Pay to hunt

That's why I support the public ownership of land. As long as the Feds and the States own land we'll have place to hunt without paying an arm and a leg to do it.

this issue is so complex. if we try to break it down to its simplest form, it doesn't make sense in practice.

on the one side we have the farmers - the guys who live there 365 days a year, paying the taxes, doing all the upkeep on the property, working the land (which is what brings many of the critters in), and generally just taking care of what is theirs.

on the other side we have the non-farming hunters - the guys who slave away at work all year, perhaps dreaming about their deer hunt later in the year. they just want a place to hunt, maybe spend some quality time w/ their kids away from work and school. not asking much.

the issue becomes complex when we throw a little money into the mix. most farmers have very little. the guys who work 9-5 in the city have varying degrees of it. the problem is at its zenith when the high roller comes in and offers (put an arbitrary number in here) per gun per day - but to make sure that money remains available for the farmer tomorrow, the high roller wants to see game. so, here we have capitalism in action - you can see where this is headed.

the solution for many of us (and this includes me on out-of-county hunts) becomes public lands. unfortunately, public land hunts are tough, most of the animals seen are being dragged into a pickup, and the antler quality is not what is available on private land (generally speaking, of course. there are exceptions).

i have no idea if we (as a country) are headed in the same direction of the european countries or not (where only the richest hunt). i'm not sure, though, that there is a better system than the one we have.

i do know that i am eternally grateful that i get to hunt private land for the bulk of my hunts - a point that is driven home every time i take on a public land hunt.

and, btw, cb900f is right about 'land swaps'.... every year i see the black hills of south dakota become more fragmented and developed (you would not believe how many new communities, golf courses, resorts, etc go up out there every year).  

Most sales or exchanges for government land have some safe guards but there is politics. But they don't have to sell the land. Priviatize the management of a block of land to an outfitter= small government. You still need a license so the state gets its money and you have to book with the outfitter "managing" the land, the outfitter gets his money, the state gets their money again because the outfitter manages the land, fewer state employees and the state gets their money yet again as the outfitter paid for the concession.. This has been done in parks but the only part privatized had revenue. This has happened to non-residents in Ontario, you most have a guide to hunt there. It builds money into the state.province economy