Looks to me like "Bigwhiskey" is the camera man and one of the posters to that thread is "perlitzranch".
I have to admit, I thought it was the real thing. Those guys deserve Oscars!
Check this video clip out
- Thread starter burris
- Start date
I have to admit, I thought it was the real thing. Those guys deserve Oscars!
Rusty Holt
New member
I agree YH...it was great acting, that's for sure. That Big Whiskey fella seems to making quite a few videos of that nature. Some just to fool the viewer like us, and some being footage of practical jokes being played on other hunters.
Take it easy, guys!
Rusty
Take it easy, guys!
Rusty
I grew up in Montana back in the days when you could just about drive anywhere and hunt. In one of the areas where I used to hunt elk it was bulls only. Then after a few years they had too many cows and so the Fish and Game gave out 300 cow tags. Immediately the ranchers started charging access fees. However, when the elk start tearing down the ranchers haystacks he calls the Fish and Game and they come out and will put plywood around the haystacks or some other method of keeping the elk away. And guess who pays for that. Us taxpayers.
I have lots of friends who are farmers and ranchers and I feel for them. In the "old" days people closed gates and didn't drive all over the fields. Nowdays it is amazing what the farmers and ranchers have to put up with. Today they have to post their land just to keep it from being shot up, torn up, and the cattle all let out.
However, now I would like to make my point as a non-landowner. Most of the ranches didn't buy deer and elk and coyotes to put on the land to be hunted. But they have turned into businesses that are managing all of their resources. They say the game animals are eating their grass and crops and so the animals are "their's". I know of a situation in central Montana where a rich lady from Texas came in and bought out a bunch of ranches. She had all the buildings torn down and new ones erected. When the contractor was done she hired him as her foreman to ramrod the place. They planted alfalfa and oats for the elk on her property. I had some friends that drove down the county road and saw the elk feeding just off the road in her fields. They stopped got out and looked at the elk. Pretty soon they saw this pickup come barreling down the road in a cloud of dust. It was her foreman. He told them to "move along" as the elk were on private property. They did because they were done looking as it was no big deal. However, the road they were on was a county road and the land on the other side of the road wasn't hers. I can't help thinking what would have happened if I had been there. Mr. Foreman and I would have had a very good "discussion". It is big money and the rich that are ruining the hunting. But it is no different than anything else in this world. Montanan's as a whole are very independent and they don't put up with some of the rich and the famous that have moved into the state and try to bring their businesses with them. But they can't keep the money out.
For those of you who think the poor farmer and rancher is just trying to make a living that is only true in a number of situations. Usually it is a guide or corporation that is leasing or buying the land and making large amounts of money off of it. I knew of an outfitter in eastern Montana that had one million acres tied up. He charged $2500 for a mule deer. The local comment was "who would pay $2500 for a stinkin' mule deer". He had plenty of out-of-state takers. Up to a half a million in gross sales just for the deer alone. That didn't include the elk and antelope. Guess what? The outfitter wasn't a local Montanan. All of the locals that used to hunt the ranches in the area couldn't hunt there anymore. As I local I couldn't walk down the street and look my friends in the eye and tell them I'm sorry that I locked up the land they hunted for years. Big money and big business. That is just the way of the world.
My old college roommate has 10,000 acres of prime wheat land. There is a lot of CRP mixed in. I am sure most of you know that as a farmer he can put enough acreage in CRP to make $50,000 a year for 10 years. The government pays him that much not to farm it. How much do they pay you and I not to work. There is a small creek that runs for about 3 miles through his property that has pheasants in it. My brother used to hunt there every year. Now my old roommate is leasing it out for $10,000 to big money from out-of-state. I can't blame him because he tells me how tough it is to make a living farming nowdays. He drives a new 4-wheel drive every year. He is incorporated and eveything in his home, groceries, appliances, etc. is written off to the corporation. Then at the end of the year he tells me that he files income taxes on only $90,000. How would you like it if all your bills were paid and you had to pay taxes on $90,000 of your play money. Life's a b***h sometimes isn't it. I love him dearly, but can't feel too sorry for him. The money he gets from the pheasant ground goes to pay for his new $100,000 storage shed with hot water heated cement floor for his $250,000 combines that he uses for 2 weeks each year.
