# Property owners, access question.



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

TimBuckTwo said:


> My grandfather talks fondly and says he misses the days of his youth when he could walk clear across the county in Houghton, MI and not see a trespassing sign. Everyone walked the land to get places and there were no fences. Couldn't get past a farm without the owner inviting you in for a visit and coffee, nowadays you'd wind up shot.


I don't know about shot...for youth anyway.
I grew up in rural Ingham County and there was plenty of room to rome in the fields and woods behind my home. in the early 70s my best friend and I would spend every weekend in Jan. and Feb. chasing bunnies. It was nothing to be jumping on a neighbors brush pile on a Saturday morning as they watched out the window while eating breakfast. 
Those fields and woods are populated with new homes now, not elitist deer habitat. A lot changes in one's life, you can lament it or role with it and find joy where it presents itself.


----------



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

MERGANZER said:


> I dont think that is his point at all. All he is saying is would you allow someone to hunt small game after the deer season is over and you were pretty much done useing the land for "hunting" by then. Not everyone can afford thier own property at any given time. You apparently can so thats great for you. My family has property up north and I am blessed with that but I am a single dad of 3 kids that I want going to college. College educations trump my own hunting property at the time. Thank god my friends dont think like you and I am blessed with a few areas to take my kids for small game and deer. *This is the bad part of QDM right here.*
> 
> Ganzer


I guess I missed the part where 12point said "because I practice QDM...". Ganz you're painting with a broad brush my friend.
I would make the argument that "because I practice QDM" there are MANY MORE opportunities to hunt rabbits on my property or on adjoining properties because of my habitat focused management style.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

MERGANZER said:


> Thank god my friends dont think like you and I am blessed with a few areas to take my kids for small game and deer. This is the bad part of QDM right here.
> 
> Ganzer


Gaanzer, QDM is irrelevant to this discussion. My thoughts on giving access to a stranger are not only unaffected by QDM, they're unaffected by whether or not I myself hunt at all.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

12Point said:


> K9wernet, are you serious? Gotta love people who don't own property complain about not getting access to hunt. You need to stop mooching off other people's hard work and go buy your own property or hunt public land. There are plenty opportunities out there to take control of your own life. Don't expect someone to buy land, pay a mortgage every month, pay taxes twice a year, put tons of cash and sweat equity into the land, then let every lazy moocher come along and treat it like public land. Give me a break. You need a reality check.
> 
> Sent from my SPH-D700 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


I think your completely out of line calling him a moocher. You thinking he "expects" to be granted permission is your own thought problem. What is it with some people thinking a person is getting one over on you when they see someone enjoying themselves. My family has let more small game hunters hunt over the years there is no way to keep track. Looking at them as moochers has never crosssed anyones mind here. In fact, a decent human being would take joy in being able to provide an opportunity for someone (maybe a group) or kids to enjoy a few hours or a day of small game hunting or some other outdoor activity. Its not all about me.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

bucksnbows said:


> No. I wouldn't let strangers hunt. Too many complications can come about if you don't know someone. Has little to do with the habitat work or the animals.


My neighbor called and asked if I would mind if he could shoot some ***** along the creek. I lease so I called the owner and told him I don't care if he doesn't. 

The man was granted permission.


----------



## Lumberman (Sep 27, 2010)

If there willing to help out in the spring with some hinge cutting or planting then I would say yes for sure. Probably say yes either way. 

And FYI you might not lose a lawsuit because of that law but that doesn't mean you won't have to spend a fortune on lawyers. 

Like With all liability lawyers are the problem.


----------



## 12Point (Mar 18, 2008)

CHASINEYES said:


> I think your completely out of line calling him a moocher. You thinking he "expects" to be granted permission is your own thought problem. What is it with some people thinking a person is getting one over on you when they see someone enjoying themselves. My family has let more small game hunters hunt over the years there is no way to keep track. Looking at them as moochers has never crosssed anyones mind here. In fact, a decent human being would take joy in being able to provide an opportunity for someone (maybe a group) or kids to enjoy a few hours or a day of small game hunting or some other outdoor activity. Its not all about me.


Let me guess, you personally don't own any of the "family" property? Everyone I know that hunts family property treats it as public land and has no problem granting access to someone else's property. Just an observation. As far as your comment about ".....thinking a person is getting one over on you when they see someone enjoying themselves". Huh?? Go "enjoy" yourself on your own property I allow select friends and family to hunt occassonally, especially when they want to bring their kids. That's totally different than a stranger asking permission to hunt my property. You won't find any "no tresspassing" signs on public land. If I didn't own land that's were I'd go. Call me crazy By the way, I'm not a member of QDMA. With all the QDM undertones, it seems like the title of this thread should have been "QDM ruins tresspasing"
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

12Point said:


> Let me guess, you personally don't own any of the "family" property? Everyone I know that hunts family property treats it as public land and has no problem granting access to someone else's property. Just an observation. As far as your comment about ".....thinking a person is getting one over on you when they see someone enjoying themselves". Huh?? Go "enjoy" yourself on your own property I allow select friends and family to hunt occassonally, especially when they want to bring their kids. That's totally different than a stranger asking permission to hunt my property. You won't find any "no tresspassing" signs on public land. If I didn't own land that's were I'd go. Call me crazy By the way, I'm not a member of QDMA. With all the QDM undertones, it seems like the title of this thread should have been "QDM ruins tresspasing"
> Sent from my SPH-D700 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


The land is as good as being in the bank. That may be hard for you to understand. Where the hell did tresspassing enter this thread. Spin!

