Views on leasing land?

What is your take on leasing land for hunting? I think it is good and bad.

I agree, there are good and bad with leasing. Personally, the way hunting land is getting tougher to get permission, leasing is the only thing left to do. I am not bowhunting this year due to lack of land. The farm I used to hunt is no longer letting people in to hunt. So, I am stuck with hunting public land that is full of squirrel hunters. If I could find land to lease, I may very well be interested in doing so.

I agree, there are good and bad with leasing. Personally, the way hunting land is getting tougher to get permission, leasing is the only thing left to do. I am not bowhunting this year due to lack of land. The farm I used to hunt is no longer letting people in to hunt. So, I am stuck with hunting public land that is full of squirrel hunters. If I could find land to lease, I may very well be interested in doing so.

Gheese Mike, if your willing to pay to lease, buy an iowa liscence and come down and hunt with me, its about 4 hrs from you and gas is $2.03 now, it will take a 1/2 tank to get here, <——<<<<= I gaurantee you one during blackpowder if you can still get a liscense,,,

Gheese Mike, if your willing to pay to lease, buy an iowa liscence and come down and hunt with me, its about 4 hrs from you and gas is $2.03 now, it will take a 1/2 tank to get here, <——<<<<= I gaurantee you one during blackpowder if you can still get a liscense,,,

I view it as bad. The only reason I say this is because you will be paying to use someones land that you can do nothing with. (maybe a food plot if your lucky). The #1 reason is because if you lease land for a fair amount of time you could have bought some land for the same amount of money you spent leasing and it would be YOUR land. You can do whatever you want with it and to it and could use it for other things than hunting. I see it the same way as renting a house instead of buying. I think in the long run you would be better off to buy land than lease. Even more so now that the price of land is going up. If it continues like this for a while by the time you have it all paid for you would be able to sell it if you wanted and make money.
If it was only for a one or two year deal while you try to figure something else out I would say go for it. If not I would go with buying.

I view it as bad. The only reason I say this is because you will be paying to use someones land that you can do nothing with. (maybe a food plot if your lucky). The #1 reason is because if you lease land for a fair amount of time you could have bought some land for the same amount of money you spent leasing and it would be YOUR land. You can do whatever you want with it and to it and could use it for other things than hunting. I see it the same way as renting a house instead of buying. I think in the long run you would be better off to buy land than lease. Even more so now that the price of land is going up. If it continues like this for a while by the time you have it all paid for you would be able to sell it if you wanted and make money.
If it was only for a one or two year deal while you try to figure something else out I would say go for it. If not I would go with buying.

There’s no doubt that it’s the way of the future. There will be more “Hunting Clubs” springing up to make the leasing of land more affordable. The unfortunate aspect of leases is that the more land that is leased-off, the more land owners will jump on the band wagon. What many don’t understand is that once an owner leases (hence, receives compensation) his land, he is now liable for injuries associated with the activity that he is “selling/promoting”. My bro. was asked to “rent” a portion of his parcel to a snomo club a few years back. His attorney advised him to decline the offer but to draw-up a document stating he would not prohibit usage but would not condone it either. It was not ag land and would not post the property (therefore, making it legal for the club to cross it without written permission). In some states, a large percentage of non-public land is leased. The positive side of leasing hunting land is that it promotes management of resources. Farmers (for example) will tend to revert back to wildlife enhancing farming practices.

There’s no doubt that it’s the way of the future. There will be more “Hunting Clubs” springing up to make the leasing of land more affordable. The unfortunate aspect of leases is that the more land that is leased-off, the more land owners will jump on the band wagon. What many don’t understand is that once an owner leases (hence, receives compensation) his land, he is now liable for injuries associated with the activity that he is “selling/promoting”. My bro. was asked to “rent” a portion of his parcel to a snomo club a few years back. His attorney advised him to decline the offer but to draw-up a document stating he would not prohibit usage but would not condone it either. It was not ag land and would not post the property (therefore, making it legal for the club to cross it without written permission). In some states, a large percentage of non-public land is leased. The positive side of leasing hunting land is that it promotes management of resources. Farmers (for example) will tend to revert back to wildlife enhancing farming practices.

Actually Walleye….It isn’t as cheap to own land as you think, thats why leases became popular……inturn sending land prices and taxes on that land skyrocketing! Making it even harder to find a place to hunt. I remember the good old days where you’d knock on a door and 7 out of 10 times we were able to do some kind of hunting on his land…ie small game, bowhunt whatever. Not to point any fingers but around my area it seems we are too close to the guys on the other side of the river, with more expendable income. Guys who don’t know the farmer down the road that will let them hunt for nothing and this is their only means to do something they love to do. A sport that once was filled passion and lending a helping hand once in a while is now filled with dollar signs and that is the only part I don’t like.

Actually Walleye….It isn’t as cheap to own land as you think, thats why leases became popular……inturn sending land prices and taxes on that land skyrocketing! Making it even harder to find a place to hunt. I remember the good old days where you’d knock on a door and 7 out of 10 times we were able to do some kind of hunting on his land…ie small game, bowhunt whatever. Not to point any fingers but around my area it seems we are too close to the guys on the other side of the river, with more expendable income. Guys who don’t know the farmer down the road that will let them hunt for nothing and this is their only means to do something they love to do. A sport that once was filled passion and lending a helping hand once in a while is now filled with dollar signs and that is the only part I don’t like.

I agree that it is getting to be all about money. If leaseing some land is your only opition and you can afford it then go for it defenitly. This is all coming from me who has hunted public land all my life. I think I hunted a piece of private land 3 times my whole life. I know what it feels like to not have land for yourself to hunt on. Just my opinion.

I agree that it is getting to be all about money. If leaseing some land is your only opition and you can afford it then go for it defenitly. This is all coming from me who has hunted public land all my life. I think I hunted a piece of private land 3 times my whole life. I know what it feels like to not have land for yourself to hunt on. Just my opinion.

I feel that leasing land to hunt is beneficial in many ways. First, the cost of a lease is typically cheaper than the taxes paid on the land for that year. For example, my brother, two buddies, and I lease 280 acres for $1280/year. The estimated tax per year on similar size plots are more expensive. (Neighbor pays $2200/year in taxes for 335 acres)

Another reason is that with the right permission, it allows the leasee to be able to maintain food plots as well as incorporate a Deer Management Program of their own.

One more reason is the fact that the more group that start leasing land, the less crowded public lands will be. More hunters will focus on their leased lands and spend less time on public lands.

I am not a big fan of “No Hunting/No Tresspassing” signs out in the wilds, but we have to face the fact that there is no stopping it anymore. The public lands hopefully will always be there for us in the future, but I think it is starting to get important to stake your claims if possible.

I feel that leasing land to hunt is beneficial in many ways. First, the cost of a lease is typically cheaper than the taxes paid on the land for that year. For example, my brother, two buddies, and I lease 280 acres for $1280/year. The estimated tax per year on similar size plots are more expensive. (Neighbor pays $2200/year in taxes for 335 acres)

Another reason is that with the right permission, it allows the leasee to be able to maintain food plots as well as incorporate a Deer Management Program of their own.

One more reason is the fact that the more group that start leasing land, the less crowded public lands will be. More hunters will focus on their leased lands and spend less time on public lands.

I am not a big fan of “No Hunting/No Tresspassing” signs out in the wilds, but we have to face the fact that there is no stopping it anymore. The public lands hopefully will always be there for us in the future, but I think it is starting to get important to stake your claims if possible.

My original post was based on a buddy that I know that leases some land here in wisconsin. There is 5 people that share the lease and they EACH pay $1,250. That is for 300 and some odd acres with close to 100 acres in fields. Thats what I used for my information. So if I am way off for some peoples other experiences I appoligize.

No matter how you look at it as long as you are out hunting and enjoying yourself that is all that matters.

My original post was based on a buddy that I know that leases some land here in wisconsin. There is 5 people that share the lease and they EACH pay $1,250. That is for 300 and some odd acres with close to 100 acres in fields. Thats what I used for my information. So if I am way off for some peoples other experiences I appoligize.

No matter how you look at it as long as you are out hunting and enjoying yourself that is all that matters.

Quote:

---

There’s no doubt that it’s the way of the future. There will be more “Hunting Clubs” springing up to make the leasing of land more affordable. The unfortunate aspect of leases is that the more land that is leased-off, the more land owners will jump on the band wagon. What many don’t understand is that once an owner leases (hence, receives compensation) his land, he is now liable for injuries associated with the activity that he is “selling/promoting”. My bro. was asked to “rent” a portion of his parcel to a snomo club a few years back. His attorney advised him to decline the offer but to draw-up a document stating he would not prohibit usage but would not condone it either. It was not ag land and would not post the property (therefore, making it legal for the club to cross it without written permission). In some states, a large percentage of non-public land is leased. The positive side of leasing hunting land is that it promotes management of resources. Farmers (for example) will tend to revert back to wildlife enhancing farming practices.

---

Right from the DNR website

604A.23 Owner’s liability.

An owner who gives written or oral permission for the use
of the land for recreational purposes without charge does not by
that action:

(1) extend any assurance that the land is safe for any
purpose;

(2) confer upon the person the legal status of an invitee
or licensee to whom a duty of care is owed; or

(3) assume responsibility for or incur liability for any
injury to the person or property caused by an act or omission of
the person.

HIST: 1994 c 623 art 4 s 4

Copyright 2004 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.

Here is what it says about leased land, man who words these things??

604A.24 Liability; leased land, water-filled mine pits;
municipal power agency land.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, sections 604A.22 and
604A.23 also apply to the duties and liability of an owner of
the following land:

(1) land leased to the state or any political subdivision
for recreational purpose; or

(2) idled or abandoned, water-filled mine pits whose pit
walls may slump or cave, and to which water the public has
access from a water access site operated by a public entity; or

(3) land of which a municipal power agency is an owner and
that is used for recreational trail purposes, and other land of
a municipal power agency which is within 300 feet of such land
if the entry onto such land was from land that is dedicated for
recreational purposes or recreational trail use.

HIST: 1994 c 623 art 4 s 5; 1999 c 183 s 5

Copyright 2004 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.

and here is the site in which my information was obtained from

MN DNR WEBSITE

Quote:

---

There’s no doubt that it’s the way of the future. There will be more “Hunting Clubs” springing up to make the leasing of land more affordable. The unfortunate aspect of leases is that the more land that is leased-off, the more land owners will jump on the band wagon. What many don’t understand is that once an owner leases (hence, receives compensation) his land, he is now liable for injuries associated with the activity that he is “selling/promoting”. My bro. was asked to “rent” a portion of his parcel to a snomo club a few years back. His attorney advised him to decline the offer but to draw-up a document stating he would not prohibit usage but would not condone it either. It was not ag land and would not post the property (therefore, making it legal for the club to cross it without written permission). In some states, a large percentage of non-public land is leased. The positive side of leasing hunting land is that it promotes management of resources. Farmers (for example) will tend to revert back to wildlife enhancing farming practices.

---

Right from the DNR website

604A.23 Owner’s liability.

An owner who gives written or oral permission for the use
of the land for recreational purposes without charge does not by
that action:

(1) extend any assurance that the land is safe for any
purpose;

(2) confer upon the person the legal status of an invitee
or licensee to whom a duty of care is owed; or

(3) assume responsibility for or incur liability for any
injury to the person or property caused by an act or omission of
the person.

HIST: 1994 c 623 art 4 s 4

Copyright 2004 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.

Here is what it says about leased land, man who words these things??

604A.24 Liability; leased land, water-filled mine pits;
municipal power agency land.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, sections 604A.22 and
604A.23 also apply to the duties and liability of an owner of
the following land:

(1) land leased to the state or any political subdivision
for recreational purpose; or

(2) idled or abandoned, water-filled mine pits whose pit
walls may slump or cave, and to which water the public has
access from a water access site operated by a public entity; or

(3) land of which a municipal power agency is an owner and
that is used for recreational trail purposes, and other land of
a municipal power agency which is within 300 feet of such land
if the entry onto such land was from land that is dedicated for
recreational purposes or recreational trail use.

HIST: 1994 c 623 art 4 s 5; 1999 c 183 s 5

Copyright 2004 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.

and here is the site in which my information was obtained from

MN DNR WEBSITE