Kansas Trespassing Fee for Private Land

KSnative said:
I do not doubt your knowledge of pheasants, CRP and wetland reserve programs but just wondering - why patronize Facebook? We don't need to enrich a socialist even more. If you want to be tracked, monitored and censored by an entity that you support financially - many "modern" wives would be happy to accommodate you, and the fringe benefits are probably better. At least, a little bit.

Best forum of its type anywhere - right here. Leave Facebook to the "Muffies".
Click to expand...
Please don't take this personally, but it has been my experience that when people don't reply to straight forward questions, it is because they have no good answer. True?

Not here to rag on anyone but if enough people stop feeding these guys who are out to bend us to their "vision" - they will eventually slow their roll. Hard to see any reason to help them in their evil endeavors - especially when very good alternatives (like this very forum) exist.
 
KSnative said:
With few to no exceptions, no farmer would significantly reduce production even if that facilitated leasing (which is not the case - what, exactly, to you suppose attracts the deer in the first place)? Nor would they increase production if they quit leasing - there is simply no rationale for that.

I wouldn't. None of my neighbors would. There may be isolated exceptions so any active farmer or landowner out there - let me know if I'm wrong on this, where you live.
Click to expand...
I am talking about tearing out tree lines or hedge rows etc to put into crop production, when you lease you lease the whole farm not just the acreage that you hunt i believe.

in my logic which very well could be wrong, if i have 160 acres with lets say a tree line and a little water way which someone leases for 2000 a year. Is it more cost beneficial to leave that acreage in tree lines and waterway alone and keep the lease or put it into production and lose the lease? Maybe my math and thinking is wrong, but i can drive around where i live and see farmers tearing out fence lines and tree lines to put into crop production everywhere.
 
whatsnext said:
I am talking about tearing out tree lines or hedge rows etc to put into crop production, when you lease you lease the whole farm not just the acreage that you hunt i believe.

in my logic which very well could be wrong, if i have 160 acres with lets say a tree line and a little water way which someone leases for 2000 a year. Is it more cost beneficial to leave that acreage in tree lines and waterway alone and keep the lease or put it into production and lose the lease? Maybe my math and thinking is wrong, but i can drive around where i live and see farmers tearing out fence lines and tree lines to put into crop production everywhere.
Click to expand...
The existence of a deer lease in no way conditions, precludes, guides or influences farming practices. At least, not in my experience. Active farmers/landowners/leasers - input welcome. What is your real-world experience?
 
KSnative said:
The existence of a deer lease in no way conditions, precludes, guides or influences farming practices. At least, not in my experience. Active farmers/landowners/leasers - input welcome. What is your real-world experience?
Click to expand...
real world experience is also anecdotal evidence correct?

I know that in many hunting leases there is a clause that if habitat is torn out it can be a legal reason to exit a contract, why would that be put in there ?
 
westksbowhunter said:
What will happen eventually is that anyone wanting to hunt Kansas, be it resident or non resident, will have to go to an outfitter.
Click to expand...
Or hunt public land that cannot be leased.

Times change. The cat buck is out of the bag and there's no going back. IMO, the current system will continue and most likely expand.

I do think we should be honest about the whole deal. The wild game really doesn't belong to the State. The State attempts to manage it, well or poorly as may be the case. That's true.

However, landowners control the access to the wild game. They control access to their land, as they should. It IS their land to do with as they will (although the Feds continue to exercise more and more oversight and control).

Since they control the access, they control the game. That amounts to de factor ownership. If the famous terty-point-buck of song and story resides on a particular landowner's 10,000 acres, that landowner essentially owns that terty-point-buck and can sell him via a lease/Outfitter arrangement. That's just the honest truth of it.

A problem that I saw and believe will become even more common is poaching. Back when this Kansas Giant Deer mania got going, places where I pheasant hunted got leased up for deer. These were places that the regular small town folks that lived in the area used to hunt for deer until the leasing got rampant. What I saw was people going out at night to get that terty-point-buck that they used to be able to fair chase.

