Changing attitude about pay to hunt ?

woodsman said:
This has been a great post but still what can be done for public land,what is south Dakota or the federal government able to do to improve the habitat and increase land availability.Without the public land being of decent hunting quality the hunter numbers are going to continue to drop,especially out of state hunters.This must be a big help to the local economies and you would think high on the states to do list.There's lots of talk about private land and how owners maintain their land for hunters and habitat,but that seems to lead to the pay to hunt issue.Improved public land opportunities is the answer,but at this time I'm wondering if south Dakota even has enough quality public land to make a difference.It has been greatly reduced over the past years and we can only hope something or someone can turn it around.
Click to expand...


U need to look at fed or state lands man not private lands leased like crep or wia they disappear & are not managed for wildlife populations only crp grass...

SD has lots of quality public land if u willing to travel a lil & look at new spots instead of bring locked into 1 area for years...

Once in awhile state lands or fed owned lands are mowed or burned etc not yearly...

To paint a broad picture that all SD public land gets hammered or is not productive is just B/S or nieve
 
Last edited:
I will weigh in on this one.

Pay to hunt is simple when someone else (company) is footing the bill as entertainment or you are simply paying for yourself. Not against trespass fee hunts, but will sit quiet on my feelings for lodge type operations. To be honest I am largely against commercialization of hunting.

What about the guy hunting with two of his kids? The trespass fee just tripled. So a daily access fee becomes $300 to $450.

I have hunted private quite often (large family farm in SD, private farms in ND and MN). Did not pay to hunt these farms. Did often leave or send gifts or helped move cattle, etc... Most of these private opportunities come and go for the reasons I listed on another thread in this forum ... I also have private opportunities for other game animals including ruffed grouse.

I have consistent success on MN public land when hunting by myself or in a small group. My dogs (especially my prime 6 year old dog) do really well in grass even on mid season roosters. The issue is drive time for a single hunt.

If I am going to pay a $120 - $170 dollars to hunt pheasants I might just hunt a nearby preserve (20 minutes from my house). Their birds are very strong fliers and somewhat elusive especially if they survive the first day. I have watched these birds run a couple 100 yards and flush wild... To be honest good preserve birds often fly and act like most wild birds ... I have been hunting wild birds since '75 so I have been around wild pheasants for 40+ years (ND, MN, SD, KS, IA).

In ND if you the landowner accept money for hunting - you become liable for any and all activities and accidents that occur on your land. ND law exempts landowners from liability if no payment is received or accepted. Gifts (food, alcohol, etc... are just that ... gifts and does not result in liability.)

What is the law in SD regarding pay hunts and landowner liability ?
 
BRITTMAN said:
I will weigh in on this one.

Pay to hunt is simple when someone else (company) is footing the bill as entertainment or you are simply paying for yourself. Not against trespass fee hunts, but will sit quiet on my feelings for lodge type operations. To be honest I am largely against commercialization of hunting.

What about the guy hunting with two of his kids? The trespass fee just tripled. So a daily access fee becomes $300 to $450.

I have hunted private quite often (large family farm in SD, private farms in ND and MN). Did not pay to hunt these farms. Did often leave or send gifts or helped move cattle, etc... Most of these private opportunities come and go for the reasons I listed on another thread in this forum ... I also have private opportunities for other game animals including ruffed grouse.

I have consistent success on MN public land when hunting by myself or in a small group. My dogs (especially my prime 6 year old dog) do really well in grass even on mid season roosters. The issue is drive time for a single hunt.

If I am going to pay a $120 - $170 dollars to hunt pheasants I might just hunt a nearby preserve (20 minutes from my house). Their birds are very strong fliers and somewhat elusive especially if they survive the first day. I have watched these birds run a couple 100 yards and flush wild... To be honest good preserve birds often fly and act like most wild birds ... I have been hunting wild birds since '75 so I have been around wild pheasants for 40+ years (ND, MN, SD, KS, IA).