Well, I need to quit rambling and venting. As a native Montanan I had a lifestyle and a lot of liberties that most people even in this country didn't have. Money is the problem and more people than just the rich have enough to spend lots of it on their favorite pastime. I don't blame the local farmer and rancher. I blame the big money corporations, the rich, and the outfitter whose is tying up all the land for his profit. But that is the way it is in a free-enterprise system. It was just a matter of time. My sister-in-law grew up on a ranch in eastern Montana just south of the Missouri river. My brother says that by the time his 9-year-old boy is of legal age to hunt about the only place in Montana that he will be able to hunt without paying is on his Grandad's place. Such is the state of affairs in the state that is known as "the last best place".
Oh, and as a qualifier, if I owned a large amount of good hunting land in Montana I would lock it up. By that I mean friends and family and the locals whom I could trust would be allowed to hunt there. It would be against my principals to charge for hunting. And I won't pay to hunt. However, if I was rich I would be hunting all over the world. And if times got tough I would probably start charging to hunt on my land so I guess I am no different than most people. However, most the money being made off of trespass fees isn't being used by people in a survival mode. It is big money and money doesn't care how it is acquired or used.
I have lots of friends who are farmers and ranchers and I feel for them. In the "old" days people closed gates and didn't drive all over the fields. Nowdays it is amazing what the farmers and ranchers have to put up with. Today they have to post their land just to keep it from being shot up, torn up, and the cattle all let out.
However, now I would like to make my point as a non-landowner. Most of the ranches didn't buy deer and elk and coyotes to put on the land to be hunted. But they have turned into businesses that are managing all of their resources. They say the game animals are eating their grass and crops and so the animals are "their's". I know of a situation in central Montana where a rich lady from Texas came in and bought out a bunch of ranches. She had all the buildings torn down and new ones erected. When the contractor was done she hired him as her foreman to ramrod the place. They planted alfalfa and oats for the elk on her property. I had some friends that drove down the county road and saw the elk feeding just off the road in her fields. They stopped got out and looked at the elk. Pretty soon they saw this pickup come barreling down the road in a cloud of dust. It was her foreman. He told them to "move along" as the elk were on private property. They did because they were done looking as it was no big deal. However, the road they were on was a county road and the land on the other side of the road wasn't hers. I can't help thinking what would have happened if I had been there. Mr. Foreman and I would have had a very good "discussion". It is big money and the rich that are ruining the hunting. But it is no different than anything else in this world. Montanan's as a whole are very independent and they don't put up with some of the rich and the famous that have moved into the state and try to bring their businesses with them. But they can't keep the money out.
For those of you who think the poor farmer and rancher is just trying to make a living that is only true in a number of situations. Usually it is a guide or corporation that is leasing or buying the land and making large amounts of money off of it. I knew of an outfitter in eastern Montana that had one million acres tied up. He charged $2500 for a mule deer. The local comment was "who would pay $2500 for a stinkin' mule deer". He had plenty of out-of-state takers. Up to a half a million in gross sales just for the deer alone. That didn't include the elk and antelope. Guess what? The outfitter wasn't a local Montanan. All of the locals that used to hunt the ranches in the area couldn't hunt there anymore. As I local I couldn't walk down the street and look my friends in the eye and tell them I'm sorry that I locked up the land they hunted for years. Big money and big business. That is just the way of the world.
My old college roommate has 10,000 acres of prime wheat land. There is a lot of CRP mixed in. I am sure most of you know that as a farmer he can put enough acreage in CRP to make $50,000 a year for 10 years. The government pays him that much not to farm it. How much do they pay you and I not to work. There is a small creek that runs for about 3 miles through his property that has pheasants in it. My brother used to hunt there every year. Now my old roommate is leasing it out for $10,000 to big money from out-of-state. I can't blame him because he tells me how tough it is to make a living farming nowdays. He drives a new 4-wheel drive every year. He is incorporated and eveything in his home, groceries, appliances, etc. is written off to the corporation. Then at the end of the year he tells me that he files income taxes on only $90,000. How would you like it if all your bills were paid and you had to pay taxes on $90,000 of your play money. Life's a b***h sometimes isn't it. I love him dearly, but can't feel too sorry for him. The money he gets from the pheasant ground goes to pay for his new $100,000 storage shed with hot water heated cement floor for his $250,000 combines that he uses for 2 weeks each year.
