Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: How it should be done

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,811

    Default How it should be done

    Get the government OUT of the land owning business, let farmers farm and managers manage. Trim all the deadwood in State and Federal government pissed away on land/habitat management.

    Incentivize land owners to compete for tax dollars paid to open their land to the public, and both wildlife and public hunters benefit from the competition to get those dollars. The bloated system we have now, where "good enough" is the standard, serves nobody but the bureaucrat drawing a check...


    LITTLE ROCK — Duck hunters looking for publicly available opportunities this fall will have even more options to enjoy The Natural State’s calling card. The Arkansas Waterfowl Rice Incentive Conservation Enhancement program was awarded a grant to expand, keeping food on the ground for ducks and opening doors for hunters.

    The grant, from the National Resources Conservation Service’s Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program, will boost the program to the tune of $2.1 million, distributed during the next three years.

    During its first year of public access opportunity, the pilot program operated on a budget of $125,000. With that money, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission was able to provide access to 11 hunting fields through a weekend draw program during the 2019-20 season. With the federal grant, that access may increase to more than 50 private fields available to hunters through a drawn permit system.

    “Leasing land for public hunting is nothing new for the AGFC, but this is the first time we’ve been awarded a grant to help us create public hunting opportunities on privately owned land like you see in Walk-in Areas in the Midwest,” said Luke Naylor, AGFC waterfowl program coordinator. “There has been a perception in the Southeast, that private hunting leases are too competitive to enable such programs to exist, or that landowners might be hesitant to participate in such a program, but a surprising number of landowners have worked with us on this, and we hope to offer even more the opportunity to be a part of this program.”

    The conservation component of the WRICE program is to combat the loss of waste grain on Arkansas rice fields resulting from tilling the ground in fall. Farmers getting a head start on their next year’s crop will turn the stubble under during the relatively dry weather so they spend less time preparing fields in spring, but this leaves no waste grain behind.

    “Flooded rice provides about 11 percent of the food energy for dabbling ducks in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley, and Arkansas represents more than 70 percent of the rice production in that area,” Naylor said. “Ducks need a variety of foods, and waste rice from agriculture plays an important role. This program not only keeps that rice above the ground, but it also offers an incentive to flood the areas, making it even more accessible to ducks.”

    According to recent research, only about 20 percent of the 2 million acres of harvested rice fields in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley are flooded. “Getting farmers to flood some of those fields could have a major impact on realized waterfowl food values,” Naylor said. Payments for landowners to forgo fall tillage and flood fields is only the beginning of the program. Where WRICE really shines is the promotion of more public hunting opportunities.

    “Interested landowners will work with us to provide public hunting opportunities on their fields through a managed draw system,” Naylor said. “After a few years of managed dove fields and a year of managed waterfowl hunts through this draw format, we’re ready to expand these opportunities for public hunting on additional privately owned fields.”

    The goal is to expand from 941 acres of huntable private fields to 3,750 acres of fields available for hunting by public draw during the 2020-21 duck hunting season.

    “We are looking for landowners who want to be a part of the program now, and hope to choose successful applicants in May,” Naylor said. “The controlled aspect of the draw hunt has been well received by participating landowners, and hunters have shown incredible respect for this great new opportunity.”

    Landowners interested in becoming part of this innovative conservation and hunter access program can contact their local private lands biologist through the website www.agfc.com/habitat​; to learn more.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    6,230

    Default

    I love competing against the government when it comes to leasing ag land ....

