It's time to do away with landowner tags enough is enough

sbhooper said:
Landowner options such as Ranching for Wildlife and others, give landowners an incentive to co-exist with the animals and make it financially feasible to do so. Without some kind of landowner preference, economics win over animal habitat in many instances.

It is a bit of a catch 22 situation.
Click to expand...

The problem in Idaho is with the tags being good unit wide instead of only the private property for which it was awarded. The incentive to support wildlife on private has mostly been lost.

The 60-90% of public ground in most units is supporting most of the game. Land owners can still be hostile towards game and receive their "new pickup" tags every year or two.
 
brymoore said:
Sen Bair has a Landowner tag bill for this session. I don't know the details but I'd guess he's promoting open sale of LO tags.
Click to expand...
The morphing of the land owner tag program is why we don't want to continue evolving the auction tag program.
 
elkmagnet said:
The problem in Idaho is with the tags being good unit wide instead of only the private property for which it was awarded. The incentive to support wildlife on private has mostly been lost.

The 60-90% of public ground in most units is supporting most of the game. Land owners can still be hostile towards game and receive their "new pickup" tags every year or two.
Click to expand...

I can see that, too. Here, landowners can apply for an elk tag if they own, or lease 320 acres within the unit. The tag is good for the entire unit, but it is because the elk are not always on that landowner's land. I don't have a problem with this preference, as they are feeding the elk all year and patching fences, whether or not the elk is there during the hunting season.

I do realize that there are some bad deals out there regarding landowner tags and they need to be addressed, but not all parts are bad, either.

I know the system that was in place in NM was terrible when I lived there. I don't know how it is now, but they still have a pretty sweet deal on the vouchers, I think.

It is pretty hard to equate what we have here, with what happens in the mountain states, as virtually all of our land is private to start with.
 
In Wyoming, a qualifying landowner(my family is) receives two tags for the qualifying species per year that are good area wide. In many cases, the animals use the private land only certain times of the year i.e. winter range, summer irrigated crops and so on. Hence the tag is good for the whole area.

I have had several conversations with Buzz on how to make the Wyo landowner program less intrusive on highly sought areas with small license quotas. One idea is to make the maximum percentage of landowner tags coincide with the percentage of deeded lands within the area. In most areas statewide, the percentage of landowner licenses issued is insignificant. Undeniably, the landowner license program is benefit to sportsman in Wyo, with dividends being better management of species and more opportunity outside of public land hunting.

Unfortunately, with Ag still a driving force in the legislature in Wyo, meaningful changes to landowner tags may be a difficult proposition. Wyoming residents, including myself, fought back a measure to allow landowners to sell their tags years ago. Hopefully that doesn't come up again in the future.
 
Senator Bair says that the great unwashed don't see the benefit of selling tags. The real question is, Who does get the benefit? The answer of course is "Follow the money". Living in Arizona, we have been able to fight off some of the crackpot ideas that come along, but we need eternal vigilance. AzGFD is finding pneumonia infections in desert sheep along the Colorado river. There are already die offs with more to come. This area has been very productive for Nelson Bighorn transplants. That's over for now and there will probably be harvest reductions next year for sure. This has happened in areas with no domestic sheep grazing. The area has some real off the grid types, folks like Tim McVey hung out here, there is the possibility that some of these folks may use goats for food and milk and just let them run. AzGFD is trying to figure it out. GJ
 
Last edited:
No disrespect meant, as quick-typing seems to be the norm and I too post too many typos ... but, Mature Buck, you ever heard of a capital letter, a period, or a comma?
 
JM77 said:
In Wyoming, a qualifying landowner(my family is) receives two tags for the qualifying species per year that are good area wide. In many cases, the animals use the private land only certain times of the year i.e. winter range, summer irrigated crops and so on. Hence the tag is good for the whole area.

I have had several conversations with Buzz on how to make the Wyo landowner program less intrusive on highly sought areas with small license quotas. One idea is to make the maximum percentage of landowner tags coincide with the percentage of deeded lands within the area. In most areas statewide, the percentage of landowner licenses issued is insignificant. Undeniably, the landowner license program is benefit to sportsman in Wyo, with dividends being better management of species and more opportunity outside of public land hunting.

Unfortunately, with Ag still a driving force in the legislature in Wyo, meaningful changes to landowner tags may be a difficult proposition. Wyoming residents, including myself, fought back a measure to allow landowners to sell their tags years ago. Hopefully that doesn't come up again in the future.
Click to expand...

I talked to a Wyoming rancher this year that is in a crappy situation. They run a HUGE amount of land (350,000 plus acres), but they lease it and so are not able to get a landowner tag. The actual landowners are not hunter and don't care. These people have lived on, taken care of and made a living on the land since 73 and have not drawn ONE mulie buck or bull elk tag for the land they take care of. At least they allow lots of hunter access, which is becoming a novelty, also. They could shut off massive amounts of country, if they chose to.

This is not right, either. Nebraska has that part right, in that the people that lease the land can apply for the tags, also.

This is a situation where there is no way to please everyone. Hunters, many times do not understand the landowner's side of the argument and vis versa.
 
sbhooper said:
I talked to a Wyoming rancher this year that is in a crappy situation. They run a HUGE amount of land (350,000 plus acres), but they lease it and so are not able to get a landowner tag. The actual landowners are not hunter and don't care. These people have lived on, taken care of and made a living on the land since 73 and have not drawn ONE mulie buck or bull elk tag for the land they take care of. At least they allow lots of hunter access, which is becoming a novelty, also. They could shut off massive amounts of country, if they chose to.

This is not right, either. Nebraska has that part right, in that the people that lease the land can apply for the tags, also.

This is a situation where there is no way to please everyone. Hunters, many times do not understand the landowner's side of the argument and vis versa.
Click to expand...

You want people leasing land to get Landowner tags? How about renters?
 
brymoore said:
You want people leasing land to get Landowner tags? How about renters?
Click to expand...

There is a distinct disadvantage at times for folks who lease range land and/or farm land. My best friend used to lease a place (now owns it) for haying/grazing, but he did not get any of the hunting rights. One year he had a herd of elk come in and completely demolish a field of triticale

Because he didn't allow hunting (didn't have much deeded ground at the time), and the owner didn't allow hunting on that piece of ground, he didn't qualify for any crop damage assistance. It was a really shitty deal for him, and to his credit he didn't take it out on the public. He still allows people to hunt on all of the recent acquisitions he's made.

I can see where there would be appropriate times for a lessee to be as deserving of a landowner tag as a landowner himself would be.

I think Montana's landowner preference tags are well thought out, and I've never had issue with them being available.
 
As a landowner in Oregon, Let me clear up a few things. Not all landowners regardless of size of property get tags. Some units in Oregon, as a landowner you may only get LOP tags every 3rd or 4th year. When I bought my property I researched where the best odds of getting LOP tags. My unit is usually every year as elk and deer at near or desired headcount. In Oregon with a LOP tag you may ONLY hunt on your property and cannot hunt unit wide. I think we as landowners who receive LOP tags should get at least one tag unit wide. Why? I spend my personal money and time in providing habitat for deer and elk. I have built and maintained water holes, cleared trees and brush which has allowed great feed source for animals and so-on. My property allows access to thousands of acres of pubic land so when hunters do harvest an animal they could enter through my gate and my neighbors to retrieve there animal. BUT.... now I keep finding trespassers on my cameras who tear up my hillsides and meadows with quads, leave bottles, cans and garbage. SO.... before you bag on private property owners remember, we are ones who feed, provide water in summer and winter food and shelter for the very elk and deer you get to hunt during your season.
 
I hope your not replying to my post as "entitlement mentality". If so I guess the following makes me an entitled.

1- giving free tags to first time hunters
2- donating tags to auctioned off to raise money for youth programs
3- never once have I ever sold a tag or charged for someone to hunt on my property, nor a tress pass fee
4- helping create habitat for spawning beds for steel head in my creek
5- allowing my cabin and property to be used for youth retreats
6- never once using my LOP tags for a bull tag. Even though I can get two a year I only pull cow tags for meat, then donate some meat to local family's in need. I've got 330" plus bulls on my property and not once hunted them. Bull to cow ratios are low and need to be increased. I could easily sell these tags for an outrageous amount, but never, ever have. Nor will I.

Just like not all hunters share the same ethics unfortunately, many, many landowners like myself help make more hunters and new ones more successful. We don't want anything for it, just not to be considered spoiled or entitled. I hunt public land every year in Colorado and respect both sides of the fence.
 
belshawelk said:
I hope your not replying to my post as "entitlement mentality". If so I guess the following makes me an entitled.

1- giving free tags to first time hunters
2- donating tags to auctioned off to raise money for youth programs
3- never once have I ever sold a tag or charged for someone to hunt on my property, nor a tress pass fee
4- helping create habitat for spawning beds for steel head in my creek
5- allowing my cabin and property to be used for youth retreats
6- never once using my LOP tags for a bull tag. Even though I can get two a year I only pull cow tags for meat, then donate some meat to local family's in need. I've got 330" plus bulls on my property and not once hunted them. Bull to cow ratios are low and need to be increased. I could easily sell these tags for an outrageous amount, but never, ever have. Nor will I.

Just like not all hunters share the same ethics unfortunately, many, many landowners like myself help make more hunters and new ones more successful. We don't want anything for it, just not to be considered spoiled or entitled. I hunt public land every year in Colorado and respect both sides of the fence.
Click to expand...

Chest bump! High five!
Unfortinatly none of this entitles you to more elk tags. Nor is any of it relevant.
We could all come up with reasons we are "special" and deserve more tags.
The reality is you already receive tags annually to hunt animals held in public trust in a limited unit that takes the public years to draw. Instead of being satisfied you say this.
I think we as landowners who receive LOP tags should get at least one tag unit wide.
Click to expand...
So you believe you are entitled to be in front of the common man at the head of the line. So that you can hunt the public's animals on public ground. Meanwhile the commoners can squabble for the leftovers.
Philanthropy aside what am I missing?
 
Last edited:
I wont keep going around and around with you but in my unit is a 0 point draw unit. Even you, a common man can get a tag every year. You can even hunt a bull, every year. ( I save them for you by not shooting them). I just simply make it easier for some less fortunate who cant afford hunting or want a safe place to hunt away from all the crazies running quads and shooing at everything that moves.

I guess I should save my alfalfa and hay for my cattle this year as we are having one of the biggest snowfalls of the decade. Ill just let "your" public land trust elk starve to death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Matt Rinella is categorically confused
18 19 20
Replies
399
Views
23K
Big Fin
Big Fin
Nameless Range
What The Hell is Science-Based Management?
5 6 7
Replies
123
Views
4K
Mtn Dawg
M
cheeser
Press Release February 7, 2024 Legal action launched to protect wolves in northern Rocky Mountains
Replies
1
Views
241
bayoublaster7527
B
Mtrimble
Fixing Western Hunting
12 13 14
Replies
268
Views
8K
Mtn Dawg
M
Pucky Freak
Free hunting social media is not free
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
Arthas
A

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,048
Messages
1,944,967
Members
34,990
Latest member
hotdeals

Share this page

Back
Top