The thing that sticks in my craw about leasing land for hunting is that you are only leasing the land and not the animal. The animals or deer in this case are owned by the state and the state is you and I. We(Us) pay for the management and the protection of these animals yet we have no right to pursue them.

Each land owner who has a significant deer herd is the beneficiary of years of good game management. Paid for by the hunter. For the land owner to turn around and profit from this is the injustice.

Let us take one step further. Many of these land owners already get tax breaks through CAUV (Current Agricultural Use Valuation). To qualify for CAUV you must follow a strict set of rules. I would guess over 1/2 of the properties in Ohio are currently under CAUV.

This is not limited to hunting. Many of the streams in NE Ohio which are teaming with steelhead (a big thank you to the folks who buy fishing licenses) can no longer access these areas due to the increasing amount of leasing.

Did the Department of Wildlife spend YOUR money to increase deer and steelhead populations so the animals can be bottled up on private property then sold for profit? I think not.

I believe in landowner rights and the right to have and secure private property but I do not believe a person should benefit or profit from state owned game animals.

My solution. Any farmer who leases their land for hunting shall no longer qualify for CAUV. Additionally these leases need to be heavily taxed to pay back the state for the public monies used for the management of the deer herd.

Finally, before you bust my chops about my opinion. I am a landowner.

I don't care who is to blame, this is a huge contributor to the end of hunting.

One who leases property is just as stupid as those who rent houses. Why lease property when you can own your own and there are millions of federaly owned land you can hunt for (get this) free!! Say you spend $250 a year on your part of a large property lease--If you take a 200 pound deer your lease cost,alone, per pound is 8 dollars a pound--are you dumb or what?? My personal favorite is when lease hunters tell the surounding landowners they should participate in deer management practices and only shoot 8 points or bigger! I wonder if they realize just how greedy and ignorant they sound or if they even care.

The entire fault lies with the hunter for this shift in the outdoor industry. With the booming value of deer and their antlers, why wouldn't a landowner profit from good management on both his part and the efforts of the state in which his land lies. The issue here is that people no longer are happy with just a deer, now it has to be a deer of at least X inches. Let us recall the foundation on which the current game populations were recovered. It is the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. This link lists the seven sisters of this model and should be reviewed by all contributing to this conversation or concerened with the well-being of our wildlife and wild places
http://www.rmef.org/Hunting/HuntersConservation/Model.htm

The first and second sister on the aforementioned website are of the utmost importance to this issue. The first is that the wildlife is in the Public Trust, belonging to the citizens and managed by the goverment for all's benefit (at the state level but that's another topic) and secondly the Prohibition of the Commerce of Wildlife. Any conservation minded hunter has heard of the population erradications that took place in the 1800's when market hunting was common practice. It has taken us over 100 years to recover most game populations to a level prior to this devastation. Some will never recover such as the Bison. The selling of a head is even worse, at least during the market hunts the meat was the utmost consern. We are shifting back to a mentality that nearly destroyed what we loved long before we were around. Do not let history repeat itself.
My recomendation is restrict the sale of antlers, shed or mounts. Anything we can do to reduce the monetary value of a trophy and return to the ideals of this model. Hunting is a privelage that should be availible to any law abiding citizen of the state in which they live. These same ideals tie in with many issues in the outdoor world, trophy poaching is driven by a dollar amount that can be obtained from a head. Remove the value, remove the motivation to poach.
The argument of leases being "just the way it is" is an excuse on the part of the hunters who maybe don't have the time to scout that they would like, one poster mentioned working extra hours to pay for the lease, perhaps those hours should be spent investigating public land options. Isn't that the point of hunting and fishing, be able to head outside to enjoy the great outdoors. The reason a farmer is leasing his land is because there is a value for the size of deer on his property. As a whole we need to change where we place our values on the outdoor experience. My final question for all to consider is, "Would you pay for a lease if you could only shoot a doe? or would you go to public land?"

There is no way that I can blame a farmer or rancher for trying to earn an extra buck, they have bills just like the rest of us. On the other hand, leasing has turned hunting in to more of a business than anything. Just seems like money means more than a friend or good neighbor to some folks these days.

I understand the farmer's/landowner's point of view. But here in Missouri it is getting pretty expensive, and I feel for the hunters. I'm fortunate enough to be one of the few Mo hunters left hunting w/ just "permission" on private property. But I'm not ignorant to the fact that my days are numbered, either. One big problem I have is tresspassing. Last year, either due to the economy, lack of access, or just plain coincidence, the tresspassing on the land I hunt was horrible.

