Do we really care about public hunting opportunities?

[Hoytvectrix]

The thing I can't wrap my head around is who wins when it comes to habitat decisions in the tall grass prairie region. On one hand, pheasants require shelterbelts to survive winter. In South Dakota, the GFP works with landowners to install shelter belts. In MN, wherever the US fish and wildlife service is involved, they kill every tree and shrub they have jurisdiction over. I saw this with my own two eyes at the Gislason Lake Tallgrass Prairie acquisition. We used to mushroom hunt there, and one year we showed up and every single tree and shrub, many plums and crabapples, were piled up by federal bulldozers, along with all the tweety bird nests that were in them.
[/
View attachment 39751

I hunt for deer on a bunch of USFWS land over by Willmar. This hasn't been my observation. Sure, I don't doubt that they have removed trees in some fence rows or restored a few prairies, but you can go on OnX right now and find stretches of timber in quite a few USFWS properties in that part of the state that was historically dominated by prairies. As habitat managers and hunters, we are conservationists by nature. As conservationists, shouldn't we want the land to be as close to it's native habitat as possible?

We can't even get hunters who all want the same thing (more mature deer), who all live and own their own land in a few square miles, to agree on management of the deer herds. You think asking them to pay $1000/year and giving up autonomy of their own land is going to work?

I certainly trust the interest of trained biologists and ecologists to make management decisions on land management, whose own motivation is nothing more than a paycheck and a shared love of the outdoors. Yes, sometimes it's a bureaucrat that makes decisions, but the day to day management and consulting of those policies and decisions are at least done by an expert in that field.

I grew up out of MN and have been living here for 6 years. Where I grew up did not have these large tracks of public land. I haven't hunted up in northern MN yet, but they are already one of my favorite aspects of the state. Minnesota is a unique state filled with quite a bit of diversity in habitat. It's a pleasure to experience those unique habitats. It would be a shame for all (and obviously impossible), if those wanting to hunt in these diverse habitats had to own or lease the land to do so.

 

[Natty Bumppo]

I care about public hunting opportunities. As a kid growing up in western Mass. with no mentor or family members who hunted, I had to learn everything by myself. I am thankful that I had thousands and thousands of acres of untouched public land to hunt on and explore. That was in the 80's when hunting was much more popular.

As much as I hate this State for its gun laws, taxes, Blue Laws, and other nonsense, Massachusetts does buy and set aside a lot of land public land. Further east near Springfield, Worcester and Boston I would think those public lands would not be great for hunting...too many joggers and dog walkers. But here in the northwest corner on the NY and VT borders, I can quite literally track bucks for days on end on public land and not come across another hunter.

 

[SwampCat]

There is friction there, but not as you perceive it. I've experienced it. This is a triple edged sword. All the big income jobs are in southern MN. With scarce land and a lack of good paying jobs, the locals get outbid by the big city incomes. That's the rub I got when I introduced myself to a neighbor. I was the guy "buying up all their land and killing all their deer." They want to own land too, and due to the tiny supply of private ground, prices are skyrocketing right outta their affordability range.

What's great about half your parent's lakeshore being off limits? Were they looking for a place where they could build and then depend on the government to keep everyone else out? How is that fair? If we're talking fair, everyone should be allowed to build where there is room to build, or no one should. This is the two faced fake virtue signaling I'm talking about. "I want it free and just accessible enough for me, and nobody else."

It is fair in that not everyone can afford to build on the lakeshore. Roughly 75% of land in MN is private - or by far the bulk of the land. Us in the south are upset because there are so many folks from the north moving from the cold and the blue state insanity, and coming to our states and buying property from the locals, and driving the prices up to where our local chicken farmers and cattlemen cant afford it. I would rather my state buy up land near me than someone from MN. But, that is life as we now see it. Not worth getting panties in a knot.

 

[homerj1]

Us in the south are upset because there are so many folks from the north moving from the cold and the blue state insanity,

I can only imagine what local Floridians and Texans are thinking about all those folks showing up who talk funny.