Well, I need to quit rambling and venting. As a native Montanan I had a lifestyle and a lot of liberties that most people even in this country didn't have. Money is the problem and more people than just the rich have enough to spend lots of it on their favorite pastime. I don't blame the local farmer and rancher. I blame the big money corporations, the rich, and the outfitter whose is tying up all the land for his profit. But that is the way it is in a free-enterprise system. It was just a matter of time. My sister-in-law grew up on a ranch in eastern Montana just south of the Missouri river. My brother says that by the time his 9-year-old boy is of legal age to hunt about the only place in Montana that he will be able to hunt without paying is on his Grandad's place. Such is the state of affairs in the state that is known as "the last best place".
Oh, and as a qualifier, if I owned a large amount of good hunting land in Montana I would lock it up. By that I mean friends and family and the locals whom I could trust would be allowed to hunt there. It would be against my principals to charge for hunting. And I won't pay to hunt. However, if I was rich I would be hunting all over the world. And if times got tough I would probably start charging to hunt on my land so I guess I am no different than most people. However, most the money being made off of trespass fees isn't being used by people in a survival mode. It is big money and money doesn't care how it is acquired or used.
the ranching deer industrie and the rich land barons have alot in common,they both feed off a natural man made need to shoot a trophy deer,and now add the qdm craze into the mix here,i am gunna get some crap off this ,but here goes,,whatever happend to deer hunting the old way? where hunting with freinds and family used to come first,now its all about the size of your food plot and end of the year tally,,i say bull **** to this thinking,its gettin harder and harder for the common everyday hunter to find land access and pursue the game his fathers probably thought was a given,i belive the ranches and qdm mentallity is a blight on deer hunting is heading down a bad road,,and i further belive all this deer for pay evolved in the hill country of texas, and spread like a plague to different parts of the country,,now its showed up here in new york state, where the trend is heading for ,if you dont own 500 acres minimun to hunt and high fence,you wont have any place to hunt in the future,i want to personally thank the big greedy ranches, the big wallet texans,and the greedy qdm developers for doing in the little guys deer hunting propects for the future 
J. Holly
New member
Here is something that kinda hits a nerve with me.
1. Should you have to pay to hunt, no. States are buying back land at a record amount for public hunting. Also, there ARE public areas that you can hunt for little or no fee. Now, are these areas over hunted. YES. Should you just open up private land for public? Absolutely not.
2. Is it "fair" that a ranch charges to hunt on their property? YES. Remember, you don't have to hunt on their property. Does the public pay their property taxes? Does the public maintain the land? Does the public manage the animals? No. Let the ranchs charge what they want to charge. If you don't think it is right, then don't hunt on them.
I find this debate to be a little silly. You wouldn't go into Golden Corral and expect to get a Morton's quality steak. You might find one every now and then, but you wouldn't expect it either.
I am from a very impoverished area. We were lucky to have a lot of land to hunt on. A group once came into the area to set up a trophy ranch. They bought the land cheap, made food plots, and fenced it all the way around. They couldn't keep the locals out of there. Eventually, I heard it went under, and to my knowledge, they never even guided a single hunt in there.
My father and I have quite a bit of land in that area. We don't have as much of a problem with the trespassing as the other operation did. We don't allow any hunting on us from the outside. Is this wrong? It is the same principle. We only allow people we want to have hunt on our land there.
Some of these people that pay for hunts on these ranchs, I personally wouldn't feel safe being around.
1. Should you have to pay to hunt, no. States are buying back land at a record amount for public hunting. Also, there ARE public areas that you can hunt for little or no fee. Now, are these areas over hunted. YES. Should you just open up private land for public? Absolutely not.
