Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

Open private land


Saw557

Recommended Posts

Does anybody know where I can get a list of the private land that is open for turkey hunting. I looked on the DNR site and couldn't find a link. I had a list a couple of years ago I think maybe the deal was if a land owner got a permit they had to make their land open to public hunting ???? don't know can't remeber for sure

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott,

you're correct that if a landowner is drawn, they must allow hunting on their land. The down side is, this is next to impossible to enforce. They may allow a person on the land for a day, and the way I understand it, that's all they need to do.

Otherwise if they let everyone on who sets foot on their property, that's a lot of pressure that could decimate the population.

I thought there was a list of landowners, but realized there isn't.

I'll do some digging and see what I can find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know it is there but it is not easy to find , check lottery hunts

there was acouple of layers of matter to get to it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

go to mn dnr - recreation top left , click on hunting , click on turkey and scroll down to land owner lottery. hope this helps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much of this land still does not hold turkeys. The landowner portion of the law should be rewritten to that the landowner has land that can or does have habitat that will support turkeys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the southeast, much if not all, has birds on it at least sometime during the year. I know they've looking into that provision, but many feel there is too much wiggle-room and interpretation in just what "turkey habitat" means.

As for the landowner list, this land is technically not "open" to public hunting. Rather, you still have to ask permission on these lands. Just thought I'd make that distinction.

Joel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joel made a good point about birds using the land at some point during the year. Even in my area the bird will be feeding all winter on the manure that farmers have spread in the fields . It may not be during your hunting season but most fields are used by these birds. I could easily work it so I could get a landowner permit but choose not to. I have heard of some horror stories about people "USING" your land for other seasons and one where opening morning a guy woke to two cars parked in his driveway.

CW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a land owner, and never "check" this box. As a hunter myself, I don't want any confusion and just close my land to me and my family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally know two people that apply in the landowner lottery and then yes, you can hunt a piece of their land but its in an area where no, there are next to no birds. Its to bad so many have to take advantage of this type license, but they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of tags is %20 max for any time period that landowners can receive. It seems funny that this is an issue when last year %17 of the total number of tags went unissued. The year before was only slightly better at about %15. I'll bet that all of the landowners that got a tag actually bought it and hunted. So I did the math and if you re figure the unused tags into the common applicants, only %78 of non landowner tags are purchased. Now why are you being hard on landowners when %22 of lottery winners don't buy their tags?

CW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harvey's post relates to the original question.

I too know of landowners who have received a "land-owner" permits and wouldn't allow anyone else on their land to hunt. The catch was, as Harvey has mentioned, this land very very rarely, if ever, would attract a turkey. But they still got their permit.

I agree with Harvey in that some land owners apply for the land owners permit just for the sake of getting a tag and don't allow other to hunt.

It's sad, but true.

Honestly, and I may get nailed to a cross for saying this, but do away with the land owner tags and it's not a problem any more. It's a system with too many loopholes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I completely dissagree with doing away with landowners permits, I'll keep to the facts. In Area 219, (this is the area I hunt if someone wants to post where they hunt I'll do the math for them)just to show how much of a non-issue this is I took the time to further investigate. 219 has 14 land owner permits issued for this year. 8 time periods consisting of 55 permits is 440 total permits. Only 3.18181 percent of the total is landowner. I also looked at the max in one time period. That would be 11 or %20 of 55. The most issued was 4 for both A & B. So if someone wants me to figure it out for them I will.

CW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cw,

while I don't deny your numbers, I'll stick to my past experience. I've seen it enough to believe the system is being abused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here I did three more just to compare.

AREA, LANDOWNER PERMITS, TOTAL PERMITS, % OF TOTAL

236 , 36 , 1120,%3.21

349,139,3600,%3.86

344,40,1000, %4

219,14,440,%3.181

So for the four I figured out the highest was %4. Why Is this an issue guys? I could tell by just browsing thru the landowner site that many areas are way under that.

CW

I do agree it is abused but we could debate by who. There is a distinct reason why the landowner permits are under the %20 mark. I don't think its because the lack of hunting landowners, but rather the point I brought up about the tresspass for other seasons and the walk on factor. Its a bad system I agree. Landowners should have their own season. Or a no tag season such as Pheasants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cw,

don't get me wrong as I'm not trying to be negative or turn this into a heated battle.