In ND if you the landowner accept money for hunting - you become liable for any and all activities and accidents that occur on your land. ND law exempts landowners from liability if no payment is received or accepted. Gifts (food, alcohol, etc... are just that ... gifts and does not result in liability.)

What is the law in SD regarding pay hunts and landowner liability ?
Click to expand...

About the same. I have not read the law, but I have been told it is the same. I have a million dollars liability policy and they tell me I need to have a waiver signed by all paying customers. The insurance company needed to approve the waiver. I no longer do any guiding for that very reason, reduce my liability.
 
I was hunting a public place in central Montana last year, and camped at the place, so I could be the first one in, in the morning.At 700 am, 2 guys in a brand new suburban pull up, and they had some local Denton guy guiding for them.so- these guides, are taking these monied up guys to the public places? What gives?Pheasant hunting is changing fast boys. Good, free, private ranches are disappearing fast!!
 
These guys were from Northern California. They both had beretta EE- LL's, and they had a guide, who told them how to hunt it, then left, to go block up on the hill.I watched all this from my 25 year old cab over camper .
 
I wont weigh in but hunting has probably changed the most in my generation. I know guys that won't go hunting unless they pay for it. Then they know for sure they are going to get the experience that they have pictured in their head. It is so hard for me to get guys to go pheasant, quail, dove, turkey hunting. I invite people all the time to go hunting. Friends, family, guys on this forum. And rarely get a guy or two to go. But when its a hunt where money is involved because of the type of game, or amount of game, people are all about it. If I called 10 people right now and said, "I am going to a good private farm 4 hours away in Kansas to hunt", I would get one or two people able to go. If I called 10 people and said "I'm going to an upland ranch 4 hours away in Kansas, it's $450 a piece for 3 days of hunting on top of your license", I would get about 7 or 8 of those people wanting to go. Just like consumer buying in general, people will pay and go for the guarantee! I was introduced to hunting by both grandpa's, dad, and uncles. That's why I knock doors and ask permission. Been successful at it, but I still hunt public too. And I help out those letting me hunt but I have also paid 25 per night per man to stay in a farm house and hunt the property too. But in that case I'm actually saving a little on hotel and getting to hunt, so I dont really consider that pay to play. But technically it is...
 
PheasantWhisperer said:
I wont weigh in but hunting has probably changed the most in my generation. I know guys that won't go hunting unless they pay for it. Then they know for sure they are going to get the experience that they have pictured in their head. It is so hard for me to get guys to go pheasant, quail, dove, turkey hunting. I invite people all the time to go hunting. Friends, family, guys on this forum. And rarely get a guy or two to go. But when its a hunt where money is involved because of the type of game, or amount of game, people are all about it. If I called 10 people right now and said, "I am going to a good private farm 4 hours away in Kansas to hunt", I would get one or two people able to go. If I called 10 people and said "I'm going to an upland ranch 4 hours away in Kansas, it's $450 a piece for 3 days of hunting on top of your license", I would get about 7 or 8 of those people wanting to go. Just like consumer buying in general, people will pay and go for the guarantee! I was introduced to hunting by both grandpa's, dad, and uncles. That's why I knock doors and ask permission. Been successful at it, but I still hunt public too. And I help out those letting me hunt but I have also paid 25 per night per man to stay in a farm house and hunt the property too. But in that case I'm actually saving a little on hotel and getting to hunt, so I dont really consider that pay to play. But technically it is...
Click to expand...

I agree. I grew up the same way. I also have time for maybe two hunts a year. As much as I love walking with my dogs, I can do it at home for free. I would turn down a hunt at a guided lodge( unless it was free) but I do gain access in sd for a little cash. But it is not about limits, it is about having the place to ourselves as if it were ours for the weekend. We did not limit out but one of the three days and it was still great. I take time to pick up trash or mend a fence when needed. Often I don't see the farmer when we go. He leaves a map and we hunt on our own.
 