The market will bear what the market will bear. If I owned land and didn't hunt, I'd probably lease it too.

But....just remember that politicians court groups that hold enough members to remain relevant come November and if hunter numbers dwindle farther and farther due to leasing (and thus a lack of opportunity) then hunters may eventually become a group that will hold little relevance in the politics of America.

Not a good argument buckhunter!
You're being small minded!
Not trying to be mean or tacky, but I've already been through this with one fellow on here.
I can't help where the deer go. It's not my responsibility to keep the deer out; nor IN!
I don't tell the deer, do or don't cross the fence. They are just dumb animals!
Dumb animal doesn't mean they aren't intelligent! It means they have no sense of right, wrong, moral, immoral, life, death; they have no soul! From birth to death, it's eat, survive, drink, survive, propagate, survive.
Humans, on the other hand, have the mental power to deduce such ideals.
Humans have also trespassed on other humans property, gotten hurt, sued said "landowner". "Landowner" loses family farm. I won't let folks hunt either!

I currently have four different pieces of private property to hunt besides my own. Two of them, the gentleman called ME and asked me if I would like to hunt them! YEAH!!! Not much cover but great hunting!

I don't like leases either, but I understand why and how come!

Bubba

Most people around where I live that complain about leases are only jealous. Jealous of the quality deer people are killing on the leases. They will complain that they stole "their" hunting spot and now have no where to hunt yet there are multiple public access hunting areas. I have also had landowners who lease property tell me that they didn't realize how many people hunted their land until they lease it because hardly anyone had permission. Meaning they were trespassing. If you think that the leasing of land is the head of all our problems as hunters you are sadly mistaken. As a landowner you must worry about hunters filing lawsuits if they are hurt on your land, you have to worry about them tearing up your property with ATVs or UTVs, or leaving their trash laying around. As a landowner if you try to hunt your own land and have nice deer around sometimes you spend more time chasing off tresspassers. Therefore if you can make a few dollars by leasing the land and set guidelines for them to follow within that lease you could be saving yourself some major headaches and making a few dollars in the process. If you really want to preserve hunting for the future introduce the future to hunting. Teach a kid good hunting ethics. These problems are small compared to the amount of youth that don't have a mentor to introduce them to the outdoors.

"And that kind of sucks."

Just "kind of"????

Leases are coming to PA as well, sure we had a few "Game Preserve" type places where you could pay to shoot about anything that walks or flies, but just this year I saw an ad for hunting land leases in central PA. It's gonna be public land or quit hunting pretty soon around here, all the local spots I've hunted for years are either being built on, strip mined, posted, or some combination thereof. I have state forest land I can hunt on, but there's hardly anything on it because the hunters who used to be spread out over a large area are now all hunting there too because they don't have any other options.

Buckhunter,
Excellent points indeed, but consider:

[1] Yes we all pay for game management and the game belongs to us all, but the landowner still controls something highly valuable: access. It could be argued that that is what they're making money on.
[2] Many, many leases are quite affordable. I know a lot of people who pay only a few hundred dollars to hunt hundreds of acres. If you remove tax breaks or tax landowners to the point where they can't make any money by letting someone hunt their land, many of them will simply deny access completely--further limiting the amount of land open to hunters and increasing pressure on public areas.

I haven't had to deal with the leasing of land, but i've heard plenty of stories and have formed my own opinion on the topic based on things i've heard and read. Though it is a persons right to do what they will with their land, it is sad to see it happen. It definitely limits where people can hunt, and it's increasingly becoming a factor in why hunting is in a decline in many places as people just don't have a place to go that is near by and can't devote the time or the money to go to places or to pay to hunt. I've seen the posting of land as a huge limiting factor in my area, and though it isn't the same it is a problem that is similar because the lack of land to hunt on is becoming an increasing problem. As far as I'm concerned I would like to see states ensure the ability of people to hunt, fish and recreate int he outdoors by getting tracts of lands in varying sizes and manageing them for hunting,fishing, and other recreational activities. Eventually on this track there won't be many places for people to hunt and fish, or even get access to places just to hike, atv, canoe, etc... as it's all sold off and posted, or leased out to individuals.