Your the one who called the original poster a mooch over his desire to aquire permission for hunting private property. I called you out on it. I think you were out of line with that statement. Many sportsmen receive permission to pursue game from private land owners. If its your wish to deny access to your property, you have every right. But, to call another man a mooch for asking is rediculous.


----------



## casscityalum (Aug 27, 2007)

[quote/] With all the QDM undertones, it seems like the title of this thread should have been "QDM ruins tresspasing"
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Ohub Campfire mobile app[/quote]

Agree. hard to tell what the real intent of the thread was now..
...ps we hunt a lot of qdm guys fields for geese who never met our group. Just gotta know how you present your self. Got permission from mason to caseville with a few no go but lots of yes's. Plus a nice gift card can go a long way after your done. 



Sent from my SCH-R760X using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

casscityalum said:


> Agree. hard to tell what the real intent of the thread was now..


The thread concept started on another thread. That thread's title was "Will small game hunting become more popular now that the small game license is included in the base license."

To which I said, "the majority of the deer worshipers don't want you looking at their property from the road, let alone shoot a squirrel or rabbit on it."


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

bioactive said:


> Walk around my property with a loaded firearm, for any reason whatsoever.


Be careful, there's this new CPL law and it allows total strangers to carry CONCEALED :SHOCKED: LOADED:SHOCKED: WEAPONS:SHOCKED: IN PUBLIC :SHOCKED: :SHOCKED: :lol:


----------



## casscityalum (Aug 27, 2007)

FREEPOP said:


> The thread concept started on another thread. That thread's title was "Will small game hunting become more popular now that the small game license is included in the base license."
> 
> To which I said, "the majority of the deer worshipers don't want you looking at their property from the road, let alone shoot a squirrel or rabbit on it."


Ok deer worship. There are lots of deer worshipers that are far from qdm that would not strangers on their land.

Regardless if they hunt deer or not I honestly believe it comes down to whether or not they feel comfortable when the introduction is made. I also believe that comes down to whether or not those people hunt some themselves or already let somebody else hunt for small game. To try and pin it on deer worshipers only is far from truth imo

Sent from my SCH-R760X using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

casscityalum said:


> Ok deer worship. There are lots of deer worshipers that are far from qdm that would not strangers on their land.


I agree that there are many non-worshipers that won't grant access, then add that to the many that are deer worshipers and that equals 2 many  :lol:


I could care less what someone does, grant or deny, I was simply stating fact.


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

Waz_51 said:


> I would have a hard enough time letting friends and family trample through a well designed deer paradise let alone somebody I've never met...setting somebody up on a deer hunt is one thing, letting a random stranger walk around freely is a whole different animal...





TimBuckTwo said:


> My grandfather talks fondly and says he misses the days of his youth when he could walk clear across the county in Houghton, MI and not see a trespassing sign. Everyone walked the land to get places and there were no fences. Couldn't get past a farm without the owner inviting you in for a visit and coffee, nowadays you'd wind up shot.


I used to hitch-hike in those days.

Time changed, so did I (and almost everyone else).


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

casscityalum said:


> Ok deer worship. There are lots of deer worshipers that are far from qdm that would not strangers on their land.
> 
> Regardless if they hunt deer or not I honestly believe it comes down to whether or not they feel comfortable when the introduction is made. I also believe that comes down to whether or not those people hunt some themselves or already let somebody else hunt for small game. To try and pin it on deer worshipers only is far from truth imo
> 
> Sent from my SCH-R760X using Ohub Campfire mobile app


Dan when are you coming down to hunt rabbits with me? There are plenty running around behind the house on top of the crusted snow. :lol:


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

Let me just say that there are tons of valid reasons for NOT letting someone on your property to hunt...

"I'm already using it for hunting; someone else is using it for hunting; too many people are already using it for hunting; concern over property damage; the person asking seems suspicious/give you a weird vibe... whatever."

The response, "because it's mine and I say so," although equally valid, is sad and pathetic.

For those who call me a commie for saying so, I flat out disagree.

I think there are few things more American than sharing our hunting heritage. That's going to mean different things to different people, but knocking on doors has a long tradition that has as much to do with camaraderie and getting to know your community as it does killing animals. To argue that it's mooching... well I'm sorry I just don't see it that way.

(Furthermore, I have a personal goal to never shoot two deer from the same stand. That's not super relevant to this conversation, other than to say that to me, hunting for that next great stand location, or pheasant field, or jaw-dropping rabbitat is as much a part of the sport as is the actual act of hunting.)