2. Is it "fair" that a ranch charges to hunt on their property? YES. Remember, you don't have to hunt on their property. Does the public pay their property taxes? Does the public maintain the land? Does the public manage the animals? No. Let the ranchs charge what they want to charge. If you don't think it is right, then don't hunt on them.
I find this debate to be a little silly. You wouldn't go into Golden Corral and expect to get a Morton's quality steak. You might find one every now and then, but you wouldn't expect it either.
I am from a very impoverished area. We were lucky to have a lot of land to hunt on. A group once came into the area to set up a trophy ranch. They bought the land cheap, made food plots, and fenced it all the way around. They couldn't keep the locals out of there. Eventually, I heard it went under, and to my knowledge, they never even guided a single hunt in there.
My father and I have quite a bit of land in that area. We don't have as much of a problem with the trespassing as the other operation did. We don't allow any hunting on us from the outside. Is this wrong? It is the same principle. We only allow people we want to have hunt on our land there.
Some of these people that pay for hunts on these ranchs, I personally wouldn't feel safe being around.
I can (and did this year) kill deer on public land with a little extra effort. And, yes, some states are increasing the amounts of public land, but not all, and not by the amount necessary to accomadate the increasing number of hunters that are being priced out.
The other thing about Public Land (especially for deer hunting) is that it is not very conducive for taking kids hunting. I hunt public land generally from a climbing tree stand, but obviously cannot carry my 7 year old up a tree with me. Permanent stands are not allowed, and hunting from the ground with a kid is not the most successful way to hunt.
Typically, if you take a kid, you need to have fairly easy access, a semi-comfortable place to sit (preferable a box blind) and a resonable expectation of seeing game. The best way to turn a kid against hunting is to hike in a long ways, not see anything, and then have to hike a long ways out.
So far this year, I have gotten my 7 year old 2 shots at deer. Both times I was hunting private property (as a guest since the lease price is more than I could afford this last year) where there was a box stand and corn feeder. In 5 trips (afternoons usually from 3 until dark) we saw deer 4 times. Now he is hooked on hunting.
I don't think I could have done that on public land. You might say "just wait until he is older and can overcome the disadvantages that public land pose". Yes, I could, but something else might have his attention by then.
I was brought up hunting public land (started at 10 or 12) and didn't kill my first deer until 18 (on private land). I took to hunting even when I spent 3 years hunting public land without even SEEING a deer. MY brother didn't. After a few years of that, he lost interest and hasn't gotten it back yet.
Rising costs of hunting and access are a fact of life, but you don't have to like it.
The other thing about Public Land (especially for deer hunting) is that it is not very conducive for taking kids hunting. I hunt public land generally from a climbing tree stand, but obviously cannot carry my 7 year old up a tree with me. Permanent stands are not allowed, and hunting from the ground with a kid is not the most successful way to hunt.
Typically, if you take a kid, you need to have fairly easy access, a semi-comfortable place to sit (preferable a box blind) and a resonable expectation of seeing game. The best way to turn a kid against hunting is to hike in a long ways, not see anything, and then have to hike a long ways out.
So far this year, I have gotten my 7 year old 2 shots at deer. Both times I was hunting private property (as a guest since the lease price is more than I could afford this last year) where there was a box stand and corn feeder. In 5 trips (afternoons usually from 3 until dark) we saw deer 4 times. Now he is hooked on hunting.
I don't think I could have done that on public land. You might say "just wait until he is older and can overcome the disadvantages that public land pose". Yes, I could, but something else might have his attention by then.
I was brought up hunting public land (started at 10 or 12) and didn't kill my first deer until 18 (on private land). I took to hunting even when I spent 3 years hunting public land without even SEEING a deer. MY brother didn't. After a few years of that, he lost interest and hasn't gotten it back yet.
Rising costs of hunting and access are a fact of life, but you don't have to like it.
You're right J.Holly, everyone needs something for nothing and they deserve just as good as anyone else that works harder either in the woods or on the clock to make their lives better.
