farmer is not allowed to make a profit?

If you stopped at a local Mom and Pop store to buy some sandwich meat for lunch, you'd expect them to charge more than the lunch meat cost them wouldn't you? You'd agree they are entitled to try to make a profit on their business, wouldn't you?

Why is the farmer not allowed to make a profit on his land?

[eliphalet]

done, going nowhere.

[redneckrepairs]

eliphalet I agree the thread will not resolve the issue . Tho we dont charge on our land and wont , the attitudes shown by a few on the thread have convinced me i just as well post all ours . There is no point to allowing hunting when so many seem to see it as an entitlement . Colorado has plenty of public land so they can hunt it from now on . i personaly have had it and to any who i extended an invitation consider it canceled , ill explain on calls or pms as they come inn but yall wont be hunting on me anymore .

[White Horseradish]

On one hand, people should be able to do with their property as they see fit. On the other, this thread is a great answer to another thread which lamented the declining numbers of hunters.

Getting into hunting is a major PITA, as I have found out. Making it more expensive will not make for more hunters. Is there a solution? I don't know. All I know is that I can't go hunting in the only place where I know people willing to take me because I can't afford to pay.

[redneckrepairs]

White i dont have the answer either , before today could you have got down here you could have hunted any game for free . However read over the posts and answer honestly can you blame my decision to stop all public hunting on my ground ? I am not saying you pay for it , I am not saying the game is mine . I am saying you will no longer tresspass on me and if you are caught you will be charged , or killed if you wave a muzzle twards me . Its done and i do feel that strongly about it .

Edited to add :
I sincerely hope that all you " its the states game " folks will test land access other than on my ground , and hi hope they will be more patent with you than i . I frankly as a landowner have now had it and the line in the stand starts today ... due to some NO ONE hunts on me . I wont enable the few by allowing the many . Its my ground and i control it , you cannot bribe me to hunt it , you cannot force me to hunt it , and finaly you will stay off it no matter the means that takes . There have you landowner rights , and this thread to thank for it .

[eliphalet]

44% of state land is open space
Gazette, The (Colorado Springs), Apr 17, 2007 by BILL McKEOWN THE GAZETTE
Forty-four percent of Colorado's 66 million acres are protected from development, according to a new report about the status and trends of open space in the state.

The report by Colorado State University's Natural Resource Ecology Lab and Southpaw Consulting found 29.9 million acres in Colorado are protected by federal, state or local governments, private conservation organizations or conservation easements on private land.

That percentage of open space statewide -- essentially 44 percent of land in the state -- does not play out in El Paso County, despite federal ownership of the Air Force Academy and Fort Carson lands.

........................

Most Western states have million's of public acres.

It is States such as Texas where only 3% is public land that charging to hunt can really become much of a problem.

I don't think anyone is entitled to do anything on another's property, a misunderstanding guess.

Hunters in Colorado have plenty of public land to hunt.

Hunting IMO is almost, if not a heritage type of activity in this Nation I would like to see it remain a average guys activity and not one for the privileged.

It is not IMO an entitlement to use another's land for any reason, sorry that was misunderstood.

I am not wanting to pick on Texas here either. Texas, I think is/was the leader in chargeing to hunt for a number of reasons, economic among several others I feel sure. Heck, some of my ancestory was born in that state/republic but headed West in a covered wagon awhile back, so I am not anti Texas

[redneckrepairs]

edited for a bit while i collect my thoughts , many here are owed more than a knee jerk reaction .

[MCgunner]

Lease pricing in Texas is supply and demand. A lease will only go for what someone is willing to give for it. Stop blaming land owners and blame hunters. They're the ones driving up lease costs. You think I'm going to lease something for 10 bucks an acre when I can get 20? You're nuts! I'm going to get fair market value, not what you think is fair. If Exxon/Mobile offers me a corporate lease for twice that, by golly you think I'm going to turn it down on principle? You're nuts! Ranchers have to make money how they can.

I said it before, 51 percent of New Mexico is public land open to hunting. Can't afford a lease in Texas? Get an out of state license in New Mexico. The land is more beautiful and mulies are more fun to hunt anyway! Heck, I killed a 220 lbs buck out there and that wasn't a large one. There ain't two deer put together on my place that will weigh that dressed, LOL!

There's lots of public hunting in Texas, too, for dove, duck, goose, and the like. The deer hunting ain't the greatest, but I tell ya what, squirrel hunting in east Texas and duck hunting on the coast of Texas don't get a whole lot better anywhere on the planet.