For those who allege that I started this to gain access: I've so far contacted NOBODY about gaining access, and am currently indebted to one person who PMed me about bird hunting next fall.

Freepop sums it up pretty well. 

We were having a conversation in which he alleged that serious deer hunters make it harder for small game hunters to gain access. I responded with the belief that sportsmen are sportsmen (including antler junkies) and in my experience are very willing to help each other out.

Freepop: You win!


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

wintrrun said:


> Hunt small game on my whitetail haven"?
> Might as well ask to be sleeping with my woman.
> Used to let people on but now with mapr's, let the games begin..
> No access to fisherman.
> ...


This year I got invited, during deer season, to pheasant hunt on one of the best QDM properties in Michigan. This property was under development for deer management long before most people heard of QDM. I also got invited to goose hunt on the property of a very prominent member of this forum, who also has a QDM managed property. 

I wasn't able to go. But both of these property owners invited a good number of hunters.

This mythological view of how most QDM practitioners manage their properties is based, in some part, in reality. I have heard at least one prominent trophy hunter (not a member of QDMA) talk about not using his property for anything but deer hunting. He is about as rare as a $3 bill.

I know many practitioners of QDM. And I have walked dozens of QDM properties. I do not have a single QDM friend who does not use their property for other things besides deer hunting. Nor do I know a single one who does not readily invite friends and family to share the property for a variety of outdoor activities. 

One would think the OP would read through the posts and realize that only one respondent said that he is worried about hurting the deer hunting by allowing small game hunting outside the deer seasons. (And he is a young fella who I hope will change his mind about that over time:lol.

None of the things in your list are true for the vast majority of QDM landowners. 

Mushrooms picked on my heavily managed deer hunting property:


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

farmlegend said:


> Gaanzer, QDM is irrelevant to this discussion. My thoughts on giving access to a stranger are not only unaffected by QDM, they're unaffected by whether or not I myself hunt at all.


 
I believe that QDM has made many land owners paranoid about anyone entering thier property for fear the deer are going to leave or be pressured as mentioned in this thread etc. When I was a kid there were big bucks on nice property and small game access wasnt difficult to get at all once deer season ended. Now if you ask many (not all) serious deer hunters with property they slam the door on the idea of someone entering thier land as if the deer will flee and never return. So I apologize for saying "QDM" but more or less those serious deer hunters and managers. Land owners have every right to allow or not to allow people to do anything on thier property as it is thiers. That being said it is more and more difficult to get access now than ever. I also beleive that is partly the hunters fault as well. I strongly beleive people in the past were more willing to earn a hunting spot by showing up and helping with work that needs to be done or harvesting etc. Too many now want to show up with a shotgun in hand asking permission instead of showing up months earlier and building raport with the land owner and then asking for a hunt. JMO

Ganzer


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

k9wernet said:


> The response, "because it's mine and I say so," although equally valid, is sad and pathetic.


Unfortunately for you, it's the only response that matters. It's the most important one. You have illustrated on this thread that you have no grasp of what is meant by property rights. None. The primary expression of private property is the ability to exclude others from access to it. Whether it's for hunting, berry picking, sightseeing, walking through one's front door, or, for that matter, access to the wallet or bank account of another. Without the ability to exclude others from it, it is not private property, and may as well be state land. 



k9wernet said:


> For those who call me a commie for saying so, I flat out disagree.


Disagree all you want. Fundamental to communism is the precept that there ought to be no such thing as private property. You profess to support the concept of private property, right up until one asserts property rights "because it's mine and I say so", calling that "sad and pathetic". *You cannot say that you respect private property then go on to object when individuals express their property rights. 
*
Fundamental to the reason why blood was shed so that this republic would be created was to establish the sacredness of private property. In the splendid words of John Adams, 

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as 
sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and 
public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence."



k9wernet said:


> I think there are few things more American than sharing our hunting heritage. That's going to mean different things to different people, but knocking on doors has a long tradition that has as much to do with camaraderie and getting to know your community as it does killing animals.


Few things more American? Long tradition? As in, going back to Plymouth Plantation? Again, your ignorance seems to have few limits.

Sport hunting was a sport practiced by very few people in this country until post-World War II. Before then, hunting was largely an activity driven by subsistence by those living in rural areas, or by wealthy individuals from urban areas on their expeditions (T. Roosevelt, Oliver Hazard Perry, etc.). Knocking on doors to do some bird or rabbit hunting was a popular pastime during a very brief window of human history, certainly less than fifty years.


----------



## hunterrep (Aug 10, 2005)

I have owned land since 2001. I have been asked a total of 2 times for permission to hunt on my land. One was for turkey hunting which I denied, the other for deer hunting by a kind old man who I gave permission to in one spot. I went back after season to find netting strung up for a blind and nails pounded into a nice red oak tree. He was denied from then on.
In my opinion, the slob hunters and fishermen are more to blame than the mean old QDM land barons. So many good shore fishing holes and ice fishing accesses have been shut down becaues slobs leave garbage laying around or they park where they aren't supposed to. The same has happended to landowners over the years dealing with slob hunters. Look at any state land parking spot, garbage. Why would anybody subject their land to that kind of potential disrespect?
Right now, if a serious coyote hunter asked me to hunt, I would probably ask to go along but would let them. If a serious rabbit hunter asked me, I would ask for my son and I to go along but only if he had good dogs. As for turning a stranger loose on my property, I would not let that happen.


