# I just lost 1850 acres of hunting land.



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

A huge farming corporation bought all the land I used to hunt on and put the farmer who gave me permission right out of business. Now all the land must be leased to hunt on. They want $4700/ year for the main field I hunt. This is all Calhoun county. I hate leasing and if you lease you are the problem. It ruins it for everyone. None of the land was very good deer hunting and the deer hunters have leased it all. The farmer himself didn't even hunt on it. Greed is ruining it for everyone. I will quit hunting before I lease any land.


----------



## ReallyBigFish (May 8, 2014)

Either hunt the thousands of acres of state land or buy. Leasers aren't the problem. How about feeling more sorry for the farmer who lost his land than you losing your hunting rights. Sorry, not trying to be a jerk but there are way worse things about this situation.


----------



## waterfowlhunter83 (Aug 10, 2005)

Sadly this is becoming more of a common occurrence...both leasing and individual farms being bought out by large corporate farms.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## gunfun13 (Jun 13, 2003)

$4700 for 1850 acres? Please pm me contact information. Sorry to be part of your problem.


----------



## jdman (Feb 9, 2005)

Not Greed... Think About The Farmers Expenses He's Just Trying To Get Some Return On His Investment... 1850 Acres @ Lets Say $4,000. Acre = $7.4 Mil.:yikes:


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

Said it before and I will say it again, Michigan is one of the worse states for lease prices from the stories I have heard. It didn't get really bad till farmers started seeing the "antler craze". When I was a kid I could get permission to all kinds of property with no money required etc. but if someone is willing to pay the prices then land owners will continue to charge what they can get. Funny to see the different attitudes in other states. I received permission to hunt in Wyoming on a relatively small ranch (for Wyoming) a few thousand acres. The rancher said we need to fill out a liability form and pay a trespass fee of $25.00. I said okay, $25.00 a day wasn't too bad. At that the rancher said $25.00 a day? What do you think I am some kinda thief or something? It's $25.00 for the season!:lol: Let me know what $25.00 will you get you access to hunht here in Michigan. 

Ganzer


----------



## LoBrass (Oct 16, 2007)

Bummer.

Yeah, I dealt with leasing issues once upon a time. My family and myself bought land. This is the very best way to keep your own little piece of the pie. I kill lots of birds on our land now and have been able to introduce countless people to what waterfowling can be. We busted our @$$'s (still are) and my country and our freedom has allowed my family and I to make our own way. The land of opportunity, my friend. 

Venture out, earn cash by the truck load and leasing (or buying-the ultimate lease) becomes soooooo much easier and less stressful. An old Lebanese restaurantuer (whom has since passed, RIP Al) once told me, "GREATEST PLACE IN THE WORLD to make a living". So true.

Also still knock on doors but to a far less intense degree. Too much rejection and far too much competition. I don't have the time to knock on every door where I think I could shoot a brace of birds. I scout whenever I'm in my vehicle, and that is every day. My visits are generally my neighbors any more. 9 times out of 10 it's an easy yes, NOT vice versa.

But.........................you or your offspring will quit hunting choice ag ground with a statement like you made. Whether it is paying an outfitter for access to good hunting grounds or leasing land, sooner or later you will want to get access and the exchange of $$$$ is a quick, secure and exclusive way to get it done. The days of pheasant hunting entire sections regardless of land ownership are over in Michigan. Sorry to fill you in.

Best of luck and see you at the Bingo.


----------



## LoBrass (Oct 16, 2007)

MERGANZER said:


> Said it before and I will say it again, Michigan is one of the worse states for lease prices from the stories I have heard. It didn't get really bad till farmers started seeing the "antler craze". When I was a kid I could get permission to all kinds of property with no money required etc. but if someone is willing to pay the prices then land owners will continue to charge what they can get. Funny to see the different attitudes in other states. I received permission to hunt in Wyoming on a relatively small ranch (for Wyoming) a few thousand acres. The rancher said we need to fill out a liability form and pay a trespass fee of $25.00. I said okay, $25.00 a day wasn't too bad. At that the rancher said $25.00 a day? What do you think I am some kinda thief or something? It's $25.00 for the season!:lol: Let me know what $25.00 will you get you access to hunht here in Michigan.
> 
> Ganzer


There are more hunters in SE MI than in all of Wyoming. Therein lies our problem.


