Hunt Quietly Podcast 84: Q & A

[Elky Welky]

A requirement for access is respect, dignity and fortitude. Many people lack those qualities by characterising people they do not know, have never met, may be in a completely different situation and have the above mentioned qualities as lazy rich guys. The blanket statements thrown out in this and other threads decrying the morality of landowners who either lease or charge a trespass fee, outfitters/guides who provide public service, hunters who use the services of said guides/outfitters are knowingly causing division rather than understanding. I have been in the business for 35 years and seen more abuse than most anyone but focusing on the problem children while ignoring the well behaved leads to a poor ending for all.

I use my name in my profile because I do not shrink from my opinions and statements.

Unfortunately for you, Joseph, many of the people on this thread remember a time when more landowners granted permission, and public wildlife wasn't seen as another avenue of profit for a private landowner. This was largely because the working ranches were still owned by local families and there were simply better relationships between them and the hunters. When (largely absentee) Big Money came along and started buying up the land, they realized they could monetize these public resources to supplement the ranch income, and leasing and outfitting increased substantially. The Big Money folks have no interest in local traditions or values, and the only goal is to make more money. As a result, the public lost the access to the public resource. Add the influx of more and more hunters leaving their home states to hunt in other states and expecting results, in-turn driving up the demand and the value, and its been a recipe for disaster.

And it goes both ways: nobody is better at ruining their opportunities than public hunters. I don't know how many ranchers I've talked to in MT who know a guy who knows a guy that littered on their property once and left a fence open, and because of that, they no longer allow access. Hunters like this are few and far between and those incidents are actually pretty rare. But that reputation is deeply ingrained, and sometimes even earned.

So I whole-heartedly agree: focusing on the problem children and not supporting the well behaved only makes the problems worse. Also, that's a cool story about that woman, good work!

 

[Firedude]

I have never turned anyone down who has asked to hunt on my farm. I might start now though.

There's definitely a reason for that trend. A lot of land is getting shut off because of us. I remember the tail end of the days when if you knocked on a farm door and asked to hunt they asked if you had friends that could come shoot more! Elk eat a lot of hay. We'd shoot them on the edge of the field and even pack guts out. I've been surprised lately how many ranches are sold to people from California that happily let me walk their ditchbanks and fence lines for pheasant. Most of the time they sit on the back porch and watch me go out there then ask to see it. Hunting is a tradition they are unfamiliar with so it's intriguing to them to see it done. One sat with me in a duck blind just to watch. He had no desire to shoot one but just wanted to see what I was doing. I gave him a couple breasts and told him how to cook them. He told me later he can see why I like going. I feel like that's a good way to create advocates. They may not hunt but if they see it done with decency they will support it.

As far as outfitters and guides go there are good ones and bad ones. The lumping together is a problem. A few years ago I got permission to follow a hit critter onto his private lease. He didn't even hesitate to say, "Yes! Go get him!" Good luck." After I got it all he asked was to see it. Then he followed me back to confirm a blood trail going onto his property. I walked him right to it. He confirmed my story, shook my hand and said, "Congrats!" He had every right to do it. Just wanted to make sure I didnt lie. There's lots of outfitters like that. But much like hunters a few bad eggs spoil it for everyone else. I'm sure you've met a few.

Cool story about the the almost old lady. (All ladies are almost old even at 90.) I hope when I'm to old to be climbing mountains somebody let's me wander their farm.

 

[Treeshark]

When (largely absentee) Big Money came along and started buying up the land, they realized they could monetize these public resources to supplement the ranch income, and leasing and outfitting increased substantially.

I think of this scenario every time I see the canned “if you want to hunt XXXX state, then you can move here/buy land here!” response here on Hunt Talk.

Beware… people just may do it and the results may be unpleasant.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I think of this scenario every time I see the canned “if you want to hunt XXXX state, then you can move here/buy land here!” response here on Hunt Talk.

Beware… people just may do it and the results may be unpleasant.

You think these billionares/millionares buying the ranches give 2 squirts of wet fecal supply what a NR tag costs? I doubt their "struggles" as a NR were the cause of them buying a ranch.

They can cut the line with outfitter preference points. They can hunt great animals in general permits on private land via outfitting.

They've been buying it up for years for a lot of reasons beyond hunting, this isnt a new story. There just happens to be more of them than ever.

 

[Treeshark]

Maybe you’re right, maybe not- doesn’t really change the outcome. Regardless, they have a lot of money and that can buy a lot of votes.

The times… they are a’ changin.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Maybe you’re right, maybe not- doesn’t really change the outcome. Regardless, they have a lot of money and that can buy a lot of votes.

The times… they are a’ changin.

I think you mean your dream, not the "outcome."

Texas has the hunting your after already

 

[Treeshark]

Texas has the hunting your after already

Much too hot, much too private. Not for me!

 

[antlerradar]

Unfortunately for you, Joseph, many of the people on this thread remember a time when more landowners granted permission, and public wildlife wasn't seen as another avenue of profit for a private landowner. This was largely because the working ranches were still owned by local families and there were simply better relationships between them and the hunters. When (largely absentee) Big Money came along and started buying up the land, they realized they could monetize these public resources to supplement the ranch income, and leasing and outfitting increased substantially. The Big Money folks have no interest in local traditions or values, and the only goal is to make more money. As a result, the public lost the access to the public resource. Add the influx of more and more hunters leaving their home states to hunt in other states and expecting results, in-turn driving up the demand and the value, and its been a recipe for disaster.

And it goes both ways: nobody is better at ruining their opportunities than public hunters. I don't know how many ranchers I've talked to in MT who know a guy who knows a guy that littered on their property once and left a fence open, and because of that, they no longer allow access. Hunters like this are few and far between and those incidents are actually pretty rare. But that reputation is deeply ingrained, and sometimes even earned.