----------



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

goosemanrdk said:


> Perfect. Very reasonable on all accounts.
> 
> As an aside, if he had not tossed the cigarette(extremely disrespectful on his part), would you have considered him entitled by mentioning the previous owner?


 
Not the way he presented the senario. I said no because of the cigarette to which he said "but I grew up hunting this property under the another owner". Now, if we would have said "I grew up hunting this property under the precvious owner and know that it changed hands. Would you be receptive to letting me hunt?" Or something to that effect, I would certainly have considered him. It's not that I disqualified him because he smoked. 
Coupled with the fact that he felt he still had permission to hunt the neighbors after not having asked for AT LEAST 3 years, kinda sealed the deal for me.
Again, I've granted access to strangers in the past and have maintained a relationship since.
One other thing, I only own 19 acres. I built the house smack dab in the middle of it. I do not allow ANYONE to small game hunt with a .22 only shotguns, for safety purposes. One of the hunters that came to the door claimed, when I enquired, that he only hunts rabbits with a .22, anything else, he claimed, wasn't much sport. He disqualified himself.


----------



## goosemanrdk (Jan 14, 2003)

QDMAMAN said:


> Not the way he presented the senario. I said no because of the cigarette to which he said "but I grew up hunting this property under the another owner". Now, if we would have said "I grew up hunting this property under the precvious owner and know that it changed hands. Would you be receptive to letting me hunt?" Or something to that effect, I would certainly have considered him. It's not that I disqualified him because he smoked.
> Coupled with the fact that he felt he still had permission to hunt the neighbors after not having asked for AT LEAST 3 years, kinda sealed the deal for me.
> Again, I've granted access to strangers in the past and have maintained a relationship since.
> One other thing, I only own 19 acres. I built the house smack dab in the middle of it. I do not allow ANYONE to small game hunt with a .22 only shotguns, for safety purposes. One of the hunters that came to the door claimed, when I enquired, that he only hunts rabbits with a .22, anything else, he claimed, wasn't much sport. He disqualified himself.


Ha. That is about how I figured it went down. Amazing how quickly you can get a sense of a person. Ya, I would have denied him as well. As for the .22's, seems reasonable to me, your property your rules.


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

goosemanrdk said:


> You might need to go back through my post and find where I said that you "quote" said they are scumbags. I didn't, you seem to have missed an important word that I used in my comment. IMPLICATION!!! Some of your rants about "strangers" sure imply that you think that any stranger(ie someone you know nothing about(credit reports, financial situation etc) is out to get you, do you harm, untrustworthy aka a "scumbag" using a term from someone else within this thread. Pretty sure that myself and several others got that feeling from you and a couple of others in this thread. You even went on at one point to comment how that is "the trend" in this county to be distrustful of others even thought you don't agree with it. Yet you admit to participating in the "trend."
> 
> But hey, the first time that I meet any person for the first time, the first thing I think is "*STRANGER DANGER*!!!!!!!!"


Only you and K9 used the term "scumbag". I treat everyone who comes to my door with respect until they prove to me they don't deserve it. I let no strangers hunt my property. My choice. That does not mean I think ill of them or disrespect them at all. 

How K9 turned that into anything related to lack of respect or why he brought up the word "scumbag" and why you latched on to it is beyond me.


----------



## goosemanrdk (Jan 14, 2003)

bioactive said:


> Only you and K9 used the term "scumbag". I treat everyone who comes to my door with respect until they prove to me they don't deserve it. I let no strangers hunt my property. My choice. That does not mean I think ill of them or disrespect them at all.
> 
> How K9 turned that into anything related to lack of respect or why he brought up the word "scumbag" and why you latched on to it is beyond me.


Didn't figure you would see how your numerous times referring to strangers with a gun, the posts about social distrust, facetious post about things you would not do for a stranger and reference to only loaning a grill after knowing a persons credit history/job( aka there not a crook) might have contributed to those conclusions being arrived at.

Glad to know you treat fellow sportsman decent until they prove otherwise. My impression of you from the things you posted and how they were posted had me thinking otherwise.


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

bioactive said:


> why he brought up the word "scumbag" and why you latched on to it is beyond me.


So many things in this thread are, Jim.

I notice as soon as I called you out on your slanderous post with the out of context quotes you quickly changed the subject.

Are you still building your case against me, or just working out the details of your apology?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

> I can well imagine that the yield of those dirty cornfields back then was pathetic by today's standards. Nowadays, cornfields are "cleaner", as in, without vegetative competition due to the application of modern herbicides, and likely have superior drainage systems.




At least those "dirty" cornfields produced a product that wouldn't slowly poison you like todays genetically engineered corn.

