Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post Reply
chwagn11
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:09 pm
Location: Kansas

Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by chwagn11 » Fri Jan 29, 2016 9:12 am

I can not think of a state out west that is poorer in terms of public land for hunting than Texas. There is very little public land for the population and land area, if you want to hunt private you must pay. Am I missing something here? Is there opportunities to hunt without a fee and without a lease? My next question with all the people paying to hunt why has the state not provided more public land with some of the money so people that believe the outdoors and hunting is not for sale may hunt?

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by ezzy333 » Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:56 am

Most public land is land that nobody wants or can afford to own, in other words worthless. Other areas cost a lot and and if government owned does not generate any taxes for the local taxing bodies, so the public is pretty much against losing it. There is a lot of public land in the mountainous states because no one wants it as you can't generate enough income to even pay taxes on it. I know it "sucks"but remember no one is selling the right to hunt but are selling a trespass fee for using their land, in other words you are paying to keep other people off of the ground you want to hunt.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

User avatar
Grange
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:24 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Grange » Sun Jan 31, 2016 9:33 pm

That is one of the oddest explanations of public land I've read in some time.

Mountaineer
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1630
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:23 pm
Location: State?...The one where ruffed grouse were.

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Mountaineer » Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:59 am

I do not know the answer to your question but Texas, pretty much, began the Leasing model.
It works there after a fashion due to the land, the nature of critters/crops, the large tracts of acreage often involved, the game species and often, the nature of the hunting.
The sad deal is that the Texas leasing model was soon applied in states which do not carry the same particulars as Texas or OK and problems exploded.
Leasing was also helped along, obviously, by the booming of deer hunting and the self-focused nature of the hunter that develops in designing deer, deer hunting and the lure of Locate, Lease and Lock Up.

It is sad when hunting becomes evermore a dollar deal, especially where once open to the Public corporate land is closed.
Hunter recruitment in many states has been negatively affected from the loss of access as well as a dearth of public ownership.
However, private land that never carried a right of public access thru tax breaks, etc., ie some of Corporate, is open to the wish of the owner.....as you would know, the WIHA programs work a treat but even they are not equal in reality in every state.

For a state to ourchase land...that requires foresight long ago.....such as PA and her Gamelands.
Today, with land values in the eye of the seller...well, it's a tough gig and many state residents would not care for increased taxes just so someone can hunt....costs never end at purchase either.
Tie purchase to some environment plus or something similiar might work....still, a tough gig.

Best to consider the value found in a Gazeteer and the Superslab.

Wacmtracm
Rank: Just A Pup
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:07 pm

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Wacmtracm » Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:15 pm

I'm positive that is correct. There is public land but mostly people you would hunt near go there...lots of beer cans:)

There are some decent leases and people usually let you out for quail if you know someone. You usually have to wait till after deer season though

fishvik
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1070
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: Idaho Falls, ID

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by fishvik » Wed Feb 03, 2016 2:55 pm

ezzy333 wrote:Most public land is land that nobody wants or can afford to own, in other words worthless. Other areas cost a lot and and if government owned does not generate any taxes for the local taxing bodies, so the public is pretty much against losing it. There is a lot of public land in the mountainous states because no one wants it as you can't generate enough income to even pay taxes on it. I know it "sucks"but remember no one is selling the right to hunt but are selling a trespass fee for using their land, in other words you are paying to keep other people off of the ground you want to hunt.
Actually Ezzy, the users of public lands in the west, particularly federal lands didn't want to buy it because they were using it at very low cost up until relatively present time. Why buy the cow when you get the milk free. (I know, bad analogy when you are talking about grazing) But when you are paying far less to feed a cow and her calf on BLM or FS administered lands, than we pay to feed a bird dog why buy the land. It was only when others saw the value to the land, and that management of it had to protect some of the other resources, and in the process protect the overall health of the land, has there been a big push to move them to county, state or private ownership.

jczv
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:16 am
Location: se wi

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by jczv » Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:51 pm

Apparently part of the answer is that because Texas was independent before joining the US they kept title to all land (including land that didn't have an owner at the time). http://www.economist.com/node/176738 that at least explains the lack of federal land.

You'll get some interesting answers (not sure how accurate) if you google "how much public hunting land in texas" or wisconsin etc. Basically says texas is about 1%, wisconsin 5%, illinois 2%, Idaho 65%, ... obviously lots of federal land makes a big difference but there's also different ways of thinking about it at the local level also.

User avatar
nikegundog
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:21 am
Location: SW Minnesota

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by nikegundog » Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:37 pm

Minnesota has approximately 12 million acres of public land, ample hunting and fishing opportunities for everyone.

chwagn11
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:09 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by chwagn11 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:35 am

ezzy333 wrote:Most public land is land that nobody wants or can afford to own, in other words worthless. Other areas cost a lot and and if government owned does not generate any taxes for the local taxing bodies, so the public is pretty much against losing it. There is a lot of public land in the mountainous states because no one wants it as you can't generate enough income to even pay taxes on it. I know it "sucks"but remember no one is selling the right to hunt but are selling a trespass fee for using their land, in other words you are paying to keep other people off of the ground you want to hunt.
Public land is far from worthless, or land nobody wants, they have been grazing it nearly for free since its inception, and selling the rights to graze at price of actually owing the land. Look at ranches out west generally most of the land is not deeded. This is entirely a different topic which should be discussed as BLM and FS lands are often overgrazed and not managed well for the public to use, especially bird hunters.