So I whole-heartedly agree: focusing on the problem children and not supporting the well behaved only makes the problems worse. Also, that's a cool story about that woman, good work!

That is not quite the way leasing started. My father outfitted from the mid 60's to the late 70's. Never had one ranch leased, even our own was still open to the public. The reason was back then the game numbers and quality was just as good on public as it was on private, even better in quiet a few places. There was really no reason spend the money to lease a ranch for your exclusive use. That changed with the 78/79 winter. The deer numbers dropped out of sight. I talked to the outfitter that signed the first hunting lease in Powder River Co. He signed that lease in about 1980 and it was according to him a direct response to the winter of 78/79. After that winter there was just too many hunters chasing too few deer, If he wanted any kind of quality for his hunters he had to take management into his own hands and pay up for a lease. Of course that pushed more hunters onto public and open private land and started the snow ball moving. This was long before the wealthy started buying up ranches in eastern MT as soon as they hit the market. The newer billionaire owners have taken leasing to a different level. No longer it it about the money, now it is all about the convenience. Just a lot easier to hand over the hunting to an outfitter and let them deal with the hassle or they want the hunting for them self.

Our place has never been leased, but it is also unlikely permission is going to be granted to someone that just shows up during the season. There are far more people that deserve a hunting slot than there is room for. When I was young in the late 70's we granted permission to just about everyone that asked. Every time we cut back on access it was do to poor hunter behavior. Never was it littering, shooting a cow or leaving a gate open. We did have people using our place to access the neighbors, turn our place and some adjacent public into a personal off road motor cross track and maybe a case of an illegal outfitter using our place to take clients. It was also very common to have someone shoot first and ask later. Now that is just blast and dash. Another big reason ranchers do not grant permission to unknown hunter is that they look across the fence at the abuse the public land and game herds take and say "not on my place"

 

[Elky Welky]

I think of this scenario every time I see the canned “if you want to hunt XXXX state, then you can move here/buy land here!” response here on Hunt Talk.

Beware… people just may do it and the results may be unpleasant.

I'm guilty of making this argument, although I'm not necessarily talking about buying land. I also don't think the people complaining about high NR tag costs are the ones that are causing those unpleasant results you refer to. The cost of living, housing, taxes, low wages, (and at least for me: terrible dating scene) really are sacrifices that the people who choose to live here make.

For example, I'm at the top end of the pay scale for my job by MT standards, but what I make for a yearly salary is right around the national average for someone who is entry level. If I had the same job in CO, my income would be almost double what it is now.

 

[Elky Welky]

That is not quite the way leasing started. My father outfitted from the mid 60's to the late 70's. Never had one ranch leased, even our own was still open to the public. The reason was back then the game numbers and quality was just as good on public as it was on private, even better in quiet a few places. There was really no reason spend the money to lease a ranch for your exclusive use. That changed with the 78/79 winter. The deer numbers dropped out of sight. I talked to the outfitter that signed the first hunting lease in Powder River Co. He signed that lease in about 1980 and it was according to him a direct response to the winter of 78/79. After that winter there was just too many hunters chasing too few deer, If he wanted any kind of quality for my hunters I had to take management into his own hands am pay up for a lease. Of course that pushed more hunters onto public and open private land and started the snow ball moving. This was long before the wealthy started buying up ranches in eastern MT as soon as they hit the market. The newer billionaire owners have taken leasing to a different level. No longer it it about the money, now it is all about the convenience. Just a lot easier to hand over the hunting to an outfitter and let them deal with the hassle or they want the hunting for them self.

Our place has never been leased, but it is also unlikely permission is going to be granted to someone that just shows up during the season. There are far more people that deserve a hunting slot than there is room for. When I was young in the late 70's we granted permission to just about everyone that asked. Every time we cut back on access it was do to poor hunter behavior. Never was it littering, shooting a cow or leaving a gate open. We did have people using our place to access the neighbors, turn our place and some adjacent public into a personal off road motor cross track and maybe a case of an illegal outfitter using our place to take clients. It was also very common to have someone shoot first and ask later. Now that is just blast and dash. Another big reason ranchers do not grant permission to unknown hunter is that they look across the fence at the abuse the public land and game herds take and say "not on my place"

This all makes sense, particularly for your neck of the prairie. My rendition of it is from my understanding of what has happened in central MT, in particular.

 

[Joseph Peterson]

The newer billionaire owners have taken leasing to a different level. No longer it it about the money, now it is all about the convenience. Just a lot easier to hand over the hunting to an outfitter and let them deal with the hassle or they want the hunting for them self.

Yes. I have had neighbors ask me to lease their ground so they can tell everyone who asks the blanket answer that it is leased. Takes the work of controlling access and policing the place on someone else. Also know of a few ranchers who never let any public access change their mind when an outfitter agrees to not only pay him but to once again, take the burden of policing the place off them and put it on the outfitter and his guides.

 

[Firedude]

Yes. I have had neighbors ask me to lease their ground so they can tell everyone who asks the blanket answer that it is leased. Takes the work of controlling access and policing the place on someone else. Also know of a few ranchers who never let any public access change their mind when an outfitter agrees to not only pay him but to once again, take the burden of policing the place off them and put it on the outfitter and his guides.

That's definitely an option. Let me just throw an idea your way though. When I was a teenager my family bought into buying a few feet of crop on either side of a fence to leave for game birds. I remember the conversation. The farmer said he made X out of those crops and we doubled it. We then fixed that fence as we walked our dogs and ran others off when we saw then on the property.

Neighbors make good gaurd dogs if they have knowledge of when to bark... Retired guys living next door will totally swing a cane at somebody over a pheasant.