Hunting on private land: Walking away from walk-ins

  • Article by: DOUG SMITH , Star Tribune
  • Updated: February 29, 2012 - 7:44 AM

A new program that has opened thousands of hunting acres might fizzle for lack of funding.

  • 12
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
longcasterFeb. 29, 12 7:23 AM

Why don't we cut the subsidies to the ethanol plants by half of a percent? They are making money but still get millions of dollars a year from the Federal Government. $500,000 dollars would be a drop in the bucket. Besides, any farmer that gets a Federal subsidy should have to allow hunting on their land because we the people are helping to pay the farmer anyway...its one big welfare system.

carl2426Feb. 29, 12 8:18 AM

They partially answered their own question. Many of the lands are already enrolled into CRP and get paid to not farm them and have native grasses, the best habitat for the birds. Why dont they require landowners already getting paid by CRP to allow public hunting. Then anything on top of that gets paid to allow. No double dipping. Whatever they do they should not let this go. It's hard enough to find places to hunt if you dont know people.

jerryaldiniFeb. 29, 12 8:22 AM

I quit peasant hunting because all the birds have been harvested by the first week of the season on WMA public lands. I'd gladly pay $15 to open up the possibilities. I also agree with carl2426: CRP should require hunting access.

jerryaldiniFeb. 29, 12 8:25 AM

These are excellent points: You as a landowner take a public subsidy, then the public gets access to hunt your land. Straight forward.

jackpinesavFeb. 29, 12 9:12 AM

Wow. An Eden Prairie "avid" hunter questions a fee to support opening up new hunting areas. Appears that this sums up our problem very neatly. I want it all; but..have someone else pay for it. Keep electing the legislative majority who are slashing the DNR budget...

Hunter_VikinFeb. 29, 12 9:42 AM

How about they stop tranfering money from the "Hunting fund", those fees paid by the sale of hunting licenses, to fisheries and Trail habitat and use it instead for it's intended purpose, Hunting and it's access. I also agree with the comments on CRM. you get public subsidies, you need to allow access for hunters and other public recreation, within reason of course.

go4kyourselfFeb. 29, 12 9:54 AM

Requiring all CRP to be open to public hunting is great in theory, but in practice it would backfire because of the unintentional consequences. CRP is a voluntary program, and the CRP rental rates paid by the USDA are already uncompetitive. If CRP requires public hunting, most landowners will simply tear up the grass and rent it out for farmland. It sucks, but it's true. In reality, if a farmer receives federal subsidies they should be REQUIRED to plant CRP on a portion of their Highly Erodible land and adjacent to all rivers and streams. If you want to farm right next to the river, and if you want to have gullies washing on your farm, fine. But then you don't get my tax money. It's as simple as that.

MoojaFeb. 29, 12 2:01 PM

If you rob Peter to pay Paul you can always count on Paul's vote. As a hunter it astounds me that we would force someone else to pay for our access to hunt private land. If we as hunters and fishermen wont voluntarily pony up the cash to pay for our own sport then we deserve what we get.

case77Feb. 29, 12 2:19 PM

@ carl2426.. Technically it is still the farmers property whether crp or not. If you wanna hunt it you gotta talk to the farmer and if its already hunted by himself or another person rents it well thats just the way its gonna be.

hootie95Feb. 29, 12 5:03 PM

go4kyourself is absolutely right. I wouldn't classify CRP as a subsidy. It is a voluntary program. Most landowners enrolled in CRP could (and many have) rent their land to a farmer for two or three times what CRP is paying them to idle their land. Many don't because they hunt the land themselves. If you forced them to open up their land to hunters, they would just rip it up and rent it out instead.


Comment on this story   |  

Click here to send us your hunting or fishing photos – and to see what others are showing off from around the region.


St. Louis - WP: L. Lynn 4 FINAL
Washington - LP: J. Zimmermann 3
Toronto - WP: M. Buehrle 5 FINAL
Cleveland - LP: C. Kluber 0
LA Angels - LP: C. Wilson 2 FINAL
Detroit - WP: M. Scherzer 5
Baltimore - LP: B. Norris 2 FINAL
Boston - WP: J. Tazawa 4
Minnesota - LP: K. Correia 4 FINAL
Kansas City - WP: B. Chen 5
Cincinnati - LP: T. Cingrani 4 FINAL
Chicago Cubs - WP: E. Jackson 8
Houston 3 Bottom 6th Inning
Oakland 1
Milwaukee - M. Garza 6:05 PM
Pittsburgh - W. Rodriguez
Atlanta - E. Santana 6:10 PM
NY Mets - B. Colon
NY Yankees - I. Nova 6:10 PM
Tampa Bay - C. Archer
Seattle - R. Elias 6:10 PM
Miami - H. Alvarez
Chicago WSox - J. Quintana 7:05 PM
Texas - C. Lewis
Philadelphia - K. Kendrick 7:10 PM
Colorado - J. Lyles
Arizona - M. Bolsinger 7:10 PM
Los Angeles - D. Haren
San Francisco - T. Hudson 7:40 PM
San Diego - E. Stults
Brooklyn 94 FINAL
Toronto 87
Golden State 105 4th Qtr 1:31
LA Clippers 105
Atlanta 6:00 PM
Memphis 8:30 PM
Oklahoma City
Chicago 3 3rd Prd
St. Louis 3
Columbus 6:00 PM
Minnesota 8:30 PM
Houston 0 FINAL
Philadelphia 0
New England 1 2nd Half 5:00
Chicago 1
San Jose 5:00 PM
Los Angeles 6:00 PM
Vancouver FC
D.C. 6:30 PM
Toronto FC 7:30 PM
FC Dallas
Montreal 7:30 PM
Sporting Kansas City
Portland 8:30 PM
Real Salt Lake
Seattle 9:30 PM
Chivas USA
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters





question of the day

Poll: Should the lake where the albino muskie was caught remain a mystery?

Weekly Question