[hopkin]

I don't see letting people hunt on my land any different to letting people take the honey from a natural hive. In both instances the creature is on my property and using my resources, although they also might use someone elses. While it's on my property, it's my choice how to deal with it.

If I don't have the right to charge people to shoot 'public' animals, do I have the right to shoot them myself? What about predators that roam? Can I not shoot a fox because it's not mine?

[Jimmy Newman]

I find a lot of this thread more than a little ridiculous.

This is hypothetical, since I do not personally own any hunting land. If I own some property, and I decide to let someone use it for ANY purpose, I can place contractual restrictions and/or conditions on that use (so long as the restrictions or conditions are legal). Therefore, if I state in a lease contract that you are going to pay me $10 per acre per year for the right to hunt dove and quail on my property, and that you are specifically prohibited from killing deer with the penalty being a $1000 fine and termination of the lease, that is perfectly legal (and ethical). If I state in the lease that you can hunt deer, but you and your guests have the right to kill no more than five deer total, subject to the same penalties, that's also perfectly legal (and ethical). If I state that you have the right to hunt deer but must pay a $200 fee per deer shot, that's also perfectly legal (and ethical). It's my land, I can make the conditions I want, and you have the right to agree to them or refuse them. If you agree to them, you are bound by them. If you refuse them, you don't get the lease.

I do belong to a hunting club (deer and duck) in East Texas in which I am a fourth-generation member. My great-grandfather helped found it in the 30's. It's a big property, but there are also a lot of members, and if every member shot whatever they wanted, the deer population would be decimated and the hunting would get pretty bad pretty fast. As a result, each member (and any of that member's guests) are limited to a certain number of deer per year, to the tune of several does/spikes and one "trophy buck." If you exceed the numbers, you pay a fine. This discourages overharvesting. These restrictions are reasonable and necessary. If everyone were free to just hunt however they wanted to, there wouldn't be anything left to hunt there.

One thing to note is that many of the places in Texas which are not leased, but are "pay to hunt" for a day or a weekend, are large properties, high-fenced to keep outside animals out and inside animals in, and stocked at heavy expense with nonnative game. A great deal of money is also spent managing said nonnative game. The business of these places is spending a lot of money on exotic game, then having hunters pay to come hunt said exotic game.

You can say you think that there should be plenty of land available to the public for hunting. Great, I don't disagree. You can say there should be places people should be able to hunt for free. Great, I don't disagree. However, I have no responsibility to open my property to anyone who wants to come hunt on it.

A part of the reason that most of the land in Texas is privately owned is that almost all of it has been historically productive or developable. As a result, all of it got claimed or purchased and used or developed. In places like Colorado that have a very high public land ratio, there are lots of big craggy mountain areas that are nice to look at but not really good for farming, ranching, developing as towns or cities, etc., so no one ever claimed them.

[skinewmexico]

I glanced at this, and knew it had to be about Texas. Too many pages to read though. High costs will cause this to be the last hunting generation in Texas though.

[redneck2]

High costs will cause this to be the last hunting generation in Texas though.No, because the land owners charge what the market will bear. If someone is willing to pay $5,000 a year to hunt, that's what they'll get. If no one is willing to pay, the price will drop.

As much as I don't like the idea of paying $5,000 a year to hunt, the landowner has no obligation to cut me a deal. I'm fortunate that I have private land I can hunt for free, but if not you have to pay the freight.

[skinewmexico]

No, because the land owners charge what the market will bear. If someone is willing to pay $5,000 a year to hunt, that's what they'll get. If no one is willing to pay, the price will drop.

That's only true if you ignore the fact that the majority of hunters start as kids, and high costs are keeping many kids from starting in Texas. Too easy to play select baseball. Every poll shows the total number of hunters dropping fast. I don't know how it is in Indiana though, maybe it's exploding with kids and guns. Since I don't live there, I will refrain from speculating.

[yesit'sloaded]

I wonder how much of this drop in the number of hunters is based more on our shift from an agrarian society to a service based one. It used to be that farming was a big employer in this country. With the shift from small human powered farms to mechanized "superfarms" it is like a small industrial revolution in the last 20 years. We used to grow corn, cotton, and raise cattle, but with the profit dropping to the point of it almost not being worth it to do it on such a small scale (about 200 acres total) compared to what we were making from hunting leases on our timber farm we stopped. The corn fields are now hay fields we run dove hunts on, while the cotton was turned to pasture and people now lease it for grazing land. I think I will be the last generation to have seen cows and cotton on our property. Hunting has gone from a way of life and nature's meat isle, to a hobby.