The thing I see is Texas has a lot of revenue from hunters but does not seem to use it in a way to help facilitate hunting for average people. Land should be opened up to hunters each year with the revenue for the use of all. If only the top 25% have hunting access what good does that do for our outdoor sports for kids and beginners. Growing the sport is how we provide additional funds for the future of conservation, protecting our rights as hunters, and good values that hunting teaches. I personally will not hunt in Texas as I will not pay when there are millions of acres of public in other states with hunting just as good. Here in Kansas and also other states I hunt when I run into Texas residents I am often confronted with the topic as there is no place to hunt in Texas so they seek opportunity outside the state. I welcome that as it increase border states revenue, but why would Texas not work to keep some of that in state by providing public land through programs. It is possible, many states have successful WIHA or Open Gate, or actually purchase land to open up to the public.

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by ezzy333 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:09 am

If you owned land and saw how many hunters leave the area you would understand why they do not allow hunting anymore. We have a farm right next to public land that does not allow motorized vehicles but it is free hunting. I can't tell you how many times the fences have been cut so they could drive their 4 wheeler through to pick up a deer or many times it appears they just want to go around a ravine, We have lost a dozen or more tree stands and had stands built in the middle of our place, have helped round up the bison that were out because of the cut fences, have had our cattle disappear for a week or more before we found them, and so on and so on.and I can supply you with all of the empty beer cans, plastic bags, fishing lines and paper sacks you will need to start a private garbage dump.

I don't suppose many of you can remember when practically all of the ground out west was public ground and ranchers and farmers were allowed to claim and homestead what ever they felt was worth owning. That went on for quite sometime. What wasn't claimed was and still is government owned land that we call public. As I stated before much of it wasn't considered good enough to pay the taxes and instead of letting it go unused it was leased to ranchers to graze but it is so poor that it takes a lot of acres to support a few cattle and is easy to over graze when regrowth is so slow and poor. But use Idaho as an example of what much of it looks like if undisturbed for years but the area that was burnt this past fall will take years to re-establish even with thousands of dollars being spent to reseed and help it.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

chwagn11
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:09 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by chwagn11 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:01 pm

ezzy333 wrote:If you owned land and saw how many hunters leave the area you would understand why they do not allow hunting anymore. We have a farm right next to public land that does not allow motorized vehicles but it is free hunting. I can't tell you how many times the fences have been cut so they could drive their 4 wheeler through to pick up a deer or many times it appears they just want to go around a ravine, We have lost a dozen or more tree stands and had stands built in the middle of our place, have helped round up the bison that were out because of the cut fences, have had our cattle disappear for a week or more before we found them, and so on and so on.and I can supply you with all of the empty beer cans, plastic bags, fishing lines and paper sacks you will need to start a private garbage dump.

I don't suppose many of you can remember when practically all of the ground out west was public ground and ranchers and farmers were allowed to claim and homestead what ever they felt was worth owning. That went on for quite sometime. What wasn't claimed was and still is government owned land that we call public. As I stated before much of it wasn't considered good enough to pay the taxes and instead of letting it go unused it was leased to ranchers to graze but it is so poor that it takes a lot of acres to support a few cattle and is easy to over graze when regrowth is so slow and poor. But use Idaho as an example of what much of it looks like if undisturbed for years but the area that was burnt this past fall will take years to re-establish even with thousands of dollars being spent to reseed and help it.
I don't suppose you can remember when all the ground out west was public either. Times have changed its not 1886 and it is useful ground and thank god it is public and should be managed for all not just grazing as the people of this great country own the land not an individual. I am not talking about unethical hunters, they are everywhere and we all should be against that as they hurt are sport. I absolutely do not condone trespassing or theft nor would more or less public ground change that. Unethical hunters are in every state so that is not a comparison for argument. Every land owner in every state deals with unethical people. I see unethical people that destroy are natural resources everywhere, drive down any road and look at the litter. I don't get how any of this has anything to do with Texas not supporting the hunting future for people that don't want to spend 10k just to hunt.

Mountaineer
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1630
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:23 pm
Location: State?...The one where ruffed grouse were.

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Mountaineer » Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:30 pm

Just a note....IF, Texas had more Public land then that would not guarantee that Texicans would not go to, say Kansas, to hunt.
More is involved in travel destinations, especially as regards birdhunting, than Public access. :idea:

The People own only some of the land in the United States.
While I would like to see more land in Public hands in some cases, the lack of proper managment for habitat diversity on much of the Public land now held has me glad that more is not held by the Public.
This, of course, would encompass areas other than in...the West.

Access programs, such as WIHA, are sound moves to open access and provide a bit of win-win-win-win...farmer, habitat, critter, hunter.
However, what permits the success of those programs is not present in every state.
As what allows Leasing to work, after a fashion, in one state is far from present in every state...still, for those who wish to lease....they do not care what their decisions affect...they only care for what it enables...them.
That...is hunting today in too many areas.

User avatar
MNTonester
Rank: Champion
Posts: 335
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:51 pm
Location: Duluth, MN

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by MNTonester » Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:38 pm

My oldest brother lives in San Antonio. I've asked him the same question. He comes up to hunt here in Minnesota twice a year (grouse and pheasant) because of the limited public hunting available in Texas. Perhaps if he developed an interest in hog hunting, he might be able to get that type of hunting in (I'm under the impression that hog hunters are welcome in a lot of places).

chwagn11
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:09 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by chwagn11 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:43 pm

Mountaineer wrote:Just a note....IF, Texas had more Public land then that would not guarantee that Texicans would not go to, say Kansas, to hunt.
More is involved in travel destinations, especially as regards birdhunting, than Public access. :idea:

The People own only some of the land in the United States.
While I would like to see more land in Public hands in some cases, the lack of proper managment for habitat diversity on much of the Public land now held has me glad that more is not held by the Public.
This, of course, would encompass areas other than in...the West.

Access programs, such as WIHA, are sound moves to open access and provide a bit of win-win-win-win...farmer, habitat, critter, hunter.
However, what permits the success of those programs is not present in every state.
As what allows Leasing to work, after a fashion, in one state is far from present in every state...still, for those who wish to lease....they do not care what their decisions affect...they only care for what it enables...them.
That...is hunting today in too many areas.
Agree!

User avatar
Grange
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:24 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Grange » Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:01 pm

ezzy333 wrote:If you owned land and saw how many hunters leave the area you would understand why they do not allow hunting anymore. We have a farm right next to public land that does not allow motorized vehicles but it is free hunting. I can't tell you how many times the fences have been cut so they could drive their 4 wheeler through to pick up a deer or many times it appears they just want to go around a ravine, We have lost a dozen or more tree stands and had stands built in the middle of our place, have helped round up the bison that were out because of the cut fences, have had our cattle disappear for a week or more before we found them, and so on and so on.and I can supply you with all of the empty beer cans, plastic bags, fishing lines and paper sacks you will need to start a private garbage dump.
I abhor the dumping that goes on public lands. I've seen everything from appliances to vehicle batteries to animal carcasses to fiberglass insulation. I've had multiple conversations with counties and townships on this issue and have heard from them about the costs to pick up this garbage. That said these same issues occur on private land. Walk almost any riparian corridor in an urbanized area and you may be surprised at what you find. I still remember walking a several mile stretch of an urbanized river corridor to assess the habitat value and was struck at how many of the riparian owners used the river banks and ravine as their personal dump. On private lands I've walked, to assess habitats I've found leaking barrels filled with unknown substances (smelled like waste oil), old appliances, animal carcasses and even an abandoned vehicle along the banks of a river.

I can relate to having tree stands stolen as both my father and I have had our tree stands stolen his land, but the surrounding land is also private.

jczv
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:16 am
Location: se wi

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by jczv » Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:32 pm

http://www.backcountrychronicles.com/pu ... ting-land/

Just including a link to all the states for reference. From looking at the Wisconsin number it's not perfect but pretty accurate (it includes some but not all of county owned land which is substantial in the northern 1/2 of the state).

User avatar
Tejas
Rank: Champion
Posts: 390
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:58 pm
Location: Trophy Club, Tx

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Tejas » Sun Feb 21, 2016 10:24 pm

Depends upon what you call public land. While there is very little federal land there is a lot of state owned land in Texas. The vast majority of state land is leased to individuals who pretty much benefit from grazing rights, sub leasing hunting access rights etc. Mountaineer was spot on with his observation that deer hunting has limited use of land holding game in Texas greatly. The price for deer leases per acre is far in excess of what one could afford to pay game bird hunting and most deer hunters don't want someone running around with dogs and doing a bunch of shooting on their lease in deer season. Deer season covers all of quail season except for the last weeks of January and the month of February.

I don't like the situation, but one simply can't argue that deer hunting doesn't contribute much more revenue to the holder of hunting rights than quail hunting does, probably by a factor of thousands.

User avatar
Grange
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:24 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI

Re: Is Texas the poorest state for public land?

Post by Grange » Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:13 pm

jczv wrote:http://www.backcountrychronicles.com/pu ... ting-land/

Just including a link to all the states for reference. From looking at the Wisconsin number it's not perfect but pretty accurate (it includes some but not all of county owned land which is substantial in the northern 1/2 of the state).
I was at the Natural Resources Board meeting today where they were voting on approving the phase 2 land parcels of state owned land being sold that was mandated by the Legislature and Governor. Phase 3 lands should be coming for review later this year. One common theme throughout the meeting is at phase 3 lands are going to be more difficult and controversial than either phase 1 or phase 2 lands. There were several controversial lands in phase 2 with some of them being large chunks of land (over 200 ac.)

Post Reply