Illegal as heck. I know it was going on though. Before you start, I've always hunted deer on public land. Best KS deer I harvested was 207# field dressed. This was on Corps land around a reservoir. Played cat and mouse stalking that deer in snow for about 90 minutes along a creek. He finally decided to make a break for it across a cut corn field. Did not work out as he planned, I'm sure. Great memory.

The other thing I find interesting is the discrimination. Corbet talks about someone owning 80 acres being able to sell his landowner tag. Why 80 acres? Why not 160? What about the guy that has 79 acres? What about the guy that has a 40 acre woodlot just packed with deer bedding down?

Why can't I get a tag and sell it to whoever wants to hunt public land?
 
whatsnext said:
real world experience is also anecdotal evidence correct?

I know that in many hunting leases there is a clause that if habitat is torn out it can be a legal reason to exit a contract, why would that be put in there ?
Click to expand...
Could be. But:
1. How many hunting leases have you actually reviewed, or signed?
2. What, exactly, comprises deer habitat?
My guess would be that an extra plot of corn might prove more favorable to deer than, say, a hedge row - good as that is for quail.
 
KSnative said:
Could be. But:
1. How many hunting leases have you actually reviewed, or signed?
2. What, exactly, comprises deer habitat?
My guess would be that an extra plot of corn might prove more favorable to deer than, say, a hedge row - good as that is for quail.
Click to expand...
1 . It is part of the lease i am involved in, that is why i bring it up
2. I move more deer in CRP or thickets than corn when bird hunting, i have had deer running out of tickets flush many a covey of quail.
 
Chestle said:
Or hunt public land that cannot be leased.

Times change. The cat buck is out of the bag and there's no going back. IMO, the current system will continue and most likely expand.

I do think we should be honest about the whole deal. The wild game really doesn't belong to the State. The State attempts to manage it, well or poorly as may be the case. That's true.

However, landowners control the access to the wild game. They control access to their land, as they should. It IS their land to do with as they will (although the Feds continue to exercise more and more oversight and control).

Since they control the access, they control the game. That amounts to de factor ownership. If the famous terty-point-buck of song and story resides on a particular landowner's 10,000 acres, that landowner essentially owns that terty-point-buck and can sell him via a lease/Outfitter arrangement. That's just the honest truth of it.

A problem that I saw and believe will become even more common is poaching. Back when this Kansas Giant Deer mania got going, places where I pheasant hunted got leased up for deer. These were places that the regular small town folks that lived in the area used to hunt for deer until the leasing got rampant. What I saw was people going out at night to get that terty-point-buck that they used to be able to fair chase.

Illegal as heck. I know it was going on though. Before you start, I've always hunted deer on public land. Best KS deer I harvested was 207# field dressed. This was on Corps land around a reservoir. Played cat and mouse stalking that deer in snow for about 90 minutes along a creek. He finally decided to make a break for it across a cut corn field. Did not work out as he planned, I'm sure. Great memory.

The other thing I find interesting is the discrimination. Corbet talks about someone owning 80 acres being able to sell his landowner tag. Why 80 acres? Why not 160? What about the guy that has 79 acres? What about the guy that has a 40 acre woodlot just packed with deer bedding down?

Why can't I get a tag and sell it to whoever wants to hunt public land?
Click to expand...
You make some excellent points here. Although game does travel considerably - even non-migratory species. Plenty of deer shot across across the line from my neighbor's leased deer stands on my corn field.

All I'm looking for is something - anything - that could be done to level the playing field for Kansas "locals" a bit. They deserve that much, would you not agree? Right now, it sounds like deer and leases drive everything, and the rules are Texas-style. Highest bidder buys the trophy - even if someone else poached it. Can't say that will ever sit exactly right with me.

Are you planning to attend the NRA annual convention in Houston? Perhaps we could get together and buy a bushel of White Wings while we are there. :)
 
s.davis said:
You're the one who asked the question. If you already have an answer you like to tell yourself, maybe don't post it.
Click to expand...
Not relevant what I do or do not like, this is an open forum - that is its value.