 

[b116757]

Why is land so expensive where you are? I know of several areas in Minnesota where the government only has as much land as they do because of tax forfeiture. They'd gladly sell if people would give more than the timber value for it.

I seriously doubt this is the case with vacant land this sort of thing does happen but it’s usually residential properties in dead or dying small rural communities. Houses the county would gladly give away just to get back on the tax rolls.

 

[bueller]

In my area we have several state parks. They'd be considered tiny in comparison to the lands you guys are talking about. 2+ million Chicago residents visit them yearly. They pack up their coolers and picnic baskets at home and spend almost no money here. It's an hour drive to get here. They trash the parks, support our local economy very little IMO and head back home the same day, all while paying no park fees. Our ridiculous state can't afford to staff the parks or keep them properly patrolled. Many of these folks turn around and come back to hunt the same parks during deer season. As soon as one parking lot clears of it's allotted hunters, a new car rolls in. Of course there are some decent people, but generally speaking many of them are bums who don't believe in rules, common sense, and safety. I'd like to see big park fees and expensive hunting permits to help keep some trash away. Won't happen though. The quarries here make much better neighbors than the public land. I'm strongly opposed to another single acre becoming public land in the north half of IL. The Rocky Mtn pics are awesome and I'm jealous of the adventure some of you folks have in those regions, but you can't wax poetic about public and think you're talking the same ballgame as what we have to deal with.

While I don't disagree with your description of what goes on at these parks, I do know that this is the closest many city folk will ever get to experiencing "wilderness". Should these people not have reasonably close access to public land? I personally have introduced a few people to hunting at parks of this type and unforgettable lifelong memories were made.

 

[Mortenson]

That's why I said park fees (like WI does) and hunting permits. 2 million park visitors leave behind quite a mess including on the roads. I also didn't say to close the parks, but what I did say was no more tax money going to buy new public lands. IL can't pay its bills. You are correct that many of these people never experience wilderness. They literally have never been anywhere. They tried getting petitions going to name these podunk parks as a national park, and get this... to become the 8th Wonder of the World. No joke. They've never seen anything.

 

[bueller]

That's why I said park fees (like WI does) and hunting permits. 2 million park visitors leave behind quite a mess including on the roads. I also didn't say to close the parks, but what I did say was no more tax money going to buy new public lands. IL can't pay its bills. You are correct that many of these people never experience wilderness. They literally have never been anywhere. They tried getting petitions going to name these podunk parks as a national park, and get this... to become the 8th Wonder of the World. No joke. They've never seen anything.

IL will never be able to pay all their bills. The more they take in the more they give and waste away. I would however support a user fee if reasonable.

While many of us likely disagree with the way public lands in our areas are managed, we really should all be grateful for them. Without the local, state, and federal statutes that created and protect these lands they likely would've all been sold off years ago and the monies collected would be long spent on something other than nature and the outdoors.

 

[Mortenson]

Think how far IL could go towards paying their bills if they took 5,000 acres of their parks around here and opened up state sponsored limestone and frac sand quarries... just thinking outside the box. City folk could go just a little further away and see true wilderness in WI. ;)

 

[Booner21]

I own two pieces of land. Both have public on two sides. Gives me access to tens of thousands of acres of land right out my back door.

I have permission on piece that is bordered on two side by Public and I have had more stuff stolen off this piece than all my others combined. Also have had plenty of issues with trespassing that I have caught. Imagine the worst neighbor possible and that is what I have by having public as a neighbor. I would pull all of my stuff had I not had a little bit of luck on this place and it is close to my house.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[g squared 23]

Yes we need public land to keep the proletariat occupied, in case they have a few minutes between checking facebook posts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SwampCat]

I have permission on piece that is bordered on two side by Public and I have had more stuff stolen off this piece than all my others combined. Also have had plenty of issues with trespassing that I have caught. Imagine the worst neighbor possible and that is what I have by having public as a neighbor. I would pull all of my stuff had I not had a little bit of luck on this place and it is close to my house.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I had some similar problems the first three or four years - and that pretty well straightened out. I still have line hunters - but I have that from my private land neighbors, too.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Think how far IL could go towards paying their bills if they took 5,000 acres of their parks around here and opened up state sponsored limestone and frac sand quarries... just thinking outside the box. City folk could go just a little further away and see true wilderness in WI. ;)