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

Seen a lot of spots change hands and policies over the years. It's not fun but we move on.
I don,t lease but see why it happens. Time to poke around and scout up multiple options. Sometimes a small pocket is productive,at times a road trip can pay off. I,m debating about a trip N.W. that I,ll hate the road part of but enjoy lots of elbow room and low traffic. Plus the being out of reach of some of the fever that goes with lots of people hunting.
Bummer to read of your loss,it happens.


----------



## boomstick (Aug 31, 2010)

That's a great price for a lease. Not even $3 and acres .


----------



## roo (Mar 30, 2011)

I would love to have a chance at a lease like that. Just moved to calhoun county and don't have a place to hunt yet. All my property is in hillsdale and won't be able to drive down often with work.


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

craigrh13 said:


> A huge farming corporation bought all the land I used to hunt on and put the farmer who gave me permission right out of business. Now all the land must be leased to hunt on. They want $4700/ year for the main field I hunt. This is all Calhoun county. I hate leasing and if you lease you are the problem. It ruins it for everyone. None of the land was very good deer hunting and the deer hunters have leased it all. The farmer himself didn't even hunt on it. Greed is ruining it for everyone. I will quit hunting before I lease any land.


I agree with everything but your leasing comment, to obtain permission for free is a huge benefit. But these land owners pay for the land, so why should you get your cake and eat it for free? No offense, I don't like leasing at all but with liability and the cost of doing business these days it's not bad. Guides often lease land to ensure they can produce quality hunts and manage it themselves. To me if you have an issue with leasing you're no better than these liberals pushing Obamacare or housing illegals for free, everything in this country has it's price. Sorry to put it so rash, but this is where you can go public hunt, or start going to other states. When I started doing more of this and realizing there's more opportunities out there I found great hunting.


Did you offer to work for the farmer if they need help?


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

MERGANZER said:


> Said it before and I will say it again, Michigan is one of the worse states for lease prices from the stories I have heard. It didn't get really bad till farmers started seeing the "antler craze". When I was a kid I could get permission to all kinds of property with no money required etc. but if someone is willing to pay the prices then land owners will continue to charge what they can get. Funny to see the different attitudes in other states. I received permission to hunt in Wyoming on a relatively small ranch (for Wyoming) a few thousand acres. The rancher said we need to fill out a liability form and pay a trespass fee of $25.00. I said okay, $25.00 a day wasn't too bad. At that the rancher said $25.00 a day? What do you think I am some kinda thief or something? It's $25.00 for the season!:lol: Let me know what $25.00 will you get you access to hunht here in Michigan.
> 
> Ganzer



Nobody drives a Model T for their daily commute anymore either and doesn't drink a coke for nickel..Come on brother


----------



## KalamazooKid (Jun 20, 2005)

craigrh13 said:


> A huge farming corporation bought all the land I used to hunt on and put the farmer who gave me permission right out of business. Now all the land must be leased to hunt on. They want $4700/ year for the main field I hunt. This is all Calhoun county. I hate leasing and if you lease you are the problem. It ruins it for everyone. None of the land was very good deer hunting and the deer hunters have leased it all. The farmer himself didn't even hunt on it. Greed is ruining it for everyone. I will quit hunting before I lease any land.



Wait a minute ...... when did land stop being free?


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

Nooooo the minimum was $25 acre. The land sold for $10.5 million. They wanted $4700/ year just for 160 acres!! Yes the farmer lost everything in this deal, even his house. Some idiots are actually paying it too. Morons.


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

craigrh13 said:


> Nooooo the minimum was $25 acre. The land sold for $10.5 million. They wanted $4700/ year just for 160 acres!! Yes the farmer lost everything in this deal, even his house. Some idiots are actually paying it too. Morons.


You should go out and buy 160, how much would your price be per acre then? Don't forget about taxes for uncle sam to...

Poor Morons can't afford their own 160 so they choose to lease so they have a guaranteed place to hunt..


----------



## gunfun13 (Jun 13, 2003)

craigrh13 said:


> Nooooo the minimum was $25 acre. The land sold for $10.5 million. They wanted $4700/ year just for 160 acres!! Yes the farmer lost everything in this deal, even his house. Some idiots are actually paying it too. Morons.


How does the farmer lose everything if the land sold for $10.5mil? Since he is the one that gave you permission, he must have been the one that owned it. Had he financed it up the wazoo, quit paying and lose to forclosure?


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

Leasing land to hunt ruins it for everyone. Greed will be the downfall of hunting.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

craigrh13 said:


> Leasing land to hunt ruins it for everyone. Greed will be the downfall of hunting.


It only ruins is for freeloaders. It makes opportunities for others to have a place to hunt.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

Not sure it is greedy to buy something and then expect to be paid by someone to use it. I'd consider it nice of them to let you use it for free, but they are not greedy for requesting payment for use.

The land owner paid for the property and uses it as a tool to make money. Making money off the land by planting or leasing, really no difference IMO.


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

SBE II said:


> Indirectly don't you lease land from the state every year when you purchase a license? Aren't you paying for those resources? So it's okay to pay your license fee just not a leasing fee...


What?
Who needs to purchase a license when your hunting the land of free.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> farm, although i agree with you on many of your post and way of thinking, i totally disagree on this one thing heavily. *"What some conveniently miss is that leasing CREATES hunting access for many. In the aggregate sense, leasing does not detract from hunting access one iota."*. You will never, ever make that stick anywhere, anytime. Specially on a waterfowl forum. and i'll explain why.
> 
> group of 3 deer hunters lease a 160 acres. 3 hunters enjoy the 160 acres. now the 3+ groups....key word, groups of waterfowl hunters that chased geese on that land are out. now the 3+ groups that shot rabbits are out, 3 groups of squirrel hunters are out. 3 turkey hunters are out. Now those 3 leasers might hunt all the above, but thats not the norm and we all know it.
> 
> tell me again how this creates hunting access? or increases it in any way?


I think you meant to say "especially" on a waterfowl forum.

It doesn't matter if you're talking deer, waterfowl, peat moss, whiskey, or bongo drums. Hunting access to 160 acres of land is hunting access to 160 acres of land, regardless of how many hunters access the land. What value is there of access to those 160 acres if one million other guys can hunt there also? Close. To. Zero.

Of course, if you are a socialist, you would measure access by the number of eager mouths accessing the same soda cracker.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

The concept that people that have the money to lease are idiots and detriments to society is amusing.

If a farmer that deny's access due to a hunting lease is bad, where does the farmer that denies access to all fall?


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

TSS Caddis said:


> The concept that people that have the money to lease are idiots and detriments to society is amusing.


You don't get out much do you?

I know a few farmers that leased to big city idiots. The idiots drove through their crops among many other things, didn't matter much after that, drive through crops equals your ats is gone.

Edit:
A couple other ones that me and a few farmer friends like to laugh about:
"can you quit working this field for the night? I'm trying to hunt"
"can you leave a 12' strip along the edge of this one mile field so we can access the hunting property?"
"can you pick the corn today so we can see some deer?"


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

TSS Caddis said:


> The concept that people that have the money to lease are idiots and detriments to society is amusing.
> 
> If a farmer that deny's access due to a hunting lease is bad, where does the farmer that denies access to all fall?


He's just an old prick set on destroying our hunting heritage.


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

wintrrun said:


> What?
> Who needs to purchase a license when your hunting the land of free.


I'm still trying to figure it out..one day, there's hope that I will never have to pull a buck out of my pocket again.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

FREEPOP said:


> You don't get out much do you?
> 
> I know a few farmers that leased to big city idiots. The idiots drove through their crops among many other things, didn't matter much after that, drive through crops equals your ats is gone.
> 
> ...


What does this have to do with my comments? 

In prior posts people that are willing to lease are assigned the label "Idiot" because they are willing to pay. And farmers assigned the label "Greedy" for expecting payment for use of something that has value.

Basically just sour grapes because the free ride ended. So instead of just accepting that the *gift of free access* ended and being grateful for past use, it has to turn into greedy farmers and idiot leasers. The farmer is not greedy for wanting to be paid for something he has of value and the person willing to pay for something of value is not an idiot for doing so.

Call it like it is, inconvenient and disappointing to lose free hunting access. There doesn't always have to be a bad guy.


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

TSS Caddis said:


> What does this have to do with my comments?
> 
> In prior posts people that are willing to lease are assigned the label "Idiot" because they are willing to pay. And farmers assigned the label "Greedy" for expecting payment for use of something that has value.
> 
> Basically just sour grapes because the free ride ended. So instead of just accepting that the *gift of free access* ended and being grateful for past use, it has to turn into greedy farmers and idiot leasers. The farmer is not greedy for wanting to be paid for something he has of value and the person willing to pay for something of value is not an idiot for doing so.


I think it was how your last post read, I had to reread a couple of times to understand your POV.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

TSS Caddis said:


> What does this have to do with my comments?
> .


I thought they were idiots and they proved they were 

I don't pay for any access and it is far from free.


----------



## boomstick (Aug 31, 2010)

TSS Caddis said:


> The concept that people that have the money to lease are idiots and detriments to society is amusing.
> 
> If a farmer that deny's access due to a hunting lease is bad, where does the farmer that denies access to all fall?



Don't waste ur time or breath on these guys. There name calling will catch up to them quicker then they think! Most men know the difference between what's right and what's FREE!


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

boomstick said:


> Don't waste ur time or breath on these guys. There name calling will catch up to them quicker then they think! Most men know the difference between what's right and what's FREE!


So cash has to pass before it's right  :lol:


----------



## November Sunrise (Jan 12, 2006)

hiflyer said:


> A very close friend of mine, he and his family had farmed almost 800 acres of the Starr Commonwealth property. They went to the auction the day of the sale and it was pretty much sold before the auction began. Also have a close friend who's dad farmed part of it and he completely sold out due to losing his share of the property. I goose & duck hunted these properties and have also lost access. Yes big corp. come in and take it all, oh well.
> 
> Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Ohub Campfire mobile app


I was at the auction. The bidding on separate tracts totaled around 4 million, and then 2 different bidders started bidding on the acreage in its entirety and the price quickly moved to above $10 million.

There's nothing sad about a property owner (Starr Commonwealth) selling their property, nor is there anything sad about the new property owner (Ceres) renting the farming and hunting rights to the highest bidder. Any farmer who rents tillable ground should be able to easily understand that renting arrangements are always fragile.

People are free to do what they want with their land and their money.


----------



## goosemanrdk (Jan 14, 2003)

Overall, I have no problems with leasing, but also understand the non-leasing side.

I do however, have problems with how "some" go about leasing or handle their lease.


----------



## LoBrass (Oct 16, 2007)

goosemanrdk said:


> Overall, I have no problems with leasing, but also understand the non-leasing side.
> 
> I do however, have problems with how "some" go about leasing or handle their lease.


Oh yeah. Like the lease holder whom invites a "buddy" out and the following year the leasor is pinched out as the "buddy" has overbid for the exclusive rights. Would that be an example?

I've seen this happen and know of other issues.

Steppin' on people is a part of _our_ society. You (Craig) got stepped on (out). I suggest getting bigger boots so you can do some walkin'.


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

November Sunrise said:


> I was at the auction. The bidding on separate tracts totaled around 4 million, and then 2 different bidders started bidding on the acreage in its entirety and the price quickly moved to above $10 million.
> 
> There's nothing sad about a property owner (Starr Commonwealth) selling their property, nor is there anything sad about the new property owner (Ceres) renting the farming and hunting rights to the highest bidder. Any farmer who rents tillable ground should be able to easily understand that renting arrangements are always fragile.
> 
> People are free to do what they want with their land and their money.


That bidding can get furious out west and now here. 
People are free to do too a point. Wetlands and zoning use for example.
I,m no fan of money is the answer to having your own land to hunt being I have little anymore.
Applies to those with enough money I guess.
Were I in the landowner of a very large tracts position ,sure leasing would appeal. Yes it increases revenue in a more secure way than crops but insures greater responsibility by users also. It troubles me more to see the family farms bought up for development or combined with other parcels to create greater scale farms but its on me to acquire the funding to buy my own acreage. Having been fleeced a couple times by a couple ex's I,m now looking for that perfect one acre. L.o.l..
Every one has a different perspective,landowners,guests,lessees,public land hunters,private land non farming owners,out of staters,disenfranchised,well to do's, Europeans. Leasing works like it or not. What is a reasonable trespass fee has a lot of variables from the position of hunters and the habitat, quality of game to availability.
There is a big checker board out there for those who don,t own or desire to lease. I hunt it. It is bittersweet leaving great spots when things change and your out but I still appreciate having hunted and studied why they were so nice. Next time I buy ,when and if that perfect acre shows up ,the past will help choose wisely. The right site and maybe it can be partially leased!


----------



## goosemanrdk (Jan 14, 2003)

LoBrass said:


> Oh yeah. Like the lease holder whom invites a "buddy" out and the following year the leasor is pinched out as the "buddy" has overbid for the exclusive rights. Would that be an example?
> 
> I've seen this happen and know of other issues.
> 
> Steppin' on people is a part of _our_ society. You (Craig) got stepped on. I suggest getting bigger boots so you can do some walkin'.


Yep, That would be one.

I have other examples, but am not going to list them as I don't want to get drawn into any debate. Suffice it to say that they fall under the theory of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And what irritates me the most about them, is that they create division amongst hunters, and that is NOT something that we need if we want the hunting tradition to continue for the future generations. But, the way some behave, I am not sure they even care about the future generations and the hunting tradition. Really sad to say and see


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

Caring about the future of hunting and accepting the landowners right to lease as not being an ahole move are 2 very different things.


----------



## goosemanrdk (Jan 14, 2003)

TSS Caddis said:


> Caring about the future of hunting and accepting the landowners right to lease as not being an ahole move are 2 very different things.


I am not saying/nor never implied that landowners right to lease was or ever is an ahole move. Not saying that leasing as whole is risk to the future either.


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

goosemanrdk said:


> Yep, That would be one.
> 
> I have other examples, but am not going to list them as I don't want to get drawn into any debate. Suffice it to say that they fall under the theory of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And what irritates me the most about them, is that they create division amongst hunters, and that is NOT something that we need if we want the hunting tradition to continue for the future generations. But, the way some behave, I am not sure they even care about the future generations and the hunting tradition. Really sad to say and see


By division do you mean jealousy? That's merely the country as a whole, separated by class.


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

SBE II said:


> By division do you mean jealousy? That's merely the country as a whole, separated by class.


Nope.
Jealousy plays no part in the business side of leasing a property.
Money does.
He's talking more about one hunter cutting another hunters throat.
I hear the jealousy issue can be learned to dealt with at a TL Bootcamp.:lol:


----------



## SBE II (Jan 13, 2009)

Shiawassee_Kid said:


> SBE, i would probably have fun with you hunting fields if i had never seen you make a post on M-S...If you would leave your hood of chicago and get up here in the sticks you just might see why we think the way we do.


Hey now, I'm not near that trash I'm an hour SW of there near the goose mecca.


----------



## charcoal300zxtt (Sep 8, 2011)

Growing up as a kid i was very fortunate (IMO) as we hunted a private 750acres of mixed apple/cherry/sod farm in Manistee which was owned by a family friend. Long story short the land was sold to an oil company and we lost our hunting privileges. Does it suck?......Yeah but we never got mad or upset whatsoever, simply thanked them for the great memories and moved on. I do agree that leasing will hurt hunting participation numbers in the long, but i must have missed the part where anyone posted there idea or a reasonable theory to put a stop to it?


----------



## LoBrass (Oct 16, 2007)

The very best way (and likely ONLY) way to curb the trend is to increase and improve the public hunting access and acreage to a point where it is BETTER than the private ground hunting. The acreage required would be tremendous as the hunter numbers would have to correspond well to the available acreage.

A daunting task in Zone 3. 

Acreage is being increased and improved in SE Michigan. I'm proud to say that Waterfowl USA, among other non-profit groups, has made some fantastic donations to purchase ground. Every acre counts. And each of us should work for or attend and contribute to a waterfowl related banquet or 3. Just sayin'.

I got a tremendous tour of Point Mouillee the other day. If a guy can't figure out a way to hunt birds and be successful out there, they should hunt deer.

Leasing just got less important.


----------



## au5952 (Oct 18, 2011)

I understand loosing your spot can be devastating, and as you have made clear you dont want to lease.. So what wrong with the U.P thousand of acres to hunt. Also I feel that the statement if their are youth waterfowl hunting private property with permission, but are then diplaced due to the land being leased, there are several managed waterfowl areas in michigan to hunt. It seems the issue is people feel the quality of hunts will be less, on state land or managed waterfowl areas. 
I feel that people will always agree to disagree on this issue.
Just because you loose rights to hunt some where doesnt mean with a little effort you could not explore other options. Another would be pick up a copy of the public hunting on private land book from your local sporting goods store.


----------



## casscityalum (Aug 27, 2007)

Just one question? How did the farmer lose his house?


----------

