Article: Federal vs. State Controlled Public Lands - Thoughts?

[ChrisS]

You have made some valid points throughout this thread but I want to also put another spin on the cost comparison above. You compare an out of state hunt to an in state lease (for you). For me, in the state of Utah I can hunt general season elk with a combination hunting fishing license and a general season elk tag totaling $87.

Good point. I am a resident of NY, we have millions of acres of public land (more than any state east of the Rockies and more as a percentage of total land in the state than some western states). I pay $90 for hunting license that includes 7+ white tail tags, a bear tag, 4 turkey tags, small game, and fishing. We don't have many leases around here because of the significant amount of public land (and because while there are many dairy farms, they're generally small (500- 1,000 acres). Now NY isn't a trophy animal state, but that's a combination of the public attitude, the ecosystem, and it's not the management goal (the NYSDEC proposed antler restrictions in a few limited units and people lost their shit). I hunt two places: 350 acres with a couple of friends on another friend's property, local state land 30 minutes from my house, and the Adirondacks. One of my friends suggested we setup a lease with my friend for his property for $500 a year and I told him if he wants to charge me to hunt there, I'll pass and hunt elsewhere. I only hunt there for meat does and to visit with my friend anyway. The only extra expense I have is membership at a deer camp in the Adirondacks (15 other guys and a cabin on 8 acres of land adjacent to 120,000 acres of wilderness area). A whopping $225 a year.

Regardless of hunting opportunities, the true motive behind the transfer is for someone to profit from it in the long run. If they are transferred to the states it won't be long before they are sold off.

I'd say in the short run. If a state like Kansas could sell off anything not nailed down right now they would and like you said, that land is gone forever for a short term fix.

 

[gelton]

I'm blown away that someone would compare having a Private Lease in TX to Public Land hunting...unreal

Have you done both? I have. I choose to hunt Public land because I choose to hunt elk.

Also, I didn't bring up the comparison, its a comparison that comes up each time someone talks about public land transfers trying to act is if Texas is the worst example of hunting. My point was, budget wise its about the same. Except you get year round access, year round hunting, bigger bag limits and just as many if not more species.

Obviously if you don't want to see the comparison then you should reach out to the people who always drag Texas into this debate.

 

[gelton]

You have made some valid points throughout this thread but I want to also put another spin on the cost comparison above. You compare an out of state hunt to an in state lease (for you). For me, in the state of Utah I can hunt general season elk with a combination hunting fishing license and a general season elk tag totaling $87. Since you didn't add any costs for travel, lodging, food, etc. on your leased hunting property example I won't add that either. If things change and I now have to pay $3,000 for that same opportunity in Utah that's a big price difference. Not to mention with that same in state combination license I can hunt waterfowl, upland, predator, etc. throughout the year and fish year round. Obviously this is as a resident of the state of Utah where I do most of my hunting, but if I want to go to Texas for a hunt as a non resident right now I'm probably going to pay a lot to hunt private land just as you are going to pay more to hunt another state. I choose to live in Utah and a part of the reason why is the access to public lands. You choose to live in Texas and lease hunting ground at a cost I don't have to pay currently for similar opportunities. As others have stated, public lands are also a place I spend a lot of time camping, hiking, etc. I know you weren't coming out in favor of the transfer of public lands you were simply pointing out, based on your experience, it may not be as bad as we all think. In my opinion, it will be that bad for more reasons than hunting opportunities.

Regardless of hunting opportunities, the true motive behind the transfer is for someone to profit from it in the long run. If they are transferred to the states it won't be long before they are sold off. I may have most of my life left to use them before that happens but my kids certainly don't. I hate the idea that our public lands have to somehow make money for someone in order to be of value. Their true value far surpasses any economic value, although there is certainly some economic value there as well. I haven't decided who I'm going to vote for at this point as I don't care for any candidate, but regardless of how my vote is placed, I'll fight the public lands transfer harder than I've fought any other political battle.

Yeah I am not saying the feds should transfer, and if I lived in a western state I would fight the hell out of it too. But I don't, and since I don't I get raped with non resident hunting license fees. If the land is ours then where is the legitimacy of the raping?