The issue is the landowners who get the tags with the intent of keeping the land to themselves.

Can the DNR guarantee that all 139 landowners in area 349 allow at least one person to hunt their land?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The percent of numbers are not being debated.. The program is I believe that if you are to apply for a landowner lottery tag that you will need to let others hunt. Of those, some allow you to hunt on land that does not have a turkey population or is ver, very, low.

Thats the issue, not how many do it but the fact that its abused.

Yes, a few allow hunters to hunt on good land but others abuse the program. From my point of view, I would lobby to end the freebe program as it is not fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My whole point is the landowner permits are such a small percentage, and all the permits that dont get used way outnumbers them. Also what do the other %96 of people bring to the table. Do they let you hunt on their 1/2 acre lot in town?

Farmer Bob has a field. During the winter turkeys feed on the grain and manure in that field. But they roosted in the woods across the road that he also owns. It provided food for the winter months but doesn't hold any birds during the 8 week hunting season. So is his land not worthy to get him a landowner permit even tho it fed a flock of 50 all winter? Now lets say he's got a buddy who lives in town. He lets his buddy hunt his land but only if he can also hunt. No its not Joe who knocked on his door but he's letting someone hunt right?

If Joe Nobody falls breaks his neck, and because the state says he has a right to hunt on my land can I loose everything? Or does the state have to pay for his claim? I agree it is a horrible program. Landowners should not be told to let someone they don't know on their land.

I guess I just cant see being upset about 1500 of 38,000 tags state wide. That 1500 would be if nobody let others hunt and ignored the rules. I'm sure some do and some never get asked. Like I pointed out if the same percentage of tags as last year do not get purchased it will total almost 6500. That number is more alarming to me than the 1500 that might not let Joe Nobody hunt his land and got a landowner permit.

CW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cw,

in my reference to landowners, I was referring to one in particualr that I know who has 40 acres in the middle of nowhere. Simply put, no turkeys.

As far as the numbers, nobody here has disputed that. You're in that arguement yourself. There was a thread a while back that mentioned that the anti's are entering these lotteries so the actual sportsmen/women have more competition in the lotteries.

Also, why complain about those who are drawn and don't purchase their tags. Things happen. It did for my sons and I last year and we weren't able to hunt. If I'm not going to hunt, should I still purchase the tag? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see where I need to bring anything to the land table as I am not in that drawing. I go through the lottery under different terms than some landowners who choose to a different program.

I also agree that no one disputed your numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here we are in agreement. Abuse exists and landowner participation in the program is incredibly low. Thanks for the facts Chris.

My problem with the situation is we all take a handful of bad experiences with these landowner tags, translate it to the whole, and then proceed to convince ourselves that the program is unfair because we do not personally benefit. With that, I have an issue.

I mean not to single you guys out either, Tom and LEP7MM. These comments are more directed at the hundreds of folks I've heard complain of the system for years now.

I'm on both sides of the debate. I've hunted a full third of the permit areas in MN, many of those on landowner-permit land. I have been turned down many times, and have seen abuses personally, first-hand. The flip side is that this is the exception to the rule, not the rule itself. I have been granted permission to well over 100 locations via this program. Plain and simple, abuses exist, but it is the best program we have for the little we invest towards access to this land (opportinity cost, not $$$ cost).

I also own land, and do not participate in the program for several reasons. Our experience was that people treated it as public land; and not just for turkeys. We were and still are a continual target for deer, morels, coon, pheasant, and turkey hunting. Trespassers caught have confirmed they believed (whether true or not) our land was public because they saw it published as such on the DNR website through the landowner turkey tag program.

Basically, from our experience, the landowner puts up with far more than he/she recieves when following the rules. Those that don't are few/far between. So when complaints arise about how unfair you have it because you know of some guy who abuses the program; think to the majority of private landowners (remember better than 90% of our turkey habitat in MN is in private holding, more than 95% in the heart of the turkey's range). Think of how their crop residue feeds the birds you'll hunt this year. The trees they don't decide to slick-off the hillside are the roost trees you're hunting, or the one you're putting your backside against.

