Sad times for hunting

[mgf]

Something I should add about the National Forest where we go just south of Bloomington, Indiana.

We used to go there a lot when I was self employed and could schedule trips during the week (Mon.-Fri.)

We've run into some real nuts on the weekends. My wife is usually with me. She carries a gun and has the dog but I still don't like leaving her in camp while I hunt. Not with those people around.

If I went alone, I wouldn't want to leave my camp unattended.

Now that I work Mon. through Fri. I mostly just don't go.

[tarponnut]

Where I hunt in Florida land is $12,000-30,000
an acre! It's absurd. I've established some good relationships with landowners over the years but land changes hands and other factors will affect that.

I'm saving for land elsewhere for when I retire, young.
When I taught school in rural Iowa, I had too many farms to hunt and at no charge. The only stipulation was that I HAD to shoot deer. I miss that.

[BAK]

Yup, Back in the 60's when I started this I hunted roughly 2000 acres of adjoining land and did so ALONE.  Today I share 200 with my nephew and the surrounding land is full of lessees.  

As far as I have scene, I am the only one bow hunting with a BOW.

[mgf]

In the 60's when I started hunting it was small game (mostly shotgun) hunting with my father, uncle and cousin.

My father and uncle would pick a direction/area. We would drive until we found a place that looked like it would hold bunnies and/or birds and knock on the door.

Not everybody said yes but many (maybe most) did.

As I said though, I still have a MUCH easier time finding a place to squirrel hunt than deer hunt. I've got a neighbor who own a GREAT patch of squirrel woods. He lets me hunt until deer season opens. Actually I usually stop well before deer season opens so they don't blame me if their hunting isn't so good.

The land owners I'm talking about will let me use the property but they aren't going to share the deer. LOL

[mgf]

Sorry, I feel like I'm taking over the thread but it's a subject that almost always on my mind.

A couple of years ago I decided, once again, to just give up deer hunting. Keep in mind my deer hunting usually involves a lot of practice shooting, getting gear together and then hunting for a place to hunt...and sitting in the back yard never seeing deer.

Of course I get on the net and read all about the great hunting and it all gets pretty depressing. LOL you know how some people get depressed during the holidays? That's me during the deer season.

Anyway, I decided to give it up and focus a little more on fishing. I've got a lot of pretty decent fishing opportunities around here and I don't have to beg.

Last year I never took my bow into the woods. I fished late into the fall/early winter and did really well.

This year I somehow got the hunting bug in a big way but I still don't have anyplace to hunt...although I did luck out and actually get one on my couple of acres.

Funny, that was about a month ago and I haven't seen a deer here since.

Sorry for the rambling/whining.

[YosemiteSam]

Read an article last night by Ted Kerasote discussing how we hunters are, most often, our own worst enemies.  The article is in David Petersen's book, BLOODSPORT, which I am enjoying... sort of...  Very somber.  I have met VERY few people over the years who I would enjoy hunting with.  Our values are just too different.  And I do my best to avoid other hunters when I'm out.  I suspect many landowners feel the same.

By the way, maybe it's a CA thing, but I have been told that although you CAN sue a landowner for damages if you're injured on his/her property, the courts will not award anything unless there is obvious negligence.  Basically, in a legal sense, the hunter assumes all the risk if (and this is key) it is NOT a commercial lease.  So if the access is free, the hunter bears most of the risk.  But if you pay for access, then the landowner assumes some risk.  I think this has a negligible effect on public access to private property but it certainly keeps frivolous lawsuits to a minimum.  Consult your trusted attorney to verify -- I'm not an attorney.

[jonsimoneau]

I've never had access to much private land for free. Killed most of my deer on badly over hunted public land. This year I killed my buck on 10 acres of timber that 3 other people hunt and we still have to pay for it. I got in on a lease in a better area but I can only get there for a week or so during my vacation. So I adjust my expectations when hunting the public land near home (most of the time) and I go enjoy better hunting during my vacation. I've got access to 2 other private land areas but the amount of timber between the 2 combined is less than 5 acres. It's way past supply and demand. I don't foresee it getting any better and with the dwindling deer numbers in many areas it's going to really "separate the men from the boys."  As it is now I don't see a single deer on 75 percent of my hunts. But it's been that way where I live for a long time now so I'm used to it. I hate to say this but overall I don't think the future of Bowhunting is all that bright. At least not for the average guy. It'll be here in our lifetimes but the only long-term solution to having a place to hunt for yourself, your children and your grandchildren is to buy a large enough piece of land to facilitate that. Of course not everyone can do that.

[mgf]

Regarding liability...It's not exactly the same thing but I was a scuba diving instructor for a long time.

I did carry insurance but it was cheap. I was required o have clients read and sign waivers which, as I understand it, do hold up in court.

I'm not a lawyer but legal risk management was part of the whole thing so this comes from the training that I received...

There's no iron clad protection from liability for "damages directly resultant" from a failure to provide a "duty of care".

The key phrases are in quotation marks. The relevant questions in a law suit are Is there a duty of care? and are there damages caused by a failure to provide that duty of care.

What "duty of care" is a hunter reasonably expecting from a landowner?

Here is a big problem. In the case of a suit, you may win. But it could still cost you so much that you lose. It generally cost a LOT of money to be in court.

My state (and maybe most others?) have laws on the books that are meant to protect land owners who permit their land to be used for recreational purposes.

I don't know how much protection they really offer but the intent of those laws are to encourage land owners to let folks hunt and fish on their lands.

[mgf]

Another key aspect is the idea that the duty of care provider is judged in relation to the "reasonably prudent person"...or reasonably prudent scuba instructor or reasonably prudent land owner.

In theory, you are not legally expected or required to foresee and prevent anything and everything.

If a hunter takes a swan dive out of his own tree stand that he placed in your tree, his injuries/damages are NOT a result of your failure to provide the duty of care of a reasonably prudent land owner.

[Zbone]

I too had thousands of acers to hunt as a kid and can't step foot on them now...

Greed has taken over the hunting heitage...

Said this years ago and will stand by it to this day, "CANCEROUS LEASES will be the DEMISE of hunting as we've known it"...

Personally have never lease and will go to my grave knowing I never did so...

Kills me when I read here on this site and others SHOPPING for or selling a lease...


People won't stand together to fight it and money and greed will prevail for the wealthy... Get used to European style hunting in the future...

[Kevin Dill]

mgf...

I follow your thinking on this. But as a landowner I can assure you many landowners do not feel protected by those laws; nor do those laws prevent an individual from hiring a hungry lawyer and filing a lawsuit. Since the state doesn't send it's own hungry lawyer out to defend the landowner, he's left to deal with whatever cost and hassle arises. This wasn't too great of a risk many years ago, but now? Turn on your television and you'll be hard-pressed not to see 3 or 4 ads every few hours from attorneys pandering to people. "Have you been injured due to the carelessness of another person? Have you lost your job or incurred serious medical expenses? You may be entitled to compensation! Our team of experienced...."

It's ridiculous but we have become so litigious that it's easier for people to say "NO" and just eliminate the risk...whether it exists or not.

Some guy falls out of a tree and on the way down he knows the landowner isn't at fault. He dies. The landowner knows he didn't cause it. The dead hunter's wife knows it was only an accident. But she's facing a very uncertain future and is advised to file suit. "The landowner's insurance company will pay, even if they don't have to. They'll want to settle this and move on. Litigation and trials are expensive. You're practically guaranteed some amount of money, and you're not hurting the landowner at all".

[Ray Hammond]

Michael,

land values are relative...when it only cost 150 bucks an acre I only made 300 bucks a week....it's still the same thing....

That's not the issue.....there was 150 million people here when I started hunting....there's 320 million here now.....

and there are a LOT more axx-xxles

[Bigriver]

Guess Im different. I have hunted lousy public land and marginal private land for almost 40 years. I came close to giving up deer hunting here, then I fell into a lease with a few friends.

The owner has a hard time paying his taxes on the land, which has been in his family for decades.  He is a poor boy, just like me. Its the only way he can keep the place in his family. Works out well for all of us. I bet there are a hole lot of people in the same situation.

I have to scrape up the money and give up a few things to pay the fee, but it is so worth it, for me.Guess that makes me greedy. It could be said there are too many free loaders that want land to hunt for free. It cuts both ways.

The guy should be able to do with his land as he sees fit. If  he didnt get the lease money, the property would probably end up a subdivision, who does that help? Certainly not any hunters.

It is not as cut and dry as people think, that is what makes it such a difficult issue.

[Zwickey-Fever]

Okay, here is another point that I failed to mention in my earlier post. My wife's grandfather owns a small farm in Hancock County Illinois, 280 acres. A few years back he was approached by a outfitter to lease his land. He took the outfitter up on the offer but said that he did not want to come out his house and see a hunter in blaze orange, not leave any gates open and respect his land. Come hunting season he starts missing cows immediately because of two gates left open. He had to round up his cows twice. Then comes the Illinois firearm season and there up in a tree about 125 yards away was a hunter in blaze orange. He called the outfitter up and told him to get the guy out of there and do not hang anymore stands that close to his home. Then one day he took a ride to the back end of his property to where he found huge ruts left by for wheeler or UTV. Needless to say that he had enough.

[mgf]

Originally posted by Ray Hammond:
Michael,

land values are relative...when it only cost 150 bucks an acre I only made 300 bucks a week....it's still the same thing....

That's not the issue.....there was 150 million people here when I started hunting....there's 320 million here now.....

and there are a LOT more axx-xxles

I don't think you find land around for much under 3,000/acre and some is much more. I sure don't make twice that in a week.

The cost of everything has gone up but I earn less than I did 20 years ago.

My wife and I were looking at a 16 acre piece this past summer. They were asking $45,000.

I might have been able to buy it but that's a lot of money to spend for a small piece to hunt.

To try to build and live on it, I'd be jumping into $100,000 in debt.

I'm 57 years old, my earnings are dropping like a rock and I currently live in a home that I've paid off.

Assuming a bank would even go along it just seemed like too much to take on at my age and current station in life.

In many areas of the country hunting is really becoming a game for the wealthy...well wealthier than me anyway.

[thumper-tx]

It is complicated. Most here tout the free enterprise system and  that is what this is. The landowner has every right to use any legal means to make some money, pay his taxes, pay his liability insurance, and feed his family. Most support this until it impacts their lifestyle. The landowner does not owe anyone a free place to hunt.  

Yes hunting has changed a lot in the last 75 years but it changed a lot in the 75 years before that. It will keep changing, that seems a given.
We as hunters will have to adapt and evolve or eventually society will stop it all.

[mgf]

I'm all in favor of free enterprise and a land owners should have the right to use their land as they see fit.

That doesn't change the fact that society changes over time and not always for the better.

[mgf]

A couple of years ago I went shopping for a lease. I don't remember the exact numbers but what I found was around $2500 for a farm that had a pretty small woodlot.

With some planning I could come up with $2500. After thinking long and hard I decided that it was more than a couple of deer (if that little wood lot is a good one) was worth to me. Especially for that kind of hunting...no room to move to go after the deer...just put up a stand or two, sit and hope for the best.

I know it isn't the same everywhere in the country. I live "out in the country" but I'm not far from a bunch of big cities...Chicago, Indy etc. There is a lot of money chasing a few deer.

I bought a new boat motor instead.

[YosemiteSam]

Originally posted by mgf:
...no room to move to go after the deer...just put up a stand or two, sit and hope for the best.

.

Somewhat thankfully, I hunt wilderness areas for just that reason.  I've hunted small plots of private land before & it just doesn't feel right to me.  100 acres just isn't enough room to roam.  Having constrictive boundaries and audible sounds of civilization kind of robs the wildness out of the experience for me.  Feels more like farming than hunting.

In my younger days, a buddy and I trespassed on a 30,000+ acre working cattle ranch.  That wasn't too bad -- plenty of room there.  But upon spotting the cowboys on horseback heading our direction, we suddenly became more like prey than predators.  We managed to stay out of sight & I don't think they were aware of us at all.  Good stuff for stories now but not something I'm willing to try again anytime soon.  At least in the wilderness areas, I can roam without really having to worry about my own neck.

[JohnV]

I really don't get all this "there is nowhere to hunt" mentality.  When I first started hunting in the 1970's, there were very few deer to hunt in many states.  If you wanted to hunt bad enough you got in your car and drove hours to where there were deer that could be hunted.  Not very many are willing to do that today.  If the hunting stinks where you live, look elsewhere!