As I mentioned Texas non resident hunting fees are 1/5th of those out west. Heck, you can come to Texas as a non resident for $315 for a general hunting license that includes all species (unlimited Hogs, 4-5 whitetail, Javelina 3 in possession and more), or a 5 day license for $48. You can even hunt Aligators for $125.

So again, budget wise its about the same.

 

[TJ]

Yeah I am not saying the feds should transfer, and if I lived in a western state I would fight the hell out of it too. But I don't, and since I don't I get raped with non resident hunting license fees. If the land is ours then where is the legitimacy of the raping?

As I mentioned Texas non resident hunting fees are 1/5th of those out west. Heck, you can come to Texas as a non resident for $315 for a general hunting license that includes all species (unlimited Hogs, 4-5 whitetail, Javelina 3 in possession and more), or a 5 day license for $48. You can even hunt Aligators for $125.

So again, budget wise its about the same.

OK, so let's say the land is transferred to the states. History shows it will be sold. Now along with those high non-resident fees you pay, now you get to pony up to pay for lease, trespassing fee, or maybe a guide. Not sure where the savings is at.

As far as I am concerned this is MY land, MY sons land, MY grandsons land, and this is YOUR land.

Like Randy Newberg says, "From my cold dead hands."

 

[realunlucky]

Texas doesn't make sense

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[tipsntails7]

Yeah I am not saying the feds should transfer, and if I lived in a western state I would fight the hell out of it too. But I don't, and since I don't I get raped with non resident hunting license fees. If the land is ours then where is the legitimacy of the raping?

As I mentioned Texas non resident hunting fees are 1/5th of those out west. Heck, you can come to Texas as a non resident for $315 for a general hunting license that includes all species (unlimited Hogs, 4-5 whitetail, Javelina 3 in possession and more), or a 5 day license for $48. You can even hunt Aligators for $125.

So again, budget wise its about the same.

First, the animals do not belong to everyone, they belong to the residents of that state. So that is where the legitimacy of rape comes from. You as a non resident in theory do not pay into the management of those animals, again every dnr dfw, game commission whatever that particular state calls it, draws money from different places, including state taxes, which you don't pay into. So that state allows you to hunt their game animals for a fee, don't want to pay that much either look elsewhere or don't pay.

You keep comparing a lease in Texas to out of state hunting fees and calling it similar, they are complete polar opposites of each other. It costs 180 bucks in Oregon for all this: Combination Angling/Hunting/Shellfish License, Combined Angling Harvest Tag, Upland Bird and Waterfowl Validations, plus a General or Controlled Deer, General or Controlled Elk, Cougar, General or Controlled Bear, and Spring Turkey tag.) Add a Columbia River Basin Endorsement for $9.75 when purchased with SportsPac.

If I was a resident of Colorado, now all land is private, so now I need a lease, or pay a trespass fee o top of my hunting license, It's not going to be the same price as a lease for whitetail in Texas, it's going to be about 10 times more expensive, because it's elk, because it's privatized and because people will pay it.

So now you being a non res, not only do you have to pay non res licensing fees, you now get to also pay the ridiculous fees for trespass or a lease in Colorado, but you don't get to go on it whenever you please, you don't get to scout whenever you please, your told when and how you can be on the land, don't like it tuff shit because it's the only option now. Oh you don't want to pay 10k for the opportunity to hunt elk? again tuff shit, it's the only option plenty of guys lined up to take your place.
Whitetail and pig in Texas are like ticks, they are literally everywhere. Elk are not like that, and because of their nature I don't believe they can become something like that.

So while the perceived costs may be similar at this exact moment, if all land was privatized the prices would change drastically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tipsntails7]

I also firmly believe that states would destroy their own fish and wildlife departments in a matter of years. Because of the drastic increase in costs associated with hunting out of state it absolutely would wreak havoc on the number of non res licenses sold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PaulBunyan]

I budget about $1800 per year to hunt Colorado for two weeks:

Gas $280
Tag $650
Hotel $140 x 2 = $280 (one on the way there one on the way back 18 hour drive solo)
Food = $150
Packout if needed = $350

$1710

Now for $800 more you can get on a pretty decent lease where you can hunt hogs year round - unlimited, doves twice a year, Javelinas-3 in possession, whitetail-4 per year in most counties and plenty of other critters too.