[Double Naught Spy]

That's only true if you ignore the fact that the majority of hunters start as kids, and high costs are keeping many kids from starting in Texas. Too easy to play select baseball. Every poll shows the total number of hunters dropping fast. I don't know how it is in Indiana though, maybe it's exploding with kids and guns. Since I don't live there, I will refrain from speculating.

Well then, if the market falls apart due to not enough demand, it will be a self correcting problem. That is the beauty of capitalism.

All this whining about not allowing folks to hunt on private property for free reminds me of the Sign Sign Everywhere a sign...what gives you the right to fence me out and fence mother nature in? Its called a land title.

[Wheeler44]

I think that the cost has a lot to do with the decline in hunting. Families do more together more now than in the past. I know that I couldn't afford to take my kids hunting at the (exorbitant) prices that the folks in Texas seem to be charging.

There is still a lot of public land in the area where I live but it is getting farther and farther away. Scouting an area before a hunt is an additional expense (both time and fuel). My son wants to hunt this year but our local gunshow is on opening weekend and he would rather spend the day selling stuff with dad (he's saving for a revolver) than go out on opening day. Maybe we'll hit late buck season.

[MCgunner]

There were not as many public hunting areas when I was growing up in the 60s as we have now. I don't think a city kid is going to find hunting regardless of era. I grew up in a rural community and knew people and found some small game and dove hunting by asking, but the two land owners on whose land I hunted only let me and a few kids they knew hunt on it. That wasn't for deer or anything, either.

I don't think things have changed all that much in Texas except the costs of leases. I remember when my grandpa got out of his lease in Leaky, Texas, big ranch in the hill country. He was POed. Price had gone up to $125 a gun, just ridiculous. LOL! That was a lot of money, then, though. Wages are roughly 6 times higher now days in the chemical plants where he worked. Lease prices have exceeded that by a bit. You won't find a lease like that one in Texas for $750 a gun, more like a couple of grand. So, yeah, it's gotten more expensive, but really it could be worse. We have a lot more public hunting now, at least in east Texas and along the coast for ducks and state wide for dove, than we had when I was a kid.

[redneckrepairs]

As a landowner this thread and some of the attitudes got me pretty sturred up . In fact i decided to post all our land as NO HUNTING . On reflection tho I am still posting all the ground , but will post it as Hunting by Written Permission ONLY . Now we still wont charge to hunt , but the free for all is over . Ill let some folks hunt some of the time . Folks who strongly feel its the states game and they have a right to shoot it need not apply at all . A few will still hunt on us , and occationaly someone new will get a slip , but all who just want to kill game , and all who show they think they " should " be able to hunt on us can just get the hell gone . No one will be charged a cent to hunt , but if its so much as i dont like how you are dressed you wont be hunting on us . If your one of the entitlement crowd well just deal with it .

[yesit'sloaded]

redneck around where is your land. I'm over by Lucedale.

[JWarren]

OK... interesting thread with a lot of good points.


It seems that the thread has a uniform understanding that private land is private land-- and that no one is entitled to make use of it except the landowner. Anyone given permission to hunt on it has received a gift or has paid some kind of compensation for that permission.

That's great. I truly wish more people were as rational as THR members.


So, I say this not to THR members. I am not even making a case. I thought I'd tell a short-ish story of how my family's land in MS became Posted.


This land has been in our family for literally around 200 years. Our family had been on this land years before Mississippi became a state at all (we came as Methodist missionaries to the Choctaw Indians.)

For years, people in this area had free-run on our property. It became common for a lot of people from as far as 30 or 40 miles would come into our community and onto our land to hunt.

Even though we didn't have any particular master-plan, we never intended people from outside of our community-- strangers if you will-- to come in and do as they please to our land.

Over the years even the strangers became to see a sense of "entitlement" to hunting on our land because they had done so for so long.

Never mind the fact that WE paid the taxes on the land every year. Never mind that WE paid to upkeep the roads.

Two events caused our land to be offically Posted in 1978.


First.


My grandfather drove up "Above the Dam." (there used to be a dam making a lake larger.) He came up to one of our lakes during Duck Season. The lake literally was COVERED with floating shotgun shells from the duck hunters. They had left-- and left the lake littered with thier empty hulls floating in the water. He spent two days scooping them out in a boat with a net-- in the dead winter. Never mind the trash that they would throw out on the road or where they parked.

Incidently, when we broke the artificial dam that had been put up years ago (we broke it to make more dry land for deer hunting.), we actually had strangers who never even asked to be on our land calling my father and screaming at him for "ruining their duck hunting."



Second.