I withdraw the "axe" question, it wasn't fair of me to ask. But your record here is informative.
 
Chestle said:
Or hunt public land that cannot be leased.

Times change. The cat buck is out of the bag and there's no going back. IMO, the current system will continue and most likely expand.

I do think we should be honest about the whole deal. The wild game really doesn't belong to the State. The State attempts to manage it, well or poorly as may be the case. That's true.

However, landowners control the access to the wild game. They control access to their land, as they should. It IS their land to do with as they will (although the Feds continue to exercise more and more oversight and control).

Since they control the access, they control the game. That amounts to de factor ownership. If the famous terty-point-buck of song and story resides on a particular landowner's 10,000 acres, that landowner essentially owns that terty-point-buck and can sell him via a lease/Outfitter arrangement. That's just the honest truth of it.

A problem that I saw and believe will become even more common is poaching. Back when this Kansas Giant Deer mania got going, places where I pheasant hunted got leased up for deer. These were places that the regular small town folks that lived in the area used to hunt for deer until the leasing got rampant. What I saw was people going out at night to get that terty-point-buck that they used to be able to fair chase.

Illegal as heck. I know it was going on though. Before you start, I've always hunted deer on public land. Best KS deer I harvested was 207# field dressed. This was on Corps land around a reservoir. Played cat and mouse stalking that deer in snow for about 90 minutes along a creek. He finally decided to make a break for it across a cut corn field. Did not work out as he planned, I'm sure. Great memory.

The other thing I find interesting is the discrimination. Corbet talks about someone owning 80 acres being able to sell his landowner tag. Why 80 acres? Why not 160? What about the guy that has 79 acres? What about the guy that has a 40 acre woodlot just packed with deer bedding down?

Why can't I get a tag and sell it to whoever wants to hunt public land?
Click to expand...
Well that's about where we're at now. 99% of land in KS is private. Let's put as many as we can on the other 1%.
 
westksbowhunter said:
Well that's about where we're at now. 99% of land in KS is private. Let's put as many as we can on the other 1%.
Click to expand...
As you have pointed out, hunter numbers keep declining. Multiple reasons for that but it also feeds on itself. Fewer people hunting take fewer new people hunting. Access is always an issue. Abundance/scarcity of game is an issue. Wealth that makes spending $20,000 annually for the chance to take a deer bigger than you did last year a mere pittance, pocket change.

I don't think it's going to change, no matter what the commoners do.

I have decades behind me hunting elk, deer, antelope, geese, ducks, quail, pheasant, rabbits, coyotes, prairie dogs...pretty well covered the spectrum. Many states, Canada, all over the place. Access was never an issue and I have rarely paid to hunt. Even then, reasonable prices.

As my hunting days went by, I found myself focusing more and more on upland hunting and primarily pheasant at that. That's what I plan to keep on doing until I can't follow the dog anymore. I'm going to ride this horse till they shoot it out from under me. Then...maybe...I'll block for a while but blocking never has really appealed to me.

To paraphrase Madame de Pompadour, après nous le déluge.
 
If you can't lick 'em, join 'em.

Anyone want to buy a 23 point non-typical (eastern count) deer head? Taking bids now. I guess.
 
Chestle said:
If they’re reasonably large racks you can get good money in Texas
Click to expand...
I know, for real. I kind of think the Texans who lease the property next to mine bagged him from one of their stands lining the property line - and facing into my best field - but didn't have the opportunity to retrieve it. (I didn't shoot it - just found it while bird hunting). Wife made me drag the head up to the road to salvage, and it was laying there in the bed of my p/u when I stopped by a gun shop. A guy saw it there, and came running in wanting to officially measure it, so I let him - turned out that it would have placed well up in the Boone and Crockett if I'd have have had the foresight to stick an arrow in its eye socket or something.

They do grow big there, not the first wall hanger to come off the place. Or last, I am sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top