I would pay 25 dollars to stay on a decent farm, he'll yeah, screaming deal. I'm sure as hell not paying some money monger 400 dollars a day!!Thats totally outrageous.My dad and I hunted together for 40 years, and one time he treated me to a fancy pheasant hunting plsce near Gregory South Dakota . 400 bucks a day, per person. We hunted in March , they drove my dad and I to the field in a big bus.We were the only ones hunting.I slayed them, because it was easy, compared to Montana hunting. It was a cool place, but the only reason I went, was because dad payed. He only paid one other time, when we stayed at a farm near Miller , and the dude only charged us 200 dollars for 3 days staying on the farm. That was 25 years ago, and I dought if those kind of places still exist in South Dakota . Those were my two South Dakota hunting experiences .
 
david0311

Goosemaster said:
I was hunting a public place in central Montana last year, and camped at the place, so I could be the first one in, in the morning.At 700 am, 2 guys in a brand new suburban pull up, and they had some local Denton guy guiding for them.so- these guides, are taking these monied up guys to the public places? What gives?Pheasant hunting is changing fast boys. Good, free, private ranches are disappearing fast!!
Click to expand...

That a least should not happen in South Dakota--As a guide cannot work any where except private land--ever if he has a current license--

a good law IMHO:cheers:
 
"He only paid one other time, when we stayed at a farm near Miller , and the dude only charged us 200 dollars for 3 days staying on the farm. That was 25 years ago, and I doubt if those kind of places still exist in South Dakota ."

Goose, Careful I think you just made my point. My tab for three days lodging in a fantastic "Man cave" lodging set up and three days hunting prime private ground runs me $450.00. With inflation figured in from your hunt 25 years ago my conclusion is YES those kind of places and experiences do still exist in South Dakota and my overall experience well justifies what I feel is a very reasonable return on my outlay.
 
Last edited:
I guess I have to agree. Pay hunting does have its place. I usually don't spend more than 250 dollars for a week of hunting in Montana, and it's good hunting. You don't limit out every day, but you get shots, and you see roosters.You can knock on doors, but you get turned down a lot, or nobody's home, or the land is leased.I think that's why people like pay hunting, way less hassle, and I can see that.I just can't afford 100 dollars a day, just to hunt. I think that's ridiculous .
 
Andy to Aunt Bea: "Aunt Bea, just pay the MAN".
 
Unfortunately my conclusion/dilemma that I pose to you all is unless the state and federal governments were to throw it's resources and mite to establish a scenario where both state and federal lands are re-prioritized FOLLOWING legitimate incentives and opportunities for the private land owner to benefit I do not see how the quality and quantity of public hunting will not continue to diminish with greater pressures put on smaller acreages.

The likely result like it or not will be more of us willing to pay for better quality hunts as our individual resources allow. My hats off to those who chose to take a do or die determination and hunt only what public has to offer but lets be honest in that at some point newcomers will avoid interest in it due to lack of opportunity. The saddest aspect to all of this as someone pointed out is the diminished chances for our young people from all backgrounds to get out and understand what time in the outdoors has to offer.

So my question to someone here like Haymaker and others who are at ground zero of this debate is if we could create a clone at the helm with Teddy Roosevelt spirit, FDR's "lets get to work" aggressiveness and a D. Trump "run it like a business" mentality is there any economic scenario that could be a win-win for both the public and private sectors ?
 
Last edited:
Brad6260 said:
Unfortunately my conclusion/dilemma that I pose to you all is unless the state and federal governments were to throw it's resources and mite to establish a scenario where both state and federal lands are re-prioritized FOLLOWING legitimate incentives and opportunities for the private land owner to benefit I do not see how the quality and quantity of public hunting will not continue to diminish with greater pressures put on smaller acreages.

The likely result like it or not will be more of us willing to pay for better quality hunts as our individual resources allow. My hats off to those who chose to take a do or die determination and hunt only what public has to offer but lets be honest in that at some point newcomers will avoid interest in it due to lack of opportunity. The saddest aspect to all of this as someone pointed out is the diminished chances for our young people from all backgrounds to get out and understand what time in the outdoors has to offer.

So my question to someone here like Haymaker and others who are at ground zero of this debate is if we could create a clone at the helm with Teddy Roosevelt spirit, FDR's "lets get to work" aggressiveness and a D. Trump "run it like a business" mentality is there any economic scenario that could be a win-win for both the public and private sectors ?
Click to expand...

I am not sure that I know the answer to that. I think a new version of CRP could help but it takes more than CRP. CRP is great for nesting but does not do much once it is full of snow. Farming practices probably are the main thing that needs to change. Fall tillage is probably the most detrimental practice for pheasants. It also degrades the soil in general. Could or should there be an incentive to reduce or alter the damage, I do not know. Our governor tried to do what you are talking about with a Pheasant Summit. I am not aware of it leading to much change, maybe I am just not aware and something good has happened. Personally I would rather see my land comprised of crops, pasture and parcels beneficial to wildlife. I can only do that if I can generate enough revenue to justify it. If hunters see that the dollars they spend on hunting are providing habitat instead of paying for a trip to Tahiti, it might not seem so bad. How much should be charged? I offer a no frills do it yourself working man hunt. I provide a place to stay that I think is cheaper than a motel, a place to clean your birds and everything you need to do your own cooking. You can walk out the door and start hunting. I am booked up for next year as much as I want to be right now so I guess I am not over charging. I am not planning to raise my rates, I might increase my minimums. I do not know if any of this has answered your questions.
 
Thanks for the reply Haymaker. Certainly no obvious answers.
I did find this report online for anyone wanting to look further into the subject.

http://habitat.sd.gov/resources/habitatsummitinfo/docs/PHWG Final Report.pdf

Haymaker I am curious about one comment you made.
" Personally I would rather see my land comprised of crops, pasture and parcels beneficial to wildlife. I can only do that if I can generate enough revenue to justify it."

If you had to guess how much less money by percentage your land would generate if run as you described above versus if you went for full commercial production using the current farming practices found in the area ?
 
Last edited:
I think that SD could follow some of the direction that Dayton did in MN with buffers. I'm not sure of the exact solution, but the idea of either forcing or enticing the operator to leave some grass buffers around waterways and fencelines would go a long ways. Tiling has done away with so much winter cover in the eastern part of SD - that cover that was very important for winter survival in SD.
Another point of conversation would be shorter term limits for CRP contract - or possibly adjustable rates. We currently have some pieces in CRP that are paying $100/acre less than current rates and they have a couple more years in contract. I'm sure this is done for a cost-saving measure on the FSA's account - since the rental rates have done nothing but increase.

SDRAT
 
sdrat said:
I think that SD could follow some of the direction that Dayton did in MN with buffers. I'm not sure of the exact solution, but the idea of either forcing or enticing the operator to leave some grass buffers around waterways and fencelines would go a long ways. Tiling has done away with so much winter cover in the eastern part of SD - that cover that was very important for winter survival in SD.
Another point of conversation would be shorter term limits for CRP contract - or possibly adjustable rates. We currently have some pieces in CRP that are paying $100/acre less than current rates and they have a couple more years in contract. I'm sure this is done for a cost-saving measure on the FSA's account - since the rental rates have done nothing but increase.

SDRAT
Click to expand...

Have you heard who is going to enforce the buffer zones around the wetlands and who is defining the wetlands? Are the wetlands going to be surveyed? Lets hope its not NRCS standards. Curious how that's going to work. ND attempted the same thing through Farmers Home Administration Easements and they area a challenge to say the least.
 
I have not followed the MN initiative much at all. The logistics of defining, maintaining/policing and paying are all labor intensive and very hard for most farmers to see the importance of.

SDRAT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top