Monsanto and Syngenta AG are as corrupt as it can get, they kill people and they don't care. They should get the death penalty, and any farmer caught growing their seed should be thrown in prison.


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

_&#8220;It's a even bigger eye opener to look at slp land photo's from the early 1900's and what extensive animal grazing did. Wouldn't need this forum on slp deer if that was still happening. It wouldn't be needed in the fifties either!!&#8221;_

I appreciate that other posters -- pro & con -- are doing the heavy lifting on this thread. &#8216;_Cutting meat&#8217;_&#8230;.as they used say, whereas I&#8217;m just playing with seasonings and lurking.

I&#8217;m cool with that. I settled the question of who hunts my land a gabillion years ago. It&#8217;s by invitation only. Period. But I invite quite a few&#8230;or so it seems sometimes.

I never honor requests. (not to hunt anyway, I do allow fishermen to get to the river regularly enough). But, and this may sound a little self-aggrandizing, I&#8217;m a very gracious &#8216;decliner&#8217;. Hell, you would walk away feelin&#8217; GOOD after being turned down by me.

Anyway, with that said, let me go back up and re-visit *Riverman&#8217;s* post, #171, which I thought contained an important insight on the SLP. I agree with him. Pasturing of animals on the land dramatically reduced the quality of habitat for many species of game animals. I have pictures &#8230;hell, I got memories.... of what properties looked like when pastured by Holsteins, by Herefords, or sheep, hogs, even horses. They could make a woodlot look like a golf course with tree hazards. A park.

It wasn&#8217;t until farm practices moved away from putting animals on the food to putting the food to the animals that SLP habitats began to recover and the deer populations rebounded from the settlement-times over-harvest.

So, marrying one of my prior posts (bowhunting begat the rise of &#8216;serious deer hobbyist) to this &#8216;pasturing&#8217; concept&#8230;..and you get a combo that would give us a bigger herd and a growing fan base, in size and commitment. Which, in turn, led to an increase in deer hunting popularity; an increase in exclusionary land ownership practices; an increase in hands-on habitat management; and the rise of organizations, ala&#8217; QDMA, ***, and others, that catered to the growing ranks of committed (and invested) hobbyist.

That's it. A story with an ending.

By the way, I&#8217;m pretty sure *Luv2hunt* in #175 buttresses that bowhunting theory of mine.
&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.

OK, finally, and I just couldn&#8217;t let it float by me&#8230;&#8230;#186, by good &#8216;ol *Bloodrunner*. Bloodrunner the bomb-thrower. Yowza, BR! Didja stumbled across an old Adelle Davis book and get food religion? That&#8217;s quite a charge. Whatcha got that'll allow you to run long & hard with it?
..........................................................

EDIT......see those three asterisks (***) up there next to the QDMA? Well, I didn't put 'em there. The default censor does that. I put in the initials for Wild Turkey Federation....But, as you well know, those three intials can stand for something other than wild turkeys. So I got default-censored.

Which, frankly, is rather gentle. Some of my posts have been treated much worse by actual live Mods.


----------



## riverbender (Dec 1, 2012)

Bloodrunner said:


> At least those "dirty" cornfields produced a product that wouldn't slowly poison you like todays genetically engineered corn.
> 
> Monsanto and Syngenta AG are as corrupt as it can get, they kill people and they don't care. They should get the death penalty, and any farmer caught growing their seed should be thrown in prison.




I've been real close a few times to inserting my own similar opinion of GMO's in various threads, or starting one. Pretty much across the board, GMO's are illegal _in countries where their political influence is limited. _Here in this country, Monsanto executives just get themselves appointed to the USDA. Go figure...


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

riverbender said:


> I've been real close a few times to inserting my own similar opinion of GMO's in various threads, or starting one. Pretty much across the board, GMO's are illegal _in countries where their political influence is limited. _Here in this country, Monsanto executives just get themselves appointed to the USDA. Go figure...


I thought BRs post should have included the USDA, greedy bastages. There has been rumor around here those demented seed companies have been working on developing crops deer will not eat. I figured someone would have inserted GMOs in one of the deer sterilization threads by now. Lol


----------



## pescadero (Mar 31, 2006)

bioactive said:


> Perhaps if we set aside the notion that selfish deer hunters are the main problem when it comes to the decline of small game hunters, we can have an open conversation about what the real reasons are.


The problem isn't selfish deer hunters, or selfish hunters.

The problem is selfish _people_ - whether they be hunter or (more likely) non-hunter.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

riverbender said:


> I've been real close a few times to inserting my own similar opinion of GMO's in various threads, or starting one. Pretty much across the board, GMO's are illegal _in countries where their political influence is limited. _Here in this country, Monsanto executives just get themselves appointed to the USDA. Go figure...


Wrong. GMO's are illegal in countries where the local agricultural lobby is influential enough to shield their own producers from price competition from more efficient producers abroad(ie., the ultra-productive American farmer). The chief objection to GMO's is purely economic, with human health concerns serving as an unsupportable smokescreen. Topic for another thread.


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

Weird, I just tried to submit a product review for Scentbuster Dust.