Somehow or another we should be ashamed to travel four or five states a year and kill trophy bucks on public land. It takes $$$ to travel and buy out of state fees.... that's money others may not have and that is just unfair. Hell the more I think about it John Kerry should've won so we wouldn't have to worry about the horrible future of hunting.
Somehow or another we should be ashamed to travel four or five states a year and kill trophy bucks on public land. It takes $$$ to travel and buy out of state fees.... that's money others may not have and that is just unfair. Hell the more I think about it John Kerry should've won so we wouldn't have to worry about the horrible future of hunting.
J. Holly
New member
I can put it a different way. My final thoughts on the subject. I am driving to Globe, Arizona, and PAYING to hunt in an area that is basically managed. I am doing this of my own free will.
If I wanted to hunt coyotes and bobcats, I would simply go and do it, with no cost to me. But I am wanting a Mountain Lion. We have a very limited number in Oklahoma, and they aren't legal to shoot. This being said, I do have to go somewhere else and yes, I have to PAY for the right to hunt in this new location.
If I wanted to hunt coyotes and bobcats, I would simply go and do it, with no cost to me. But I am wanting a Mountain Lion. We have a very limited number in Oklahoma, and they aren't legal to shoot. This being said, I do have to go somewhere else and yes, I have to PAY for the right to hunt in this new location.
Brian Bentley
New member
I totally agree. Paying for access to private property is not only fair it should be expected. You make a grat point in that the public doesn't pay the landowners property taxes and therefore SHOULD be able to charge for access.
My only rub is when landowners start charging for the individual animals. This is not only unethical, in my opinion, but illegal. Wildlife is OWNED by the state,"public", and should not be sold as livestock by landowners. If they want to have that ability, I believe that the state should make them purchase any animal on their property and then it would be considered livestock. With that, they would have the right to set any price they choose and sell it accordingly. I just think that these "game ranches" taint any trophy taken on them. There is a reason that B&C does not recognize animals not taken "FAIR CHASE". Just my opinion.
My only rub is when landowners start charging for the individual animals. This is not only unethical, in my opinion, but illegal. Wildlife is OWNED by the state,"public", and should not be sold as livestock by landowners. If they want to have that ability, I believe that the state should make them purchase any animal on their property and then it would be considered livestock. With that, they would have the right to set any price they choose and sell it accordingly. I just think that these "game ranches" taint any trophy taken on them. There is a reason that B&C does not recognize animals not taken "FAIR CHASE". Just my opinion.
J. Holly- I might have dozed off somewhere, but I don't think too many people seriously think that private landowners should have to open up their land to the public.
I also don't think that people have a problem with landowners charging trespass fees. But, it is a fact that some people simply can't afford to hunt. Good, bad, or indifferent.
If you were a city kid that watched the outdoor channel and thought you might be interested in hunting, what would your options be to get to do that? All of them would typically involve a good bit of money.
Even wealthy landowners who have a lot of surplus deer that they need removed would rather hire deer killers (this is legal in Texas on permitted property) than allow people to come in take their deer for them. Even if it involved a supervised youth hunt.
I also don't think that people have a problem with landowners charging trespass fees. But, it is a fact that some people simply can't afford to hunt. Good, bad, or indifferent.
If you were a city kid that watched the outdoor channel and thought you might be interested in hunting, what would your options be to get to do that? All of them would typically involve a good bit of money.
Even wealthy landowners who have a lot of surplus deer that they need removed would rather hire deer killers (this is legal in Texas on permitted property) than allow people to come in take their deer for them. Even if it involved a supervised youth hunt.
jrb- If you think that the future of hunting is bright, either you haven't done your homework, or you are only concerned about it as it relates to you.
Brian Bentley
New member
I have been to hunting shows where hunts could be purchased/booked. In many cases I have seen outfitters with photo albums of deer. They would book a "hunt" for a particular animal. Not just a class. An any event, in the state of Texas at least, you could legally kill any "legal" deer for which you held a valid tag and not have to pay any extra fees unless there was a contract specifying different. Which would put you back into the realm of selling a particular animal. It is a fine line. Unfortunately most look the other way to these details with the thought that it is just the way it's done.