Just prior to our Posting our land, my father did what he routinely did during deer season. He went to his favorite planted field (yes, we paid for and planted it). This particular one was great is he was running late because it didn't take as long to get to. Because of this, he hunted it often.

As he is sitting one day on his stand, he notices movement about 25 feet up a tree on the other side of the deer plot. As he scopes it, he realizes that someone ACTUALLY put up a crappy deerstand on the opposite side of Dad's own deer plot. What was worse is that if he fired, he would have fired directly AT my father in his deer stand!!!(Which was a free-standing -- obvious stand)


It gets better.


Dad yelled to the guy and told him to get out of the stand immediately-- and that he had his rifle trained on him-- so don't do anything threatening.

The guy left.

Immediately, Dad went and got an axe and tore the deerstand out of the tree. Later that night, it seems that the man went back-- only to discover his stand was torn down.

He actually had the nerve to call my father and curse him out for destroying the stand instead of allowing him to come back and get it down! As Dad informed him, he never offered to pay for the cost of planting the plot he was using-- and never considered my father's safety. He hung up on him.


Right after that event, Dad Posted our land.


But it wasn't over.


Because so many of these people felt entitled to our land, they felt that WE wronged THEM by preventing them from what was "rightfully" theirs to use.

We had gated and locked our road. Practically every day, we would find that someone had poured Crazy Glue in our lock. This was bad because there were other landowners that needed a key to the lock, and there was a couple companies that came in. It would not be possible to simply put another lock on until the other people had keys.

In the minds of those people wishing to come in, this was a way to FORCE use to unlock our gate-- even if it was temporary.


To combat this, my father finally bought several CASES of locks keyed just alike at considerable cost. Now, a lock could be replaced immediately.


But that did not prevent gluing the locks.


To add insult to injury, practically every time we would go in our property, we would find rotting, dead animals such as dogs and deer hung over our gate.


Calling the sheriff was practically a useless effort. It wasn't something they could devote manpower to, and not a thing that they would "stake out." We just had to deal with it.

That changed when my mother decided to take a day off and sit in the woods overlooking the gate with a thermos full of coffee and a 30-06.

Sometime around 11 AM, she watched a guy come up and glue our lock. In the age prior to cell phones, she held him at gunpoint until someone came by that she could send to call the sheriff.

We prosecuted this person and he ended up with a bit of Jail time. This news spread like fire and soon the instances became less frequent, and finally ended.


It took that-- and about 3 years of fighting-- for the RIGHT to Post OUR land.



So I not only have NO pity for anyone that thinks that they are entitled to use ANYONE'S land without expressed permission, I have ABSOLUTE distain for anyone that does such a thing.

And I hope anyone who suggests that we have a "responsibility" to let people on our land, or anyone who suggests that we are unethical for it, re-read the efforts we went through only to assert OUR claim to our own land.

If that doesn't convince them, they know where they can go.


Sadly, those that many would normally have no problems letting hunt on their lands had their shot blown in many cases by those that disrespect the landowner, trash the land, or kill indiscriminately. Yet, the LANDOWNER is the one that they blame for their misfortune-- because he is a stationary target. They should probably save some (99.9999%) of their anger for their own hunting buddies.



-- John

[M_Olson]

im in the "its their land, they can do pretty much whatever they want with it" camp. but, as far as leasing land killing hunting in texas, i can definitely see it happening. the people talking about the free market are right to an extent. the problem is that the lag time in pricing may well kill the sport. most young people cant afford to pay for a land lease, so these young people have a higher chance of never even starting to hunt. if they dont start when they are young, theres a higher chance they wont start when they get older. so the situation that is created, is a massive fluctuation that the market will not predict. at some point that "wall" between the older, more financially stable hunters and the younger hunters who cant afford to lease is going to be hit, and, imo, hunting as a major hobby will have a hard time bouncing back. this of course is not the only factor, but it is a major one. when you have a sport or hobby that is detiorating due to the internet and tv or w/e, making it harder to get into, especially at a young age, will be very detramental in the long run.

what can be done about it? honestly, im not sure. as i stated at the beginning of my post, whether we like it or not, private land is private land. no sense in whining about it. until a strong majority of land owners feelings or perceptions toward hunting change, we are going to continue down this path. likewise, until a strong majority of hunters attitudes (such as respect for property, etc.) change, land owners are going to continue down the same path. i suppose the best thing to do is to take individual responsibility for our own actions as land owners and hunters, try to educate others in proper respect for property, and my teacher just starting talking and i lost my train of thought :o anyway, i think you get the jist of it.