Those drunken ‘sconis have enough FIB problems already

 

[b116757]

I owned a 40 bordering national forest with a small cabin my uncle still owns one that borders the national forest and our distant relation owned the 40 between us. Just about every rifle season we would be escorting a lost fool that thought he was on public ground off our property. I stopped locking the cabin door better to let the thieves in then deal with the property damage of kicked in doors on a regular basis.

 

[Skeeter]

I seriously doubt this is the case with vacant land this sort of thing does happen but it’s usually residential properties in dead or dying small rural communities. Houses the county would gladly give away just to get back on the tax rolls.

Aitkin County, MN
All of the colored/shaded regions are government owned in some manner or another. Mostly raw land. I'd guess by looking that it's over 50% of the land in the county. I've benefited greatly from having such easy access to so much public ground. However, just because I have benefited, that doesn't mean that I agree with how the state handles these lands or how much they hold. I've enjoyed reading people's thoughts on the subject and it's helped me have a wider perspective on the issue.

 

[sandbur]

Aitkin County, MN
All of the colored/shaded regions are government owned in some manner or another. Mostly raw land. I'd guess by looking that it's over 50% of the land in the county. I've benefited greatly from having such easy access to so much public ground. However, just because I have benefited, that doesn't mean that I agree with how the state handles these lands or how much they hold. I've enjoyed reading people's thoughts on the subject and it's helped me have a wider perspective on the issue.

Parts of the county have lots of flat wetland. If a bit too wet for farming and the wild rice farming no longer fits, I imagine the government ends up with it. I don’t see much potential for other profitable uses at present.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sandbur]

I owned a 40 bordering national forest with a small cabin my uncle still owns one that borders the national forest and our distant relation owned the 40 between us. Just about every rifle season we would be escorting a lost fool that thought he was on public ground off our property. I stopped locking the cabin door better to let the thieves in then deal with the property damage of kicked in doors on a regular basis.

I got to the point where I had the hasp on my front door to the cabin fastened with two roofing nails. I had less repairs after breaking that way.

The problem solved itself when they burned it down. There were no public lands nearby, just felons and associates for neighbors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[4wanderingeyes]

I just moved onto my hunting land in NW Wisconsin, where I live now is a big tourist area. There is a lot of public state land all around me, including parks for recreation. Most local businesses here would never survive without tourist money, but yet not very many locals like outsiders. I have owned my land since the early 2000’s and I know a few of the locals personally. They cater to the tourists, but don’t like them at all.


One thing I like about my area is, the state and county will give the private land owners a tax break, in exchange to allow public hunting. There is also a lot of forest land that is entered into public hunting, and not leased. Plus all of the tax forfeit land becomes public hunting. I agree with this because if the county, or state has money, or tax breaks into the land, then it should be able to be used by the public.

SD, you could also look at the private lands as well for the lack of access. When you have large investors buying up large tracks of land for investments, it takes it away from the public as well. There are large companies buying up hundreds of thousands of acres and then they control them acres, not allowing locals the use of the land. I know in the central US this is a much more common thing then up here, but they are to blame for much of land prices being so high.

I know when I was a kid, you could just knock on a couple doors and get permission to hunt, now in most cases the people that live on the farm house no longer own more then 5-20 acres. That land is owned by just a few large farmers, and corporations, and because of liability reasons don’t allow anyone to hunt.

 

[Sconnie]

Those drunken ‘sconis have enough FIB problems already

Yes we do! I’d cede Dane county to them FIBS for FREE at this point. Pass me another beer…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mortenson]

Any of you Sconi beer connoisseurs like Blatz? I pulled this 8' sign from my great uncle's barn before it collapsed. Had never heard of it. I could price it cheap if anyone is passing thru with a trailer! I still like Leinie Northwoods the best.