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,811

    Default

    I can imagine. Under the current system, once all the nephews and neer do well brothers in law of all the Commissioners have gotten first crack, the pot is light...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    6,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JABIII View Post
    I can imagine. Under the current system, once all the nephews and neer do well brothers in law of all the Commissioners have gotten first crack, the pot is light...
    I'm pretty sure the farmers I lease from don't have any high ranking relatives. With that said, even though we get along great and are on good terms, they wouldn't hesitate to lease their land to the government instead of me if they offered more money and my leases were up. It's business to them and a considerable amount of their income for the year.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,811

    Default

    That is exactly my point. By first crack, I am not talking about those looking to lease ground to hunt, but those looking to lease their land...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Irmo
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Having 1.13 million acres of rice in AR makes this program a little easier to implement.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,811

    Default

    There is an infinitesimal amount of tax dollars available to compete for quality land. I would propose the sale of state and federal land. The money derived from the sales invested. The investment returns on that money from the sale of state land spent in that state. The federal money would be invested and split with one half of the returns staying in state, the other half split among all 50 states.

    We are talking about a huge pot of money and the cut of a huge waste of taxpayer dollars that is currently funding substandard public hunting opportunities...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lexington, SC
    Posts
    14,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huntinghagen#12 View Post
    I'm pretty sure the farmers I lease from don't have any high ranking relatives. With that said, even though we get along great and are on good terms, they wouldn't hesitate to lease their land to the government instead of me if they offered more money and my leases were up. It's business to them and a considerable amount of their income for the year.
    You think Doug has any of those high ranking relatives? He does seem to be a mover and shaker in Hot Springs and on the links.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    6,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steelin' Ducks View Post
    You think Doug has any of those high ranking relatives? He does seem to be a mover and shaker in Hot Springs and on the links.
    Don't know ... but I know I wouldn't pay a penny for that lease after the one year I had it. The AGFC can have that one.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Irmo
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JABIII View Post
    There is an infinitesimal amount of tax dollars available to compete for quality land. I would propose the sale of state and federal land. The money derived from the sales invested. The investment returns on that money from the sale of state land spent in that state. The federal money would be invested and split with one half of the returns staying in state, the other half split among all 50 states.

    We are talking about a huge pot of money and the cut of a huge waste of taxpayer dollars that is currently funding substandard public hunting opportunities...


    Burroughs and Chapin approves this message.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JABIII View Post
    There is an infinitesimal amount of tax dollars available to compete for quality land. I would propose the sale of state and federal land. The money derived from the sales invested. The investment returns on that money from the sale of state land spent in that state. The federal money would be invested and split with one half of the returns staying in state, the other half split among all 50 states.

    We are talking about a huge pot of money and the cut of a huge waste of taxpayer dollars that is currently funding substandard public hunting opportunities...
    You have no fear of loosing your hunting rights and then 2nd amendment in the long game ? My opine would be that if this happened the other two mentioned wouldn't be far behind.
    Genesis 9;2

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,811

    Default

    1. The government does not grant us the "right" to hunt. Because we as Sportsmen have allowed ourselves to raise tax revenue in the form of licence sales etc. for the benefit of our sport does not give the government the authority to tell me that I can or cannot arise kill and eat. Never be confused about that.

    2.The 2nd Amendment IS a constitutional right that is constantly under attack in the courts. How, in your opinion, does improving hunting opportunity become the issue that topples the most contentious Amendment on the book?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,970

    Default

    I am missing something in your equation obviously, or it was omitted, how you are "improving hunting opportunity" if you are selling off high quality public land which is currently open for public hunting?

    Number one speaks to some form of uprising and feeding yourself , I think ? I don't see how you would keep those rights protected with a bunch of middle aged, beer gutted, out of shape, air condition adapted, internet lip smackers that have to ask their wives for permission to pee backing the cause against a well trained and provided military , but ok. There is no confusion on that end from me.

    Neither is there any confusion, that if such a thing were to happen, that the landscape, especially those high end private holdings would be poached clean in a year of both game and the afore mentioned faux protectors. Its well past time to give all of that a thought in my opine.

    Sincerely curious as to improving hunting ops with your plan? You really think private landowners are going to allow the public masses of every sort to swarm their lands? Nah, nope, not. That little program that SCNDR did with SCWP ? I would like to know how many got to go that didn't get drawn for the lottery and how much money the SCWP got from the taxpayer coffers personally.
    Last edited by Strick9; 04-24-2020 at 02:29 PM.
    Genesis 9;2

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •