Leasing Ruins Conservation

[Elmo]

One guy picked donuts and the other guy picked cookies and now the guy with the donuts is jealous because he doesn't have cookies.

 

Just because someone has something you don't have doesn't mean they rich jerks.  People prioritize things differently.  I've meet guys who make less than I do and they go on hunting trips, have expensive gear, etc that I can't afford.  But "can't afford" is relative isn't it.  Sure if I really want to, I can afford it.  "Can't afford" really means "can't afford" and still have all the other stuff I spend money on.

[stoneam2006]

One guy picked donuts and the other guy picked cookies and now the guy with the donuts is jealous because he doesn't have cookies.

 

Just because someone has something you don't have doesn't mean they rich jerks.  People prioritize things differently.  I've meet guys who make less than I do and they go on hunting trips, have expensive gear, etc that I can't afford.  But "can't afford" is relative isn't it.  Sure if I really want to, I can afford it.  "Can't afford" really means "can't afford" and still have all the other stuff I spend money on.

I agree I have some friends with leases but I still don't think leasing helps the locals. I offered to lease the land I hunt as someone back a page or 2 had stated and they refused bc there is 2 family's who hunt it. They would have been on the lease too but glad there are still land owners like that

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[moog5050]

9 minutes ago, Elmo said:

One guy picked donuts and the other guy picked cookies and now the guy with the donuts is jealous because he doesn't have cookies.

 

Just because someone has something you don't have doesn't mean they rich jerks.  People prioritize things differently.  I've meet guys who make less than I do and they go on hunting trips, have expensive gear, etc that I can't afford.  But "can't afford" is relative isn't it.  Sure if I really want to, I can afford it.  "Can't afford" really means "can't afford" and still have all the other stuff I spend money on.

Donuts are always better than cookies.  This is a poor example, sorry Elmo.

[Elmo]

3 minutes ago, moog5050 said:

Donuts are always better than cookies.  This is a poor example, sorry Elmo.

Valid point but if you're ever in the city I'll take you around to some serious cookie joints.

[moog5050]

5 minutes ago, Elmo said:

Valid point but if you're ever in the city I'll take you around to some serious cookie joints.

Haha. I actually had to reconsider my position once I remembered my grandmother's butterhorn and almond paste cookies.

[adkhunter71]

31 minutes ago, Elmo said:

But "can't afford" is relative isn't it.

I agree Elmo....I have a strong dislike for this term.  When it is used correctly, I have no problem with it.  

I have heard excuses that "I can't afford" such and such, when the reality is that they can afford such and such but choose not to spend their money on it...big difference to me.

And to continue to take this thread off topic- I prefer cookies.
 

[Core]

2 hours ago, adkhunter71 said:

I agree Elmo....I have a strong dislike for this term.  When it is used correctly, I have no problem with it.  

I have heard excuses that "I can't afford" such and such, when the reality is that they can afford such and such but choose not to spend their money on it...big difference to me.

And to continue to take this thread off topic- I prefer cookies.
 

Yep, it often goes along with "I don't have time to", which is in almost all cases complete crap. If you work full time you may legitimately not have time to build a complete house by yourself on some land you own, but I've never met a person who didn't have time to work out, or take up a hobby or whatever. My younger brother said he was jealous that I went hunting last year and got a deer. But when I told him what to do to replicate it suddenly he's just too busy. But playing video games takes up a lot of time, so, I guess he didn't have time to get into hunting after all.

BTW I'm a cookie guy, actually my favorite are those cheap icing sugar cookies at walmart for like $3/box, the ones that are like little cakes. I will throw down half a box of those like it's nothing.

[Doc]

It does seem a shame that there is now a demand for making something that used to be free into a question of affordability. It's just another factor involved in the demise of hunting. As soon as hunting land costs get put on a priority list of affordability, the results for hunting are quite predictable, aren't they?

But I am a believer in the sanctity of "landowner's rights" so I can whine all I want about it, but thankfully, there is no way to force any of that to change. It's just the natural evolution of things.

[growalot]

Yes sir...as a landowner if I ever thought I might say yes to opening our place up to a stranger or to when I get too old or just can't hunt...That thought is so far gone the light of day will never find it after reading this.

BTW...you guys always want "proof"for dang near everything..yet take this whole DEC..Was going into private land to kill deer like it or not..without question...

Edited September 2, 2016 by growalot

[Padre86]

6 hours ago, growalot said:

Yes sir...as a landowner if I ever thought I might say yes to opening our place up to a stranger or to when I get too old or just can't hunt...That thought is so far gone the light of day will never find it after reading this.

 

See, I don't get this mentality.  Don't get me wrong, I understand private land is just that....private.  But if you're a landowner who at least understands the value of properly managing local animal populations, why would you not be in favor of allowing other hunters onto your land to help manage said populations (for payment or for free)?

And if the landowner can't or won't hunt anymore, why wouldn't he/she be in favor of allowing someone else to do that hunting?

FWIW, there is a deer population issue in western and central NY, most of it to do with too many bucks being taken and not enough does.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Padre86

[Buckmaster7600]

See, I don't get this mentality.  Don't get me wrong, I understand private land is just that....private.  But if you're a landowner who at least understands the value of properly managing local animal populations, why would you not be in favor of allowing other hunters onto your land to help manage said populations (for payment or for free)?

And if the landowner can't or won't hunt anymore, why wouldn't he/she be in favor of allowing someone else to do that hunting?

FWIW, there is a deer population issue in western and central NY, most of it to do with too many bucks being taken and not enough does.

I'm with grow on this one, maybe when I'm too old to hunt I might consider leasing it but as long as I'm able there will be no one else hunting other than my brother and father.

The real problem is that people can't be trusted. No one else treats my land as I do and as I want it treated.

It's just easier not to worry about it and have it to yourself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NYBowhunter]

19 minutes ago, Padre86 said:

See, I don't get this mentality.  Don't get me wrong, I understand private land is just that....private.  But if you're a landowner who at least understands the value of properly managing local animal populations, why would you not be in favor of allowing other hunters onto your land to help manage said populations (for payment or for free)?

And if the landowner can't or won't hunt anymore, why wouldn't he/she be in favor of allowing someone else to do that hunting?

FWIW, there is a deer population issue in western and central NY, most of it to do with too many bucks being taken and not enough does.

Why you ask? Its very simple just way to many dirtbags and low lifes in this world  that have no repect for others property. Being a landowner and landlord, sometimes we think the people we know, we really dont. What some have worked thier lives to get can get destroyed by others in short order. Sometimes the risk just doesnt  out weigh the benefits wether it be finacially or for the sake of animal mgt. Granted there many honest great hunters out there but who has the time to weed through them. Thats why when your out seeking permission  you get the simple NO from landowners a vast majority of the times. Its just not worth the headache.

[Buckmaster7600]

Why you ask? Its very simple just way to many dirtbags and low lifes in this world  that have no repect for others property. Being a landowner and landlord, sometimes we think the people we know, we really dont. What some have worked thier lives to get can get destroyed by others in short order. Sometimes the risk just doesnt  out weigh the benefits wether it be finacially or for the sake of animal mgt. Granted there many honest great hunters out there but who has the time to weed through them. Thats why when your out seeking permission  you get the simple NO from landowners a vast majority of the times. Its just not worth the headache.

This is exactly it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Padre86]

3 hours ago, NYBowhunter said:

Why you ask? Its very simple just way to many dirtbags and low lifes in this world  that have no repect for others property. Being a landowner and landlord, sometimes we think the people we know, we really dont. What some have worked thier lives to get can get destroyed by others in short order. Sometimes the risk just doesnt  out weigh the benefits wether it be finacially or for the sake of animal mgt. Granted there many honest great hunters out there but who has the time to weed through them. Thats why when your out seeking permission  you get the simple NO from landowners a vast majority of the times. Its just not worth the headache.

 

3 hours ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

 

 

I'm with grow on this one, maybe when I'm too old to hunt I might consider leasing it but as long as I'm able there will be no one else hunting other than my brother and father.

The real problem is that people can't be trusted. No one else treats my land as I do and as I want it treated.

It's just easier not to worry about it and have it to yourself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Listen, I get that a landowner has the absolute freedom to choose who does and does not hunt on his land...and I would never argue to take that away.

But if individual landowners are only focused on their own hunting goals, are they still working towards the common goal of keeping the deer population, as a whole, healthy and stable?  If you want to seal off your land from any and all strangers, that's your prerogative....just don't complain when the deer population starts to get out of whack.  

 

That aside, land access is the number one issue deterring most new hunters from really getting involved in this activity.  With the exception of the Adirondacks, which is a real tough area to hunt, there isn't a lot of public land for new people to get their feet wet on.  Sooner or later, us older farts are going to die off.  If we want the next generation to keep hunting viable, culturally and legislatively, we need to find ways to get more people out hunting...there isn't enough public land in western and central NY to accommodate everyone.

 

Edit: And I can totally appreciate why some landowners are skeptical of letting total strangers onto their property...it only takes a few ******* to really ruin it for everyone.  All the same, if we are all only focused on our individual goals, we're going to have a tough time keeping hunting traditions alive going into the future.

Edited September 2, 2016 by WNYBuckHunter
Edited for language. Please see the forum TOS

[growalot]

I'll tell you why... the absolute disdain  for land owners that has been shown on just this site and this thread...I just looked in the mirror...Nope I really do not look like a chump nor stupid... Kick me in the shins and I just may smile before I punch you in the face. Though I wont say thank you, would you like to do it again?....That is what I am taking away from some of these posts.

O

Edited September 2, 2016 by growalot

[growalot]

In fact I have been grooming this place to sell to hunters when the time comes...I'm actually thinking perhaps not...I'll be considering courting developers instead...

[The_Field_Ager]

We allowed some family acquaintances to hunt our property for a time. We endured poaching, littering and attempts to utilize multiple family tags in order to clean out the woods of deer. These guys were not even strangers.

[stoneam2006]

Well some landowners think they own the game that is on thier property and build natural and unnatural fences to limit the deer from getting off the property and then complain when the dec tries and does something about it bc landowners don't shoot enough doe or plant mass food plots that the doe come into and stay then they fill their few tags and the rest just wait out the season. Wonder why some guys can't stand the landowners when guys are willing to help eradicate yotes but yet some landowners decide they can shoot them outta season bc there is to many of them...sounds like some landowners are the ones who make the rest look bad just like some hunters make the rest look bad.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[The_Field_Ager]

1 hour ago, Padre86 said:

 All the same, if we are all only focused on our individual goals, we're going to have a tough time keeping hunting traditions alive going into the future.

What does this even mean? You are presuming that private hunter goals are non conservationist. You have empirical evidence to support the claim that hunters of private lands are ecologically hostile to management? 

No indeed, it is the opposite. Private land owners are very precious and caring about their local deer in my experience. It is the strangers, blow-ins and trespassers that wreak havoc and do not have long term goals for these areas.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Papist

[growalot]

Some land owners huh...I love your post...let me put one out there that is comparable in facts:

Well some hunters kill too many bigfoot whist swinging from tree to tree with a blow darts...This is making it impossible for the Jackalope hunters to lower the out of control jackalope population...while complaining that they should be allowed the use of hoverbroards...

[The_Field_Ager]

16 minutes ago, stoneam2006 said:

Well some landowners think they own the game that is on thier property and build natural and unnatural fences to limit the deer from getting off the property 

This makes no sense. Fences also keep deer from coming in. Can't imagine a fenced in population lasting many seasons. Not when one considers the average parcel size of private land that is not farm or forest. 82 percent of NY land is either forest or active farm land. Undeveloped private parcels account for a tiny percentage of landmass, less than 1.5 % in fact.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Papist

[The_Field_Ager]

This report states that 40% of private land owners do indeed allow non family member to have recreational access, including hunting. Bigger than I would have guessed at:

http://www.agriculture.ny.gov/rl_survey.pdf

[Buckmaster7600]

Well some landowners think they own the game that is on thier property and build natural and unnatural fences to limit the deer from getting off the property and then complain when the dec tries and does something about it bc landowners don't shoot enough doe or plant mass food plots that the doe come into and stay then they fill their few tags and the rest just wait out the season. Wonder why some guys can't stand the landowners when guys are willing to help eradicate yotes but yet some landowners decide they can shoot them outta season bc there is to many of them...sounds like some landowners are the ones who make the rest look bad just like some hunters make the rest look bad.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

I have never heard of this particular phenomenon. Is this an epidemic in your area?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stoneam2006]

What's that?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[phade]

On ‎8‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 1:44 PM, Core said:

Yep, it often goes along with "I don't have time to", which is in almost all cases complete crap. If you work full time you may legitimately not have time to build a complete house by yourself on some land you own, but I've never met a person who didn't have time to work out, or take up a hobby or whatever. My younger brother said he was jealous that I went hunting last year and got a deer. But when I told him what to do to replicate it suddenly he's just too busy. But playing video games takes up a lot of time, so, I guess he didn't have time to get into hunting after all.

BTW I'm a cookie guy, actually my favorite are those cheap icing sugar cookies at walmart for like $3/box, the ones that are like little cakes. I will throw down half a box of those like it's nothing.

Some people legitimately don't have time because of the value of other priorities and also because of the balance at which they want to be successful. Hunting can be anything to people - simple as throwing boots on and putting a few fosters into the smoothbore and heading out back - all the way to sending in lab samples to measure the protein % of your clover plot.

For some people, if they can't be "all in" it's "all out," however. That's completely understandable. While I aim to take older bucks, I'm also able to enjoy company/time with family and friends. What I know I am not, is the casual hunter though. I couldn't do that because it won't deliver on what I want out of hunting. Some people can hunt opening day and not do anything again until they sight in their gun for the next season. Not me - twice last season I had to travel back from Indianapolis on red eyes to make the rut vacation and gun opener, both events involving delayed flights and hitting the pillow with less than two hours of sleep before needing to shake the cobwebs off and hunt. Sane people wouldn't do what I did to hunt, and that's perfectly OK. My hunting buddies know I am a little crazy, so I fit right in with them.