Do we really care about public hunting opportunities?

[SD51555]

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.

View attachment 39843

We used to buy Blatz Light by the pallet in college while it was still sold in returnables. I'll never forget $8.43 out the door for a case. Once we discovered it, it didn't last long. It got to be we'd bring back a case with 1 missing, then 3, then a dozen. We just got too rip roaring drunk and broke or lost a bunch of them.

 

[Barndog56]

I'm poor folk. My parents never owned any property. My wife and I own a 5 acre hobby farm. We will never own any hunting land. It wasn't until I was 35 before I began hunting, thanks to my wife's brother.

As such all my hunting takes place on public land. It can be found all over here in central Wisconsin. In the past 15 years I've hunted a dozen different public land spots within 45 minutes of the house. I continue to hunt only 2 of those on a yearly basis. A very large tract a half hour away, and a very small tract 2 minutes away. I have yearly success at both places, with success for me being at least a doe harvest. I've long ago dealt with the fact I'll likely never have a buck mounted on my wall. I have had the privilege of seeing a black bear, a badger, a fisher, and a bobcat while hunting.

I'm grateful for the opportunities given me due to public land. But I'd rather not see any more public land acquired around here. Most of it goes largely ignored. I'd rather see money spent on actively managing the habitat, improving the experience for those of us who already use it.

 

[dogghr]

Depends where one lives. We have over 1.5 million acres of public land. No metro area is further than 30 minutes from prime hunting of anything from deer bear turkey duck. In addition the adjacent states have similar easily accessed tracts for minimal license costs.
It is a constant battle with the tree hugger crowd for management of those lands.
The biggest issue with the feds is they love to designate National Park status as evidenced by our most recent NRG Nat Park. Restrictions suddenly arise which typically do not cater to hunters.
The biggest issue I see is not lack of access but simply progressing lack of interest from successive generations for hunting. I suspect in a few generations there will be little interest in wild game hunting regardless of our efforts. Old man talk I know but time moves on. I’m not what my great great great grandparents were and neither will be the future children. Change is inevitable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PatinPA]

We're fortunate to have a lot of public land in PA. There is state forest, national forest, state parks, and the game commission owns their own land. All free public access, except for a few things. I know a local state park near me has a swimming pool they charge access to and you have to have a permit or a hunting license to use a Game Commission shooting range. The public land near populated areas gets a lot of hunting pressure but if you had the time and willing to put forth the effort, there is a lot of remote public lands in the northern tier. The best buck sign I've seen in my life was about 2 miles back a woods road on state forest in Potter County. I was hunting spring turkey at the time. Every 100 yds was a scrape that was 6-8 ft across, followed by the biggest rubs I've ever seen.
I'm not sure of the management plans for any of them though. The game commission does work on their land but as far as I know the state forest, which is managed by our DCNR, doesn't have anything other than a timber management plan. Which is cut every 50 years. There are a couple of game commission lands near me that have fields that they plant corn and soybeans and leave them up all winter for the deer. They even had a clover plot and a couple of apple trees. That's pretty rare though from what I've seen on other game commission lands.

 

[SwampCat]

I'm poor folk. My parents never owned any property. My wife and I own a 5 acre hobby farm. We will never own any hunting land. It wasn't until I was 35 before I began hunting, thanks to my wife's brother.

As such all my hunting takes place on public land. It can be found all over here in central Wisconsin. In the past 15 years I've hunted a dozen different public land spots within 45 minutes of the house. I continue to hunt only 2 of those on a yearly basis. A very large tract a half hour away, and a very small tract 2 minutes away. I have yearly success at both places, with success for me being at least a doe harvest. I've long ago dealt with the fact I'll likely never have a buck mounted on my wall. I have had the privilege of seeing a black bear, a badger, a fisher, and a bobcat while hunting.

I'm grateful for the opportunities given me due to public land. But I'd rather not see any more public land acquired around here. Most of it goes largely ignored. I'd rather see money spent on actively managing the habitat, improving the experience for those of us who already use it.

I know in our state - AR - we have a lot of public land. The two best ways to improve the experience here are not so much habitat improvement as it is reducing hunter competiton. That can be done one of two ways - limit number of hunters on a piece of property by quota system - or provide more land.

 

[b116757]

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.

I did some research on this it certainly is true that many county’s in Minnesota seem to be holding a great deal of vacant property do to unpaid taxes. As someone else stated there most be a tremendous amount of basically swamp land in those areas that is of little value to human habitation and usage. It surprises me that these swamp areas where ever privately held. I’m curious now why these areas have basically zero value in private hands. I wonder if these are swampy wooded areas and the state has made it impossible for the landowners to harvest any timber from them? Color me intrigued.

 

[jsasker007]

Minnesota needs all of those swamps for mosquito breeding grounds and cattails. Last thing you want to get caught doing in Minnesota is disturb a cattail! DNR is a JOKE here.

 

[Mortenson]

You guys should get some good drain tile in there! That's how to make more land!

 

[jsasker007]

I tried to put in a pond years ago and got nailed by the DNR for disturbing the wetlands. I could write a short book about all the bullshit that went on with that ordeal.

 

[rocksnstumps]

Here up north, marshes, wetlands, and flood plains have lots of restrictions for what you can do as a land owner and the state goobermint agencies watch like a hawk and will fine the chit outta you for not following the rules. They like to spout off about how those lands are a huge benefit to everyone and help buffer flood water but your taxes are just as high as regular rec land but you cant alter it, build on it, basically no improvements. Not a surprise if some swamp ends up in tax delinquent unless the stuff that offers good duck hunting or such.

They actually are important to keep from being changed but no tax breaks for all the rights they take away so some folks inherit and say screw it.

 

[jsasker007]

Here's a little more info by request of SD......It all started when I made a pond with a dozer that the DNR estimated to be about 90,000 sq. feet. I was lead to believe I could put in a pond in what used to be a pasture and was sitting at the bottom of a nice ridge. Figured run-off from the ridge would help to fill it and being it is mostly clay here it should hold water pretty well. Turned out to be a great pond that would have held water for all the animals in the most severe drought.I thought that would be good for everything and I could see it from my house while sitting at the dinner table. Then the DNR showed up and really went the extra mile with the monetary threats and wanting me to fix it(fill it back in) right in the middle of winter. To make the story shorter they said I was disturbing the wetlands and couldn't have the pond. The one DNR officer told me that when they took samples from the bottom of the pond(before it filled) they had to take samples from nearby swamp to get the desired results because the pond bottom didn't show the proper soil colors they needed to find me in violation. It took one whole summer to make the pond with my dozer and two summers to get it filled back in. I believe it became a problem because I live in Mille Lacs county and am not a native american(they just gave the indians another 61,000 acres) that will pay no taxes and the tax difference will come from the remaining property owners. After I finally got that pond filled in the DNR was at the property AGAIN and the one guy points to my backyard and said I could put in a pond there and the DNR would help me design it. That could have been 16-18" deep with one spot no deeper than 6 1/2 feet with a 12' radius. I did not even respond. They declared my pasture an F3 floodplain after that. That spot is where I now grow one of my larger food plots and have never had an issue with it being too wet. That was 20 years ago. Pisses me off just thinking about them and their power tripping bullshit.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

You guys should get some good drain tile in there! That's how to make more land!

Agricultural prairie part of our state has done well with that. People wonder why the dakotas have such drastically better waterfowl populations and migrations.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I did some research on this it certainly is true that many county’s in Minnesota seem to be holding a great deal of vacant property do to unpaid taxes. As someone else stated there most be a tremendous amount of basically swamp land in those areas that is of little value to human habitation and usage. It surprises me that these swamp areas where ever privately held. I’m curious now why these areas have basically zero value in private hands. I wonder if these are swampy wooded areas and the state has made it impossible for the landowners to harvest any timber from them? Color me intrigued.

Aitkin county was shared as an example and there is a whole lotta flat swampy land there but the tax forfeited land is not just a uneconomical swampland issue. Around our land in Itasca county there is tons of tax forfeited land and a lot of it has been successfully logged in the past few years. The best buck I have consistently had on camera the last 2 seasons poses for my camera on the edge of recently clear cut tax forfeit parcel where it borders USFS mature forest.

 

[b116757]

Wow good timber ground simply being walked away from for tax forfeiture. I just don’t even know what to think of it. There has to be way more to the story.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Wow good timber ground simply being walked away from for tax forfeiture. I just don’t even know what to think of it. There has to be way more to the story.

Yeah, I’d have to assume there is more to the story and it may be numerous things in different regions. I have no idea when any of the land was forfeited, may have been different market forces and reasons a long time ago.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Did a quick search on tax forfeit in Itasca county where our land is. Found this info on tax forfeited land auctions https://www.co.itasca.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/6545/October-22-2021-Land-Auction-Results

Seems like they are keeping their mitts on anything with timber value. Lots of small parcels but some with acreage. Looked up one of the bigger parcels and i'd say it looks pretty decent.

37.8 Acres, sold for $63k.



Edit: further reading revealed that the MN DNR has to review and approve sale of many of the types of land that might be interesting for recreational/hunting purposes. https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/lands_minerals/taxforfeit/statutes.pdf

Basically, if it has standing timber, water front, nonforested marginal land or wetland, Lands chiefly valuable for commercial quantities of peat (maybe aitkin county?), or land classified as conservation land by county.

 

[Mortenson]

Looks like a sweet parcel. How much are the back taxes?

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Looks like a sweet parcel. How much are the back taxes?

Not sure how to find that but I don't think the buyer pays them.

 

[Skeeter]

I did some research on this it certainly is true that many county’s in Minnesota seem to be holding a great deal of vacant property do to unpaid taxes. As someone else stated there most be a tremendous amount of basically swamp land in those areas that is of little value to human habitation and usage. It surprises me that these swamp areas where ever privately held. I’m curious now why these areas have basically zero value in private hands. I wonder if these are swampy wooded areas and the state has made it impossible for the landowners to harvest any timber from them? Color me intrigued.

The tax forfeited land near our hunting shack is a mix of low and high ground, not just low. I believe much of it doesn't sell due to access issues, people being unaware of how much land is in forfeiture, and not knowing that there is a process to try and buy those lands. Some also fear that if they start the process and someone else ends up out bidding them they end up with a new neighbor instead of just leaving it be and treating it as their own piece of public. My experience with the process is through the guy to the north of us. He wanted another 40 and went to the county to get it put up for auction. As far as I can tell he is the only one with reasonable access to it. He said that he was told that the selling price would have to be higher than the timber value so that someone wouldn't buy it, log it, and then let it go into forfeiture again. He ended up getting the piece, but almost didn't when a neighbor that he had upset ran the price up on him. Would have almost been better off never trying to buy it and just kept hunting it as his own, but he wanted to change some things on it for better hunting so he had to buy it. We haven't had to deal with the DNR on our property yet, but I do hear some real horror stories.

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

Not sure how to find that but I don't think the buyer pays them.

My understanding is that the state must sell these properties if people are interested in them and the price is for the amount of the back taxes. I have been wrong one other time in my life so...