From a publication put out by Texas A&M in 2003: Preserving Texas' Hunting Heritage - A Strategic Plan for Ensuring the Future of Hunting in Texas.
Defining the Problem:
Defining the Problem:
I'm not saying it is a lost cause, but I certainly wouldn't say the future is bright.
Speaking from experience, I'll tell you that many preserves and ranches donate food, lodging and labor to needy kids, handicapped kids, terminally ill children and inner city kids while they allow them to hunt free of costs on their property.
Sounds like someone just has a case of jealousy over 180" whitetails and there must be NO GOOD that can come from an industry that produces them for those that can afford it.
What if an inner city kid decided he wanted to play NFL football? What if he wanted to drive Dale Jarrett's taurus? These things aren't going to be cheap, much less free. If people can't afford it, tough **** . There are a lot of things I'd like to do that I can't afford. There are plenty of folks in my area that can't afford to purchase the bullets and $25 tag to go kill themselves a deer... I donate dozens of deer a year to hunters for the hungry but I'll be damned if the world needs to rotate on it's axis until these poor people can hunt as they wish. Hunting, driving, fishing, golfing and everything else is getting expensive... that's life.
The future of hunting isn't near as bleak as some folks like sit back and BS that it is. There is an awful lot of "the sky is falling" rhetoric from folks and I haven't started running around like chicken little just yet. YellowHammer, I think you are obviously looking at things "as they pertain to you" or you'd be a little more chipper.
Sounds like someone just has a case of jealousy over 180" whitetails and there must be NO GOOD that can come from an industry that produces them for those that can afford it.
What if an inner city kid decided he wanted to play NFL football? What if he wanted to drive Dale Jarrett's taurus? These things aren't going to be cheap, much less free. If people can't afford it, tough **** . There are a lot of things I'd like to do that I can't afford. There are plenty of folks in my area that can't afford to purchase the bullets and $25 tag to go kill themselves a deer... I donate dozens of deer a year to hunters for the hungry but I'll be damned if the world needs to rotate on it's axis until these poor people can hunt as they wish. Hunting, driving, fishing, golfing and everything else is getting expensive... that's life.
The future of hunting isn't near as bleak as some folks like sit back and BS that it is. There is an awful lot of "the sky is falling" rhetoric from folks and I haven't started running around like chicken little just yet. YellowHammer, I think you are obviously looking at things "as they pertain to you" or you'd be a little more chipper.
I think that says all we need to know about your attitude.
You may be right, but not because I can't afford to kill a barn raised 180.
What happens when the above mentioned 6% of people that hunt dwindles down to nearly nothing?
You may think that because you can afford to hunt where you please that you control your hunting destiny. The voters and the legislatures ultimately govern whether or not you hunt. I sure would like a higher percentage of voters than hunt. If that 94% that doesn't hunt decides you don't need to, then it will be tough ****!
Yeah that's my attitude about people wanting something for nothing while they sit on their ass and wait for it. Do you want to raise taxes so the government can buy back private property so you can take your son hunting on it? Why not buy a piece of property and donate it to anyone and everyone that wants to hunt it for free? Sounds like you want something for nothing and anyone that disagrees is ruthless and cold hearted.
You guys raise 180" deer in barns in texas? Crazy! I thought those ranches were thousands and thousands of acres with shooter boxes and timed feeders. Oh wait, I KNOW they are. LOL! All this hypothetical talk and exaggeration is getting good!
I never even thought about legislation and voters.. it's almost like politics. Haha.
80% of Americans are not opposed to hunting, that is the number that makes or breaks our hunting future. You can watch all the peta adds you want but they only a VERY small percentage of this nation so the consiracty theories don't fly too well. The 6% of the nation (Yes that is also the same average as texas) that hunts is declining at a consistant rate over the last ten years. If you or your kids give up on hunting just because you are forced to hunt subpar public property that is not anyone else's fault... that 80% probably isn't willing to buy you some property.
