Land measurement methods.

[JackTerp]

Several of my friends have been looking for a place to lease for deer and turkey hunting. The lease they had for years has not been renewed because of change of ownership.

They have found a really nice piece of property that is advertised as 700 acres. When I look at the property on the county GIS site, it measures out to 559 acres. It is listed as 571 acres on the tax records. Are there multiple acceptable methods of measuring real estate for sales purposes?

They are asking $20 per acre to lease at 700 acres and will not negotiate. I think that is high for the land myself in the area they are looking.

 

[tooln]

I'd have to say the tax deed and GIS is going to be the most accurate measurements. No county anywhere is going to give up tax $$$$$$$$$.

 

[Jim Timber]

Seems like these are people you don't really want to deal with anyway you measure it out.

The GIS service on many county web sites has very accurate measurement tools available.

 

[JackTerp]

I talked with my friend this evening and asked how the realtor handling the leasing could get 700 acres out of 571. The realtor told him that that is 571 acres when viewed from above. the topography of the land is fairly substantial but I still cannot see picking up 129 acres. That's a 22% increase. I think the guy is out of his mind, but I am not the one paying $14,000 for a one year lease. That just doesn't make any sense to me. I could get 100 acres of land and the mortgage wouldn't be 14,000 per year.

Is there such a thing as buying or leasing land based on "surface" acres?

 

[Jim Timber]

My deeds all have different area's listed, and what's taxed as 80 from the space it occupies on the planet is actually 82 and change because of the topography. Lumpy land has more surface area in a given "L x W" area than flat would.

 

[JackTerp]

I think I just solved the problem. It appears, on the GIS site, that the owner has another plot that is attached to the primary acreage. If that is included in the lease, it appears that it would total about 700 acres. This additional acreage is not shown on the plat map that was given to my friends. The realtor handling the lease probably does not even know about it. One is 131 acres and the main one is 571 acres for a total of 702. I still think it's way too much to pay for a lease, but it's not my money. I think I'll let Jeff stew a little before I tell him. :)

The really nice thing about it, now, is that they would have frontage on 4 different roads and can access the land from any direction depending on the prevailing wind that day.

 

[bwoods11]

They are paying $14,000 per year to lease a farm?

I pay $9800 per year in annual payments on my 228 acre farm. I get $9250 back in CRP and tillable.

Have they looked at buying a farm?

 

[Jim Timber]

I pay a bit more than that per year, have no CRP and will be paid off in 10 years or less (a couple years before I hit 50). :)

700 acres around me is $1.2 Mill. Not having to cough up 1.2 Mill is reason to lease a place like that. It also allows you to move around when the hunting sours. There are up sides to leases, but I'd rather own it than merely hunt it.

 

[JackTerp]

They are only looking to lease the hunting rights to a nice piece of property. The owner, through a real estate agent, wants $20 per acre per year. Today they found out the land is also on the market to buy. If it is sold, they lose their hunting rights and only get back a pro rated amount less "fees", whatever that means . They have told the agent to take a hike. I think it's a rip-off waiting to happen.

 

[Jim Timber]

Sure sounds like they want their cake, with ice cream, sprinkles, and a hooker on top.

If someone's got a $14K lease on the joint, you put that in your advertising if it's for sale "property currently under lease, closing will be available on ____" like any normal landlord does. :rolleyes: It's not like the property is going anywhere if your closing date moves out a month or two.

Potlatch made me wait out the previous lease rights and they were only getting $520/yr.

 

[bwoods11]

They are only looking to lease the hunting rights to a nice piece of property. The owner, through a real estate agent, wants $20 per acre per year. Today they found out the land is also on the market to buy. If it is sold, they lose their hunting rights and only get back a pro rated amount less "fees", whatever that means . They have told the agent to take a hike. I think it's a rip-off waiting to happen.

Yes seems like a rip off. I don't know how many guys you are talking, but personally I'd rather own 40 acres or 80 for example than lease 500. Just me, but if these guys have cash, buy something!! Unless it is just out of their price range to buy?

 

[j-bird]

Rip off is an opinion. Most of us would prefer to own land then to rent it, but that may not be in the cards for others for various reasons. Worth is all relative. If you had zero access to private property what would it be worth to you? I agree that purchasing may be a better long term investment, but they may no be seeing it as an investment. Consider the money we spend on habitat work that may not result in an increased property value - doesn't keep us from doing it, and may take some of the enjoyment out of it if we did look at it that way. Would I like to have $14K to toss around every year to support my hunting - you bet. Not my place to tell folks where to spend their money - it's theirs, they can set in on fire if they want (I would prefer to dispose of it for them first however).

As for the lease and the property being for sale - I think somebody is trying to have their cake and eat it too. Either they know exactly what theare doing or have no clue. Either way - the lease holder stands to have their hunting ground pulled out from under them at anytime. Yes they may get a pro-rated return, but are you going to risk having this happen just before the peak hunting and then be left with no place to hunt???? On the other hand the property may not sell quickly and you have no issues. Thats the gamble.