Kinda hard to argue with Buckhunter, he brings some massive points to the table. I've never been against leasing property for hunting, we had a property we leased when i was growing up in south texas in the 90's for $250 a year, yeah, very very very very cheap, awesome hunting. What has irked me more than anything when it comes to leasing property is when you take someone hunting with you on a piece of private property that you have free permission to hunt, that you spent the time researching and asking around until you found the right spot, then the person you took, leased it out from under you and won't let you even go with them. On that note, be careful when you hunt with any of the committee members from large wildlife conservation organizations in the Colorado Springs area.

The problem, in my opinion, is not that leasing is occuring. It is the prices in my opinion that are outrageous. I pay $18 for a state license, 18 for archer, and another 18 for big game. After I pay the state and such, which is not the problem, hunting lease's are going for over $1500 in my area. Being a Sgt in the Marines, I just can't afford that without taking a personal loan from the bank. That amounts to nearly $400 dollars a deer, not including what I pay for processing. That's pretty expensive meat. My issue is not with leasing, its with the pricing of leases.

However, leasing does offer the ability to have prime hunting land to hunt and if I could offord to throw away that amount of money to hunt good land with great deer, I guess I would too.

deffinatly agree with Buckhunter about laws being changed so landowners would not be able to claim CAUV tax breaks if they're raking in lease money on top of the federal money for not farming the ground. That's double dipping and should be illegal.

It seems the privatization of the states deer herds is the biggest issue. When all the best private property deer ground is being leased or managed for trophy deer, the states management plan has no effect.And thats the way it is going to stay.I cash rent out my rowcrop on my farm, so I am not getting any government check, but lease the hunting rights to several other farms to guide hunters that want to hunt unpressured deer with a chance for a real wallhanger. My state includes a doe tag with the anysex tag so usually the hunters all take a doe also. I am not selling the states deer, I am selling the opportunity to hunt a well managed private farm. Most of the hunters that come here are hard working average guys that save up all year to spend their 1 week of vacation time, where they have a chance at a good buck.If you are not happy with your hunting opportunity then you need to do something about it, or be happy hunting the states deer on public land if you dont believe you should have to pay for it.

In this day and age we live in I don't blame land owners or hunters for leasing land. Leasing is just another step in the evolution (and ultimate demise) of hunting. Most hunters can't afford to lease land. As more land is leased to fewer hunters many hunters will give up hunting. Some will believe that they were forced to quit by the wealthy. Some of these ex-hunters will develop negative feelings about hunting. It's human nature.(If I can't hunt why should I support your right to hunt?)The anti-hunters will grow stronger as our numbers shrink. They will win by default. Most hunters are willing to share their knowledge and experience with others but few are willing to share their happy hunting grounds. What good will leasing be when we will no longer have the right to hunt.

Obviously I would rather not have to pay for a lease to hunt deer, but as was mentioned in the blog, this is a reality today and very often something that farmers/landowners need to do keep their property. Viewing the upside, this is something that becomes easier when you bring in a group of friends to share the financial load, folks who perhaps share a common commitment to hunting ethics and game management. Having a lease also requires cultivating and maintaining a good relationship with the landowner, which helps to foster a long-term relationship. Bottom line is access to property for hunting is a thing of value, and the market will dictate the price.

I own land in Texas that has pretty good deer hunting. My three sons and I hunt it pretty seriously when we have the time to do it. I have let relatives come in and hunt on us with permission. The problem as I see this, is that pretty soon the distant relative brings someone else with him and before long his friends are the ones hunting on us and not the relative. As a result, after that happened and them also giving the game warden trouble, none of them are allowed to hunt on us now. That's unfortunate, but he brought it on himself for bringing friends other than his son and grandson to hunt on us. Permission to hunt means only permission to hunt for those that the person asks to hunt.

While we love to hunt, my son and I are looking into putting up deer stands and everything to go along with it to allow for paid three day to week long deer hunts. I have no interest whatsoever in leasing land for deer hunting. I've seen too many cases where people who did, didn't get paid their full lease or they caused problems with how they used the land that they had leased for deer hunting. In this day and time, it takes everything you can do to be able to make a living running a ranch besides just running cattle. Anyone who has good deer hunting and isn't using that as part as his ranches income is wasting a resource that is available to them.

Our deer population has increased from what it was 30 years ago when I started deer hunting. The best thing that happened to Texas pandhandle deer hunting where I live is that gun season went from 10 days to 2 months. With a 10 day season, you just about shot the first deer that you saw as deer weren't very plentiful. With the 2 month season, 3 if you include archery season, you can pass up bucks that you would normally have taken. Other than that I don't see that the Texas Parks and Wildlife is doing a lot to manage game. If anyone is doing it, it's the landowners whether on purpose or as a side benefit to their crop production. About all we see here as a result of governmental help is the game warden and his efforts in busting poachers. By the way, in Texas it's a felony to trespass. It's takes a pretty brave or pretty stupid poacher to trespass to take a deer if you have the chance of winding up with a felony on your record. Convicted felons give up the right to own firearms which pretty well takes away their hunting rights.

I've read all the posts and would like to combine the comments of Buckhunter, Ed Stores it, and PA Hunter. That is not to say everyone else did not makes some good points. I simply think that the three listed above summed up most of the general comments and feelings.
I also hunt leased property. It's not real big (500 acres) and about 10 of us hunt it and share the cost ($200/year). We get a few nice deer each year and rarely are we all there at the same time because our state's hunting season is so long (Sept. to Jan if you bowhunt).
I also am fortunate to have public land nearby I can hunt. It is managed by the state and you have to obtain a free permit to hunt there. I believe the manager told me there were 180 permits issued last year however once again because of the long season and hunter's work schedules, one rarely sees another hunter. Every now and then you may see an inconsiderate soul wandering around and interfering with other persons who are hunting, but it is the exception rather than the rule.
I can see the biggest problems in states with little public land and short hunting seasons (2 weeks or so).
In my state private land has to be posted in a prescribed manner or it's impossible to have someone cited for tresspassing. We experienced this on an old lease that we used to have. We reported a tresspasser and the Fish & Wildlife guy came out and simply told the guy he had to exit the property. The F&W guy told us he couldn't issue a ticket because our lease was not properly posted with signs. He did inform us about how it was to be done.
The potential backlash or problem as I see it will be states with little or no public lands. This was coverd in the three examples mentioned above. When local hunters have nowhere to hunt because A.) they can't afford a lease, or B.) They can't afford the time off/out of state license fees to travel to another state to hunt, they will sooner or later get together, form a grassroots group and start talking to state legislators. Then it may become political & messy. Remember, you may lease/own land in another state, but you can't vote there unless you are a resident.
It would be a simple fix if all our great states would do what they have to do to acquire public land in at least strategic areas to ensure hunting opportunities for everyone; both the lessor, and the hunter who for whatever reason at that particular stage in his/her life can't afford a lease. That would be the best way to insure the continuity of hunting in our nation.

Im glad I own my own land.

I don't hunt deer but I have a lot of friends who do. There are a lot of good arguments on all sides of this issue. I really have to agree with Buckhunter. Here in central Illinois most of the land owners are not poor farmers trying to make ends meet. Hardly. Some of them get government payments as high as $300,000 per year. That is not a typo. This is sheer greed. The rich eventually spoil everything...not just hunting. They over pay to fish, hunt, travel to exotic places, collect antique guns, decoys, art. I could go on all night. Their willingness to over pay just to have the best of everything ruins it for the rest of us. I wish I owned about 300 acres of prime hunting ground. The only hunters I would allow to hunt (for free) were the ones I liked and were true sportsmen.

I don't like leasing land. I also don't like speed limits, taxes or cats.

Leasing land is a reality. Timber companies in Arkansas started leasing land 20-25 years ago for a host of reasons: (1) money, they figured out people would pay to lease land, (2) liabilities, (a)if land is leased, someone is legally responsible for what happens on the property so the timber companies have a buffer between them and idiots who get hurt doing something stupid (b) lease holders are required to hold insurance against fire loss (3) management, I understand International Paper used to state in lease agreements hunters were to shoot any hogs found on IP property due to the damage hogs do to the "crop".

Two results of these policies: (1) Lease holders close off property to prevent others from accessing what they paid for. (2) Public opinion caused the AGFC to start buying land for public hunting land; AND charging hunters for access. (Think they learned something from the timber companies?)

The biggest complaint I have with leasing land is when someone leases land, does trophy management for a period and really improves the deer herd, then the landowner raises the price on the lease because now the lease is much more valuable!

Mr. Bestul is perfectly right: independent agri-business owners just want a viable business, which is why the free market deer-lease system works so well in Texas. We lease our land like so many other cattle raisers in Texas because the capital earned from deer leasing equals or surpasses our original endeavor of cattleraising. That said, I'd rather manage a cow herd than a group of deer hunters, but leasing is our reality when the USDA has done everything it can for corporate agri-business at the expense of small, independent producers (see Joel Salatin's manifesto). Therefore, here's a suggestion to those who say they can't afford to pay (I am the deer lease manager for my family's 2,000 South Texas CATTLE ranch): bring skilled labor in lieu of cash. You don't have to be a large-animal veterinarian, either. Hunters have skilled labor to offer -- how about offering your butchering skills as a deer hunter to process out a few beef carcasses so the rancher could direct-market beef? A good butcher is valuable and hard to find (and pay for) for us small beef producers. Then help the rancher move sell some of that beef by word of mouth. If it worked, it would certainly be worth a year's lease to an outfit like ours. Guys offer to drive tractors all the time. Seriously? If you think that's all you have to offer, then we'd rather just have your cash. You're not getting any discounts for offering to drive tractors. That's unskilled labor (on a ranch), and worth very little. Try asking landowners what they REALLY need to be a viable business, other than capital from deer leasing. Any of y'all with value-added ideas that could help small, independent agricultural producers make some money could be in a hunting partnership for a long, long time...

I am part of a hunting club, so I guess you can say I lease land. I also enjoy hunting on private land when I get a chance. But to answer the question and to go along with the post, I would say a fair price for hunting land needs two things. A willing buyer or lessee and a motivated seller or lessor. If you have both then the price is what each one agrees to. It will vary across the country as different areas such as in Texas and Kansas would have higher prices because of better quality deer than say Florida.

jbird,
I apologize for not being more clear, selling antlers isn't the sole issue. It is the value that we as hunters have placed on shooting a big deer. The reason that wildlife is in the place it is today and 180 inch whitetail is a real possibility was the banning of for profit harvest. We are swinging back that way and a lease is just a small peice of this as is antler sale, indeed you can blame capitalism but the original practice of banning commercial harvest removed a monetary value of a wildlife species and that is a major component what lead to the population rebounds. Do we really want to return to a time when you see an animal and dollar signs pop in your head. When discussing a lease price I would assume the trophy potential is always a factor in price. I am arguing that this mentality is the root of the problem

It's all going to blow up on the landowners sooner than later. The point of leasing land is to get somewhat exclusive, uncrowded access to the land. The small amount of hunters paying to lease that land can't possibly keep the population in check. Who knows how this will work out. Not favorably is my guess.

Silverback you are right it is about enjoying the outdoors. But calling your fellow hunters YAHOOS because of a few bad apples isn't the way to go if we wish to preserve our sport. As I have read in some of the other comments so far some YAHOOS lease land too. Here in NE Pa. public land is crowed and because of that tempers do flair but most of the time hunters respect each other.

PA Deer Hunter - Right on the nose. I fully agree that there are many, many more gentlemen than YAHOOS. My point was more to the fact that if I want to spend my HARD earned money to maximize my experience in the woods, don't blame it on us leasers. I was pushed to lease by some guys who just don't give a crap. It's like buying a car, sometimes you pay more for a better experience, but of course that old clunk "should" get you down the road. BTW, I am all for "ALL" types of hunting (gun, bow, rifle, crossbow, lasers and bowie knife if you want) as long as we can play nicely toghter.

I am lucky enough to have a friend who allows 2+ people to hunt his land; myself, his step brother, and anyone his step brother brings with him. I have never asked to bring anyone nor assumed to bring anyone. I have offered time and time again that if he needs any help to just give a holler. His land is surrounded on 3 sides by lease (and I believe across the road is lease also) and I would never jump the fence and hunt that leased property without permission. I am indeed lucky and know it and don't ant to jepordize my place, public land here in TX is like finding diamonds in your bathtub, and public land that allows modern firearms for white-tails is even rarer.

Mike, when you actually own land and have to make decisions, maybe somone will care what you think.

Hank111 as usuall your right on target. The states need to do more. I don't own land but I agree private land is just that. But yor last sentence made me think. I understand in your area their are few deer and you are doing what you can to help. But near where I live their is a land owner who feeds the deer pulling them off poblic land. His land is posted no hunting I don't think he hunts either. My question is do you think anything could be done about this. also I was thinking should he be held accountable if their are more deer-car accidents in this area.

Thanks Hank111

I live and hunt in Central Mississippi, in this state we are fortunate to have vast tracts of National Forest Land and Wildlife Management Areas operated by the state.
That being said, most of the hunters I know either own, llease or belong to a club that either owns or leases the land. I am 64 yr old and for the last 35 years I
have either paid club dues or paid a landowner for hunting access, along with some days spent on public land. I have no problem with leases for hunting, what else in this life that is worth having is FREE.