That is not to say that the Feds should transfer, only to state that you pay to play in both instances, and given the longer seasons and bigger bag limits the trade off is about the same. Dont misunderstand the comparison as pointing to my personal enjoyment of hunting out west...there is nothing like it and these large tracks of land are a true blessing, chasing elk is way more fun than sitting in a deer blind, but financially the commitment is about the same.

This assumes you hunt out of state. For us that live in these great states with some reasonable amount of public land, the price breakdown is drastically different. $120 in WA for a combo license (deer, elk, bear, & cougar) including special hunt applications is literally 20 times less expensive than your lease example.

 

[tipsntails7]

Mnn

 

[Trial153]

No matter what I read on here on this topic I am thankful for one thing. That I don't have to wade through post full of WVmountianeer's idiocy.
It's the little things that make me happy.

 

[gelton]

This assumes you hunt out of state. For us that live in these great states with some reasonable amount of public land, the price breakdown is drastically different. $120 in WA for a combo license (deer, elk, bear, & cougar) including special hunt applications is literally 20 times less expensive than your lease example.

Exactly my point. For out of staters there isn't much different. Am I jeolous of those that have these opportunities in state, yes. I only ask that people quit dragging Texas into this debate. If I have to drag up the half a dozen threads about this and show everyone how Texas is dragged through the mud each and every time This topic comes up I will.

Not degrading what you have out west, it's awesome and if you look at each and every one of my posts I have tried to make that apparent. Unfortunately I think most of those posting here are ignorant to that underlying point. Like Texans 42 correctly stated, quit comparing Texas hunting opportunities to those out west - it's moronic.

 

[kpk]

Texas non resident tags may be 1/5 the price but Texas has about 1 million acres of public land vs colorados what 25 or so million?? I just looked at Texas public land atlas and I think it sucks personally. Nearly all the public land is located within one north south strip on the east side of the state. Every little star I clicked on was about 300 acres. I'm sure there are some big ones but I didn't find them. Texas can have high year round bag limits, but I'd almost have to assume those tags aren't getting filled on public ground. If public land is so great and accessable in texas....people wouldn't be leasing everything.

Throw a dart at a map of Colorado and you're probably within walking distance of decent public land.

 

[gelton]

Texas non resident tags may be 1/5 the price but Texas has about 1 million acres of public land vs colorados what 25 or so million?? I just looked at Texas public land atlas and I think it sucks personally. Nearly all the public land is located within one north south strip on the east side of the state. Every little star I clicked on was about 300 acres. I'm sure there are some big ones but I didn't find them. Texas can have high year round bag limits, but I'd almost have to assume those tags aren't getting filled on public ground. If public land is so great and accessable in texas....people wouldn't be leasing everything.

Throw a dart at a map of Colorado and you're probably within walking distance of decent public land.

Never did I say that the public opportunities in Texas were as great as Colorado. What I said was an out of state Coloradan could come hunt private land just as many species for a longer period of time, with bigger bag limits, for about the same price as it costs me to hunt public land in Colorado.

 

[tipsntails7]

Exactly my point. For out of staters there isn't much different. Am I jeolous of those that have these opportunities in state, yes. I only ask that people quit dragging Texas into this debate. If I have to drag up the half a dozen threads about this and show everyone how Texas is dragged through the mud each and every time This topic comes up I will.

Not degrading what you have out west, it's awesome and if you look at each and every one of my posts I have tried to make that apparent. Unfortunately I think most of those posting here are ignorant to that underlying point. Like Texans 42 correctly stated, quit comparing Texas hunting opportunities to those out west - it's moronic.

Dude... You are the one comparing them, constantly over and over and over again in regards to price. You literally did it in this exact response I quoted.

You are either being dense or obtuse, I'm not sure which. This statement has zero to do with Texas OK?

Your an out of state hunter, you pay 1500 bucks for a DIY hunt in wherever the hell state in the west you want to go.
So you spent 1500 dollars for the entire hunt.
Now all land is private, you are a non res hunter and want to go hunt the same state. You need to spend that same 1500 bucks, plus now a lease or trespass fee. Which costs lets just say 2k.
Now your hunt costs 3500 bucks, not 1500.

So
public land hunt $1500
Private land hunt $3500

So, now your 1500 Texas lease was the same as your out of state hunting. But now that everything is private it costs even more, so the prices would not be a wash..

Everyone gets it, it's not Texas fault that they have no public land. Nobody is dragging Texas through the mud, all people are saying is they don't want states that are currently loaded with public land to have the land division make up of Texas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kpk]

Yeah, and I'll agree with that. I'm asking out of genuine curiosity and not to argue but is the public land in TX worth hunting? Here in mn we have quite a bit of public land. The majority of it is up north and the hunting there sucks for the most part except for bear. Deer are nearly non existent and they ended our moose hunt. In the southern part where I live there are scattered pieces of public all over but 90% of them are absolutely pointless to hunt. I fish at 3 of the biggest areas around me and I've never once seen a whitetail in any of them. Get off state land and you can throw a rock and hit a deer.

 

[Violent Hippie]

I have become accustom to recreating in National Forests surrounding my home that are around 1 million acres. I pay my annual hunting license fees and tag fees for a deer or 2 and maybe a bear and the fishing license which all totals under $200 . I recreate freely and engage in many activities (backcountry skiing, mtn biking, shooting, hunting, fishing, backpacking, hiking,truck camping etc.)on a weekly basis literally out my back door. When I see the word "lease" or the phrase "trespass fee" I feel a warmth on the back of my neck were the hair begins to stand up. Kind of a flushing. If one knows no better I can get it BUT I am one like many on here who are used to routinely recreating in vast western wilderness . Its truely awesome and I personally dont want that to change.

 

[tlowell02]

Some are decent, if you're extremely lucky to get drawn. I was lucky and drew two years in a row for an antlerless hunt and both times got my two deer.

The number of properties that allow big game hunting without being drawn (aka just show up) are extremely limited.

 

[PaulBunyan]

Exactly my point. For out of staters there isn't much different. Am I jeolous of those that have these opportunities in state, yes. I only ask that people quit dragging Texas into this debate. If I have to drag up the half a dozen threads about this and show everyone how Texas is dragged through the mud each and every time This topic comes up I will.

Not degrading what you have out west, it's awesome and if you look at each and every one of my posts I have tried to make that apparent. Unfortunately I think most of those posting here are ignorant to that underlying point. Like Texans 42 correctly stated, quit comparing Texas hunting opportunities to those out west - it's moronic.

I can agree that Texas is different in a lot of ways than most of the western states when it comes to hunting, not the least of which is the history and types of game animals. I still think that many states, like Texas, are missing out when it comes to public land, and that isn't a model I would prefer the rest of our country pursue.
I'm not sure why its so wrong to compare Texas to western states. Obviously you have a different history of how/why you got there, and I don't mean to drag anyone through the mud. That doesn't mean we cant say that the model in Texas (and many other states) isn't what we want for some (western) states that may be contemplating moving land towards privatization.
I mean no disrespect towards Texas, maybe the hunting situation down there is ideal, I've never hunted Texas so I wouldn't know. All I know is that I don't want more land in my corner of the country getting one step closer to me having to pay a private entity for access.

 

[gelton]

Dude... You are the one comparing them, constantly over and over and over again in regards to price. You literally did it in this exact response I quoted.

You are either being dense or obtuse, I'm not sure which. This statement has zero to do with Texas OK?

Your an out of state hunter, you pay 1500 bucks for a DIY hunt in wherever the hell state in the west you want to go.
So you spent 1500 dollars for the entire hunt.
Now all land is private, you are a non res hunter and want to go hunt the same state. You need to spend that same 1500 bucks, plus now a lease or trespass fee. Which costs lets just say 2k.
Now your hunt costs 3500 bucks, not 1500.

So
public land hunt $1500
Private land hunt $3500

So, now your 1500 Texas lease was the same as your out of state hunting. But now that everything is private it costs even more, so the prices would not be a wash..

Everyone gets it, it's not Texas fault that they have no public land. Nobody is dragging Texas through the mud, all people are saying is they don't want states that are currently loaded with public land to have the land division make up of Texas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope not me making the comparisons, I am only defending my birthright, which, besides the fact the Feds bought our land and didn't need it to be given to us, the differences are minor. Now the one thing that scars me about alot of the private land ownership here is that it is high fenced, which I am surprised no one has brought up in their antagonism towards Texas. So there, I've stole your thunder. But again, not me bro, hands up don't shoot. Here are just a few examples of when Texas was brought up every time this situation hits the interwebs.

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/show...-to-Transfer-Federal-Land-to-the-States/page2

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/showthread.php?41124-Ted-Cruz/page14

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/general-discussion-forum/34249-republicans-stances-land-transfer.html

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/showthread.php?41124-Ted-Cruz/page11

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/general-discussion-forum/38542-executive-action-12.html

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/gene...ively-bowhunters-vs-rifle-hunters-lend-2.html

 

[tipsntails7]

First off you can get on a damn good lease with year round hunting and huge bag limits for about $2500. $3K tops. Second of all the private land owners in Texas have managed their land for wildlife in a way that is heads and shoulder above fed lands. Thirdly, when you add in the price of non resident licenses ($6-800), the gas that it takes to get there, hotel stays along the way, extremely short seasons, especially during rifle, and extremely limited bag limits, it all comes out to almost being a wash.

I am not suggesting that the Feds transfer the land to the states, and I am coming around to the whole Federal lands issue, mostly thanks to Randy Newberg, but I am tired of everyone referring to Texas as the poster child of whats wrong with hunting. If you really believe that check the numbers Texas generated $6.2 Billion for wildlife activities including resident and non resident hunters. Colorado claims to have generated $38.1 Million from non residents...so I would say from that comparison, more non residents are coming to Texas to hunt than Colorado, so we have to be doing something right.

Did find this 1.38 $Billion compared to $38 Million from Colorado and our non resident licences are about 1/5 the price of colorados. Conservation at its finest.

Texas hunting, fishing generate huge revenue for state economy

I budget about $1800 per year to hunt Colorado for two weeks:

Gas $280
Tag $650
Hotel $140 x 2 = $280 (one on the way there one on the way back 18 hour drive solo)
Food = $150
Packout if needed = $350

$1710

Now for $800 more you can get on a pretty decent lease where you can hunt hogs year round - unlimited, doves twice a year, Javelinas-3 in possession, whitetail-4 per year in most counties and plenty of other critters too.

That is not to say that the Feds should transfer, only to state that you pay to play in both instances, and given the longer seasons and bigger bag limits the trade off is about the same. Dont misunderstand the comparison as pointing to my personal enjoyment of hunting out west...there is nothing like it and these large tracks of land are a true blessing, chasing elk is way more fun than sitting in a deer blind, but financially the commitment is about the same.

My point was, budget wise its about the same. Except you get year round access, year round hunting, bigger bag limits and just as many if not more species.

Obviously if you don't want to see the comparison then you should reach out to the people who always drag Texas into this debate.

Never did I say that the public opportunities in Texas were as great as Colorado. What I said was an out of state Coloradan could come hunt private land just as many species for a longer period of time, with bigger bag limits, for about the same price as it costs me to hunt public land in Colorado.

As I mentioned Texas non resident hunting fees are 1/5th of those out west. Heck, you can come to Texas as a non resident for $315 for a general hunting license that includes all species (unlimited Hogs, 4-5 whitetail, Javelina 3 in possession and more), or a 5 day license for $48. You can even hunt Aligators for $125.

So again, budget wise its about the same.

These are all examples of YOU comparing Texas to other states, mainly Colorado in just this thread.

Look I'm not trying to be a dick, but I don't care about doves, I don't care about whitetails, and sense YOU brought it up, I don't care about wild exotics that have been planted behind a fence. I don't care about shooting pigs from a feeder either. Like I said , I like Texas, for the hogs and the BBQ and I plan to go back next year actually, but I don't ever, ever , ever want states that hold public lands to be sold and privatized. I don't want a lease, I don't want to pay for year round access. I chose to take a job with less money and more vacation in the west for that exact reason. Because whenever I want I can jump on a trailhead 365 days a year and just walk, 5 miles, 10 miles, 20 miles however long I want all for the low low price of FREE... Maybe I'll camp, maybe I'll fish, maybe I'll hunt, I get to choose.


I don't know a lot about Texas wildlife and how it is managed to speak intelligently but it is a hell of a lot easier for someone to manage 1000 acres for quality wildlife then someone managing 1 million acres.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk