Would you be leasing deer hunting land?

Strictly a hypothetical question at this point, but here it goes.

I’m interested to know how many of you be interesting in leasing deer hunting land for archery or gun under the following conditions:

– The plots of land are in western Wisconsin and the eastern half of Minnesota.

– The plots are small, no 10000 acre Texas whitetail ranches here, the plots range from 40 to 120 acres.

– All of the plots are undergoing various habitat improvement efforts so there are some young food plots, cover improvements are ongoing, etc. None of these improvements are complete, but it’s an improvement over “raw land” with no additional deer attractors.

Now for the “catch” as they say:

– The biggest catch is that all plots are actively for sale. The management company would make all efforts to avoid closing a sale in the middle of a short hunting season like the MN firearms season, for example. If a plot should sell, you would have the option to take another plot of similar size, or recieve a refund for the portion of the season that remains. The management company would be honest and open about the plots and would communicate with leaseholders openly about potential sales of the plots.

– Camping is NOT allowed on any of the plots. Use of the land is strictly limited to hunting, you would have to find alternatives for lodging.

– No season overlap, IE if you lease the archery rights, you cannot hunt the plots during the firearms season, but then will be able to resume your hunting afterward.

– Absolutely no vehicles allowed except for designated roads. That means no ATVs / SXS UTVs, etc.

– Generally speaking, there are no established stands or blinds. Those leasing the property would have to proveide their own stands and use 100% portable stands that could be taken down with no nails or bolts attached to trees. Leasees would be allowed to access the

Under these conditions, two questions:

1. How many would be interested in hunting leases under the above conditions?

2. Pick your plot AND state if you’d be willing to pay the following prices:

Plot A – 40 acres with food plots in Western WI. Excellent trail cam pics of mature bucks. Good plot, but due to small size it must be hunted carefully and quietly with painstaking attention paid to wind direction. $2000 for full archery season, $3000 for full gun season. Limit of 4 hunters in party for each season.

Plot B – <75 acres in west Central WI. Very new habitat improvements just starting to produce results. No trail cam pics, but lots of sign and tremendous numbers of deer trails on property. $3000 for full bow season, $4000 for gun season. Up to 6 hunters.

Plot C – 120 acers of mixed timber/fields in East Central MN. Edges of some fields just converted to plots, rest is mixed crop with some corn and beans. About 60 acers wooded. New kill plots under way, but will be seeded late in year. $2500 archery / $3500 full gun (rifle) season. Up to 8 hunters.

Grouse

I think something like this would interest me, provided that the leased property is not shown during the terms of the lease agreement.

The last thing I would want is to pay good money for a lease only to have the realtor and interested parties walking around, stinking up the woods on me.

Plot A to me sounds intriguing!

Outside of the cost, which I am reserving comment on, not being able to use an ATV to drag out an animal would probably be a show stopper for me. It would also be very upsetting if the property sold just prior to hunting or finishing a hunt as well as shown. I’m sure you would have no problem filling such a lease assuming your price is competative.

To Justin’s comment, I’d say that the management company would keep showings limited to qualified and highly interested parties and would coordinate with the lesee. But with that said, the properties ARE for sale, so to some extent the show must go on.

But I will say that in general this wouldn’t be a huge problem as there just aren’t that many showings.

As far as having the properties sold during the season, I’d say that given the lease money, owners would probably be motivated to hold off closing until after hunting season simply so they can pocked more $. But that doesen’t mean it couldn’t happen. More likely, I think, is a property being sold in August or September with a new owner having designs to hunt it that fall and thus leaving the lesee out of luck on rather short notice.

To Suzuki, please don’t withold comments on the prices. Let me know what you think.

Here’s the core problem: The owners of these properties all said essentially the same thing, that it has to be worth their while. Leasing for a few hundred bucks and a handshake isn’t going to happen because the owners don’t want the hassle or the potential for problems unless it’s worth it in terms of hard cash. Also, these properties are abover/beyond what you normally see in terms of hunting-specific improvements.

As far as ATVs, again it’s the owner’s fear of having guys tearing up roads, trails, and fields. I can see it might be possible with some owners to have a “dead deer” clause that allowed only ATV use for that, but I can tell you with at least one owner it’s going to be a solid “no”.

Grouse

Sounds a little too complicated for me. The property would have to be “high quality” for me to even consider with all the different variables/rules. Not that I even could do it this year…. just saying.

I went through a few leases like this. I partnered up with a logger who was buying up land, leasing it out for a few years, select cutting it and selling it. Awesome for the logger. Ok for guys like me. I was paying exactly what the taxes were on most parcels. The leases ran 365 days. If the property sold, it was pro-rated per day. I always leased a couple parcels and staggered when I started the leases. Then I would at least have somewhere to go if one sold. The problem I had was letting go after the property was sold. It killed me to not be able to go back after deer I had come to know. I prefer to find a place I can go year after year and improve the land and work with the land owner.

In my humble opinion, they are letting way too many hunters have access to such small areas. That fact alone turns me away. I would also need some sort of clause for a full refund should the property sell and a notification period allowing me to clear any stands I may have set on the property. Prices seem a little high to me, but I haven’t looked into leasing lately either.

Quote:

---

To Justin’s comment, I’d say that the management company would keep showings limited to qualified and highly interested parties and would coordinate with the lesee. But with that said, the properties ARE for sale, so to some extent the show must go on.

---

Personally, although I understand the above statement, this would be a deal breaker for me, especially for the price mentioned. Most guys who are willing to shell out thousands of dollars on a lease are hunting trophy bucks and would expect exclusive access.

Quote:

---

Personally, although I understand the above statement, this would be a deal breaker for me, especially for the price mentioned. Most guys who are willing to shell out thousands of dollars on a lease are hunting trophy bucks and would expect exclusive access.

---

Great feedback.

As you probably understand, I need this kind of feedback to show the landowners the other side of the coin. Namely, that hunters are going to want something gaurenteed for thier money.

As a clearification to my original post:

The number of hunters allowed per property is a maximum for the lesee. In other words, the properties are leased to only one person/group, but then that person/group may allow others to hunt, but ONLY up to the stated number.

The fear expressed by landowners was that they would lease the property and then a party of 12 rampant meat hunters would descend on the 40 acres and whack anything that moves stacking up deer like cordwood.

My reason for posting this is that I have discovered numerous properties that are essentially unused. They were bought years ago, in 2 cases by a husband that has now passed away. These properties tend to be for sale, but the owners view them almost universally as an investment so they are stubborn about the price and in the past, holding on to the land cost them almost nothing so there was no motivation to sell OR to lease out the land.

With the ever increasing property taxes, I’ve discoverd there may be owners out there who now would be willing to lease land, but only under the right conditions.

Grouse

For that kind of money, I’d be shopping for a group of guys that wanted to BUY the property. No matter what the newscasters say, the economy is NOT full of buyers. People need houses yes….. but this is a recreational situation and I’m seeing a LOT of recreational property continue to fall in sale price and the county assessors are over pricing values to keep the taxes up. I know of land tracks in western WI that have dropped 40% and more compared to the assessed land value and they STILL can’t get it sold!

If those folks can find guys willing to shell that kind of money, more power to ’em but I’m inclined to leave their pockets empty. If I can pay thousands for a seasonal lease, I can afford a 15-30yr. term payment for something I can call my own.