I bet the average income of todays hunter has gone up over the last 10-20 years. Perhaps someday we will pay reperations to those folks who missed out on the hunting of big game. LOL!
And whats this "you can afford" stuff? You sending me some money?! If I could hunt where I please I'd be in Arizona next weekend!
You guys raise 180" deer in barns in texas? Crazy! I thought those ranches were thousands and thousands of acres with shooter boxes and timed feeders. Oh wait, I KNOW they are. LOL! All this hypothetical talk and exaggeration is getting good!
I never even thought about legislation and voters.. it's almost like politics. Haha.
80% of Americans are not opposed to hunting, that is the number that makes or breaks our hunting future. You can watch all the peta adds you want but they only a VERY small percentage of this nation so the consiracty theories don't fly too well. The 6% of the nation (Yes that is also the same average as texas) that hunts is declining at a consistant rate over the last ten years. If you or your kids give up on hunting just because you are forced to hunt subpar public property that is not anyone else's fault... that 80% probably isn't willing to buy you some property.
I bet the average income of todays hunter has gone up over the last 10-20 years. Perhaps someday we will pay reperations to those folks who missed out on the hunting of big game. LOL!
And whats this "you can afford" stuff? You sending me some money?! If I could hunt where I please I'd be in Arizona next weekend!
jrb- I think you are missing the point. I will bite the bullet and pay to hunt private land to the extent that I can. I'm not worried all that much about MY hunting because I hunt more than most much of it on private land.
I am, however, also concerned about propetuating the hunting heritage of America.
I am, however, also concerned about propetuating the hunting heritage of America.
Yeah, some of them are huge some even as big as 200 or 300 acres. With 5 acre breeding pens in the middle so a few "Cull" bucks can be turned out and shot. Most of the "hunters" are not even bothered by the ear tags or tattoos either. But that is beside the point.
That is the same 80% that outlawed bear seasons in several states, mountain lion seasons in California, use of leghold traps in several states and the list goes on. But, no sense in bothering with the facts.
I guess you are trying to slam me personally, but I never said or implied that I or my kids would give up. And I certainly don't expect anyone to give or buy me anything.
J. Holly
New member
I don't have numbers or statistics to back the coming statement up, but I do know it is happening and I also see it.
The State of Oklahoma has purchased many acres back from private land owners to increase the area of public hunting. Also, donations of land is at an all time high. Most of the newly donated land has specifications that it can only be used by "youth hunters". Additionally, Oklahoma has worked out many deals with Timber companys where the land gets traded, public land to a private company and vice-versa.
In a lot of states, this would be unheard of. Since the State always gains more property than it swaps out for; plus this property is thinned out of a lot of the big trees and replanted, where is the problem?
I will offer some statements that are completely personal opinion. I have no facts to back this up again. I see a decline in hunting here, primarily due to the break up of homes. A lot of kids that used to be with both mom and dad aren't now. Dad might like to hunt, he might not. Here in Oklahoma, it is getting harder to make a living with only one working parent. Thus, the money isn't there for activites that "cost" anything. You can play basketball with a $3 ball from Wal-mart in a neighborhood park. Baseball can be played for a little bit more. Football can be played for about $10. Also, these sports are popular with the neighborhood kids.
I see in the future some nintendo hunting. As a matter of fact, a ranch in Texas has already started it.
I don't blame anyone for the spot that we are in currently. I know in Oklahoma, we have a very aggressive plan to buy back land and to help hunters out. A lot of cars being driven in the cities have the special Wildlife Conservation Tags on them. An extra amount above our already high tags prices goes to the Oklahoma Department Wildlife. We have regular public meetings where people from the ODW listen to landowners. These meetings are held all over the state to convenience the landowners.
While there are no plans for price increases for tags this year, I am sure it will happen again soon. Most of this new money is being used to reintroduce types of animals in the state or to keep this reintroduction going. Elk are making a comeback, so are bear and mountain lion.
I can't blame any one group for the problems with hunting, except maybe the hunters themselves. There are a lot of people that go and trash up an area and then leave. Landowners have to clean it up themselves. Why would they let someone come back? People kill livestock, why would the landowners allow people back. Most "hunters" these days don't care. I know that most of us here in this board do, but we are a small minority compared to Mr. Businessman through the week and Duck Slayer on the weekend.
We need to police ourselves first, Practice and Preach Conservation and good practices, then this will hopefully educate the masses. Maybe I live in a delusional world, but here the sky is always blue, and the land is camoflauge.
The State of Oklahoma has purchased many acres back from private land owners to increase the area of public hunting. Also, donations of land is at an all time high. Most of the newly donated land has specifications that it can only be used by "youth hunters". Additionally, Oklahoma has worked out many deals with Timber companys where the land gets traded, public land to a private company and vice-versa.
In a lot of states, this would be unheard of. Since the State always gains more property than it swaps out for; plus this property is thinned out of a lot of the big trees and replanted, where is the problem?
I will offer some statements that are completely personal opinion. I have no facts to back this up again. I see a decline in hunting here, primarily due to the break up of homes. A lot of kids that used to be with both mom and dad aren't now. Dad might like to hunt, he might not. Here in Oklahoma, it is getting harder to make a living with only one working parent. Thus, the money isn't there for activites that "cost" anything. You can play basketball with a $3 ball from Wal-mart in a neighborhood park. Baseball can be played for a little bit more. Football can be played for about $10. Also, these sports are popular with the neighborhood kids.
I see in the future some nintendo hunting. As a matter of fact, a ranch in Texas has already started it.
I don't blame anyone for the spot that we are in currently. I know in Oklahoma, we have a very aggressive plan to buy back land and to help hunters out. A lot of cars being driven in the cities have the special Wildlife Conservation Tags on them. An extra amount above our already high tags prices goes to the Oklahoma Department Wildlife. We have regular public meetings where people from the ODW listen to landowners. These meetings are held all over the state to convenience the landowners.
While there are no plans for price increases for tags this year, I am sure it will happen again soon. Most of this new money is being used to reintroduce types of animals in the state or to keep this reintroduction going. Elk are making a comeback, so are bear and mountain lion.
I can't blame any one group for the problems with hunting, except maybe the hunters themselves. There are a lot of people that go and trash up an area and then leave. Landowners have to clean it up themselves. Why would they let someone come back? People kill livestock, why would the landowners allow people back. Most "hunters" these days don't care. I know that most of us here in this board do, but we are a small minority compared to Mr. Businessman through the week and Duck Slayer on the weekend.
We need to police ourselves first, Practice and Preach Conservation and good practices, then this will hopefully educate the masses. Maybe I live in a delusional world, but here the sky is always blue, and the land is camoflauge.
So to perpetuate the sport of hunting you want too..... what? Make it illegal for someone to build a fence on their property? To keep people, poachers, dogs and predators out? To practice QDM to better their herd? I guess what I'm missing is what taxes you'll raise and practices you make illegal to get back to 50% of the population hunting again.
And what should the guy do with his 200-300 acres in Texas? Is there a market for cactus down there? If a guy has the initiative to build a business and he makes it work out within the limits of the law so be it, how does it affect the average hunter?
Statistics from california aren't the best thing to contribute to national averages... take a look at the election map and you'll see where the liberals live.
You know better than me "slam you personally". I'm just trying to tie your argument together here... how is this hunting industry going to keep your kid from hunting in five years? Ten years? If he wants to hunt he will, I thought you were trying to make the point people would be priced out of hunting... that's totally different than being legislated out.
And what should the guy do with his 200-300 acres in Texas? Is there a market for cactus down there? If a guy has the initiative to build a business and he makes it work out within the limits of the law so be it, how does it affect the average hunter?
Statistics from california aren't the best thing to contribute to national averages... take a look at the election map and you'll see where the liberals live.
You know better than me "slam you personally". I'm just trying to tie your argument together here... how is this hunting industry going to keep your kid from hunting in five years? Ten years? If he wants to hunt he will, I thought you were trying to make the point people would be priced out of hunting... that's totally different than being legislated out.