A few minutes later, a product rep modified my review to tell the world how I really feel about it! 

Still waiting on your apology, Jim.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

CHASINEYES said:


> I thought BRs post should have included the USDA, greedy bastages. There has been rumor around here those demented seed companies have been working on developing crops deer will not eat. I figured someone would have inserted GMOs in one of the deer sterilization threads by now. Lol


We can add the USDA, FDA, AHA, Big Pharma, to the list that doesn't give a rats a** about human life. They could all be shipped to an island and Nuked as far as I am concerned.

But like FL said, this discussion needs its own thread.

So lets get back to talking about "Greedy" land barons.:lol:


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

k9wernet said:


> Weird, I just tried to submit a product review for Scentbuster Dust.
> 
> A few minutes later, a product rep modified my review to tell the world how I really feel about it!
> 
> Still waiting on your apology, Jim.


Meanwhile, there are landowners out there waiting for an apology for this doozy:



k9wernet said:


> The response, "because it's mine and I say so," although equally valid, is sad and pathetic.


Pretty obvious that you cannot grasp the hostility of that pathetic remark to property rights. "Because it's mine and I say so" is a perfectly sufficient and reasonable response for a man to provide when someone inquires about access to his property, whether that property is his land or his wife's vagina. No difference.


----------



## riverbender (Dec 1, 2012)

farmlegend said:


> Wrong. GMO's are illegal in countries where the local agricultural lobby is influential enough to shield their own producers from price competition from more efficient producers abroad(ie., the ultra-productive American farmer). The chief objection to GMO's is purely economic, with human health concerns serving as an unsupportable smokescreen. Topic for another thread.


Yep...topic for another thread. Can't hardly wait! Wow, "unsupportable smokescreen", eh? 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

bioactive said:


> Only you and K9 used the term "scumbag". I treat everyone who comes to my door with respect until they prove to me they don't deserve it. I let no strangers hunt my property. My choice. That does not mean I think ill of them or disrespect them at all.
> 
> How K9 turned that into anything related to lack of respect or why he brought up the word "scumbag" and why you latched on to it is beyond me.


If someone want's permission to hunt my property next to my house, I treat them as if they are incompetent until they make me feel otherwise.


----------



## Rasputin (Jan 13, 2009)

I'm just amazed at this thread. A microcosm of our culture I suppose. Advancing the attitude that the poor are righteous and the wealthy are evil. Congratulations for perpetuating stereotypes.

And on top of that, you reduce your judgement of the morality of someone to one issue. 

Truly pathetic. 

Of all the threads that haven't been locked...........


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Rasputin said:


> I'm just amazed at this thread. A microcosm of our culture I suppose. Advancing the attitude that the poor are righteous and the wealthy are evil. Congratulations for perpetuating stereotypes.
> 
> And on top of that, you reduce your judgement of the morality of someone to one issue.
> 
> ...



There are a lot of very wealthy people out there that don't own hunting land that live in expensive houses and take the best hunting trips money can buy. 


And there is a lot of poor people that were handed down (gave) land from dead family members. I see it all the time, they live in a $25,000 Modular with their Bridge Card on 80 acres of prime deer hunting land.


More stereotypes I suppose.


----------



## standsetter (Dec 2, 2007)

farmlegend said:


> ...*"Because it's mine and I say so" is a perfectly sufficient and reasonable response* for a man to provide when someone inquires about access to his property, whether that property is his land or his wife's vagina. No difference.


Does it make a difference that what he is saying isn't what you are hearing? 

"A" reason is valid, "THE" reason is what he feels is sad and pathetic. 

IMO, this discussion has never been about whether or not permission could be or should be given or denied. It's about the rationale for determining whether or not permission will be granted when faced with the scenario posed in the original post. 

Of course a landowner can invoke his "I say so" right, that is a given, even more so considering he is being asked to provide a response. Yes, no, get lost or F off all fit into the "I say so" category. 

If the primary rationale for rejecting a request is "Because it's mine" also a given by the way, I think it's safe to assume that other issues are at play besides the obvious.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

bioactive said:


> I treat everyone who comes to my door with respect until they prove to me they don't deserve it. I let no strangers hunt my property. My choice.


Come on Bio, if a perfect stranger drove in with a truck tricked out in Arm and Hammer logos, you still wouldn't let them hunt?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

CHASINEYES said:


> Come on Bio, if a perfect stranger drove in with a truck tricked out with Arm and Hammer logos, you still wouldn't let them hunt?


Maybe if the "doorknocker" was willing to buy a case of scent buster dust, and was decked out in Scentblocker clothing he could get Bio thinking.:lol:


I think the stereotype of the "doorknocker" being poor and the landowner being rich is very misunderstood and not the case.


Many times the hunter has much more money than the person that owns the land, they are just asking to hunt or even lease the property. 


A lot of landowners are struggling and in debt up to their ears, that is why they want to lease the land to help pay for property taxes.


----------



## kingfisher 11 (Jan 26, 2000)

That's known as dirt poor, in reality if they sold that dirt. They are the richer of the two in most cases.


----------



## Honkkilla59 (Dec 12, 2013)

I'm 54 years old and remember when access to farm ground to small game hunt was rather easy to get and always treated the land with respect . Today it's a whole different ball game and after reading many of the posts to this thread I can see the future of hunting for younger generations is in trouble.
The antis don't need to worry about putting a end to hunting as long as the access to land disappears it will slow the recruitment of younger hunters unless you are fortunate enough to be connected to property or money.


----------



## November Sunrise (Jan 12, 2006)

Honkkilla59 said:


> and always treated the land with respect . .


I'm 46, and so that must have happened during the eight years between when you and I were born. What I remember is roadsides filled with litter and cans and bottles - some improvement began to occur when the bottle deposit law came into play. It would have been a rare occurrence to find a SLP farmstead that didn't have a pile of junk laying in a fencerow or woodlot.

I remember a guy who hunted on the neighbor's sitting in a blind that I build on our property and refusing to leave when I asked him to. I remember a neighbor to the east firing slugs that were whistling over the top of his vehicle while I was walking close by on the road. I remember a guy chasing my friend and I down the road in his pickup and following us on to my grandparents property and berating us once we stopped because we had obtained permission to hunt on a property that he also hunted on. And these three things all occurred just over the course of two years in the eighties while I was in high school

The theological term is sin, and sins such as selfishness, greed, dishonesty, and self-righteousness have been present and on clear display since the beginning of time. Those of you who idealize the good old days are looking through rose colored glasses.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

kingfisher 11 said:


> That's know as dirt poor, in reality if they sold that dirt. They are the richer of the two in most cases.



At 2-4 grand an acre? They better have ALOT of acreage and have it paid off.


One of my buddies is a multi-millionaire that buys leases in Michigan, Illinois, and South Dakota, and goes on at least 3-5 hunting trips a year. He says he doesn't care to own land and would rather lease, that way he can try different things if it doesn't work out.


I just looked at a 40 I might put an offer on, I walked the property and kinda liked it, deer killing would be simple as it has lots of bedding area.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

November Sunrise said:


> I'm 46, and so that must have happened during the eight years between when you and I were born.



Second time I've laughed out loud today(the other time was the hilarious post #3 on the Kalishnikov thread in the gun forum; http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=4958923#post4958923 ).

I'm 57, and bought my first small game license in 1970. Forty years ago, every landowner I ever interfaced with seemed to have no shortage of stories of hunters that parked where they were told not to, left gates open, littered, trespassed, spooked the livestock, stole pumpkins, damaged fences, and other mischief I've forgotten. 

Completely agree on the nostalgia-influenced rose-colored glasses used to view days of yore.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

Honkkilla59 said:


> I'm 54 years old and remember when access to farm ground to small game hunt was rather easy to get and always treated the land with respect . Today it's a whole different ball game and after reading many of the posts to this thread I can see the future of hunting for younger generations is in trouble.
> The antis don't need to worry about putting a end to hunting as long as the access to land disappears it will slow the recruitment of younger hunters unless you are fortunate enough to be connected to property or money.


This senario has been in action for quite some time. I've said it before, the proliferation of whitetails put this in to high gear during the late 80s. Small game hunting "was" the best recruitment sport we've ever had.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

Bloodrunner said:


> I just looked at a 40 I might put an offer on, I walked the property and kinda liked it, deer killing would be simple as it has lots of bedding area.


Another elitist land baron in the making. Lol


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Bloodrunner said:


> I just looked at a 40 I might put an offer on, I walked the property and kinda liked it, deer killing would be simple as it has lots of bedding area.


I can see it now, blood - in a couple years, you'll be like my buddy who spent 52 days improving the deer habitat on his property last year, then deer hunted it....twice last fall. 

Lots of expertise here on this forum for ya.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

CHASINEYES said:


> Another elitist land baron in the making. Lol


Crazy! It's like joining a Cult, LOL!

I have the cash put aside to buy a good 40 if I find what I want, but I already have access to sure thing slamdunk deer hunting land so I am on the fence if I want to be tied down a little. 

I do see it would be a good investment to put my money in If I find the right piece. They don't make anymore dirt.

Plus the added bonus of hunting trespassers and yelling at fence sitters sounds fun.:lol:


----------



## brewster (May 30, 2010)

FL said " I'm 57, and bought my first small game license in 1970. Forty years ago, every landowner I ever interfaced with seemed to have no shortage of stories of hunters that parked where they were told not to, left gates open, littered, trespassed, spooked the livestock, stole pumpkins, damaged fences, and other mischief I've forgotten." (I need to learn the quote thing sorry.)


I completely agree with this. Grew up not far from where I live now (20 miles) and worked on several farms from the time I was a pretty small kid. A lot of farmers wanted to let people hunt and quite a few hunters were courteous. 


Somewhere in there hunter attitudes started to change from being grateful to entitled. 


Many had enrolled in HAP.They would have 4+- tags for their property and you were supposed to stop at the house to get them. Many times no one stopped, but there would be 10 cars/trucks in their field/yard/ woods and crap left all over as well as all the things FL mentioned. Sometimes they were bitched out by HAP hunters for allowing too many people. They dropped HAP, wouldn't lease unless they new the person well and/or quit letting people walk up hunt.


If people want to cultivate hunting sites they need to do it before the day of and treat the land owner like a land owner, not the caretaker of public property.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

farmlegend said:


> I can see it now, blood - in a couple years, you'll be like my buddy who spent 52 days improving the deer habitat on his property last year, then deer hunted it....twice last fall.
> 
> Lots of expertise here on this forum for ya.



That's what I am afraid of, the wife would cut something off if I invested in hunting land and hunted my old spots instead.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

At one point in the 80s, we were farming 2000 acres. 3/4 of that was leased and we had permission to hunt every bit of it and then some. I can't remember ever having a problem with hunters who asked permission. Sure, there has been mishaps by hunters who were granted permission and unfamiliar with lines.

Someone mentioned cut fences and garbage. That brings back memories. Usually a bunch of drunken night time violators were the ones cutting fences or leaving garbage. The same group tore up hayfields, not people who asked permission.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

Enrolling in HAP was the mistake. Might as well advertised. Lots of riff raff mixed in with the good guys. I highly doubt anyone asking permission is going to trash the place, 9 times out of ten they will treat it better than their own.

Those farmers mentioned in the post above actually wanted hunters until they advertised.


----------



## RMH (Jan 17, 2009)

CHASINEYES said:


> Someone mentioned cut fences and garbage. That brings back memories. Usually a bunch of drunken night time violators were the ones cutting fences or leaving garbage. The same group tore up hayfields, not people who asked permission.


Must be the night fisherman who are leaving their empty worm containers across the state land fishing access sites.:lol: Follow any state land trail that ends where people fish and you will most likely find dunnage from worm containers, water bottles, lunch, new fishing equipment and maybe even a few Popsicle wrappers.


----------



## StevenJ (Feb 11, 2009)

farmlegend said:


> I can see it now, blood - in a couple years, you'll be like my buddy who spent 52 days improving the deer habitat on his property last year, then deer hunted it....twice last fall.


That's pretty ******* elitist of the guy. All that resource left to waste. He should have knocked on doors and begged the neighbors to hunt the property. Some people have no sense of Michigan hunting heritage. There is no excuse for that. He's also probably not going to let anyone rabbit hunt or come varmint hunt the red foxes.


----------



## kingfisher 11 (Jan 26, 2000)

Bloodrunner said:


> At 2-4 grand an acre? They better have ALOT of acreage and have it paid off.
> 
> 
> One of my buddies is a multi-millionaire that buys leases in Michigan, Illinois, and South Dakota, and goes on at least 3-5 hunting trips a year. He says he doesn't care to own land and would rather lease, that way he can try different things if it doesn't work out.
> ...


They are not much of a farmer if they don't have much acreage. Maybe you deal with hobby farmers?:lol: Try buying farm land in Southern MI for 2-4 grand, not going to happen. I am sure its not as much of a problem in your neck of the woods but good farm land in the rest of the state is expensive. 

The farmers we know all farm over 2000 acres. Most much more in our area. I am sure the big chunks of farm land in NW of TC will make you rich.

You don't buy leases, you rent them.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

kingfisher 11 said:


> They are not much of a farmer if they don't have much acreage. Maybe you deal with hobby farmers?:lol: Try buying farm land in Southern MI for 2-4 grand, not going to happen. I am sure its not as much of a problem in your neck of the woods but good farm land in the rest of the state is expensive.
> 
> The farmers we know all farm over 2000 acres. Most much more in our area. I am sure the big chunks of farm land in NW of TC will make you rich.
> 
> You don't buy leases, you rent them.



I don't want a farm, I want the thick and nasty piece of land surrounded by farms. The farmers feeds the deer and I kill em.


One of the best pieces of hunting property I have ever hunted and still can hunt in Mi. is only 48 acres in Isabella County and I have been around.


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

Bloodrunner said:


> I think the stereotype of the "doorknocker" being poor and the landowner being rich is very misunderstood and not the case.


I agree. I think the idea that most door-knockers are "poor" is myth.

In my area, most door-knockers are suburbanites from Ann Arbor to Detroit suburbs who do not own their own land and are looking for hunting opportunities within an hour or two of home. They have jobs and the wherewithal to spend the money to drive out to the country to hunt.

Rural residents don't need to door-knock for the most part because they will make friends if they have the social skills to do so, whether it be through work, or through the two main social institutions in rural areas, church or the bars.


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

Bloodrunner said:


> I don't want a farm, I want the thick and nasty piece of land surrounded by farms. The farmers feeds the deer and I kill em.
> 
> 
> One of the best pieces of hunting property I have ever hunted and still can hunt in Mi. is only 48 acres in Isabella County and I have been around.


Very wise Blood. In farm country owning the swamp is the thing to do. Cover is king. And what most farms lack is cover. Good luck finding your property.


----------