It costs you the "potential" opportunity at a tag, and Chris showed that they don't decrease your opportunity by much (esp. in the latter half of the season). For little to nothing, you get a roadmap to some great turkey hunting if you're willing to do the legwork it takes to get it, should you choose to use it. You don't have to pay increased taxes, an entrance fee, or even extra stamp/license $$$ for this insider-information on access.

If someone has a better idea for more efficient, cost-effective, more fair (both-sides), and ultimately better access to more land for turkey hunting, we would all be very interested!!! I may be wrong, but I'm of the opinion that it likely does not exist. That's coming from a landowner who chooses not to participate in the program, and a turkey hunter that loves many of the fine turkey hunting opportunities provided him in the past 15 years.

Joel

Looked at my records. It's more like 1/4 of the permit areas and 60+ landowner permit lands grin.gif That's the fisherman in me grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never benefited from these tags and never will as I have places to hunt any plenty of them. I do understand that many benefit from this but will never agree with the program in whole due to the fact that some and probably more than I personally know abuse it. Just because it works for some does not make it a great program for all.

Yes, it works for some but, the progran does need a fix. if no one ever states anything about the wrong things about any program, it will never change and the abuse will only grow.

If all fisherman always followed the laws, we would not need all the laws that are now in place. Same with the turkey program or for that matter any other. We start out with a program and fix as we go and this program needs a fix.

If it doesn't hurt another hunter from recieving a tag, thats fine but the abuse is still ongoing.

If the landowner puts up with so much as you state, there is a choice and that is to not allow anyonee on their land and that is exactly what we do in North dakota where I deer hunt. We could enroll in the different programs but I do not feel that the hassle is worth it as it seems so many will not follow the rules. That is a choice we make and live with. If we did choose to enroll in any hunter program, it would without a doubt be wrong to do what would be simply in our favor to gain a tag.

So, as long as it works good for some, your telling me Joel that the abuse can continue.

As far as the wildlife eating crops in the field, thats the way it will always be and will never change. It really bothers me when people think that since the wildlife eat on their land that they might or should have total control over all wildlife.

We will need to agree to disagree on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: harvey lee

So, as long as it works good for some, your telling me Joel that the abuse can continue.

Tom, you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. You can disagree if you like, but I never said that.

What I will say, is that it works for more than just some. It works for the vast majority. If you think yours is the first complaint to the DNR regarding this program, you'd be off the mark. In repeated conversations with wildlife managers and conservation officers, most recently at our DNR safety training banquet, with CO Kevin Prodzinski, the program is very successful at providing access to vast amounts of land for the majority of hunters out there willing to take advantage of the program.

I urge those who know of abuses to do something about them. Just like someone keeping an extra limit of walleyes, these abuses should be reported. I reported one three years ago of a landowner who wished to charge me additional dollars as an entrance fee after making use of the landowner permit. The problem was rectified through enforcement.

It's easy to sit back and say something is broken, but a much different task to propose a means to fix it. Right now, enforcement is used to fix whatever problems arise. If folks don't have a problem with the lack of enforcement of the rules, but have a problem with the rules themselves, we would all like to benefit from their wisdom and foresight.

I'm not of the opinion that the program is perfect and couldn't use a facelift, but DNR officials need to get the most they can from what little they have. No one said the program is flawless, just the most efficient we currently posess.

Thoughts for improvement?

  • Stricter enforcement?

  • More descriptive land requirements (certain % wooded cover)?

  • Increased license fees for landowner easements?

  • More?

Joel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: harvey lee

As far as the wildlife eating crops in the field, thats the way it will always be and will never change. It really bothers me when people think that since the wildlife eat on their land that they might or should have total control over all wildlife.

We will need to agree to disagree on this one.

Let me clarify my comments so folks don't think I posess total control over wildlife on our land.

I'm simply of the ilk that respect should be shown for the folks that are there providing habitat for our birds the other 360 days of the year. They don't posess any more rights, other than those to their land; and they don't own the wildlife just because they potentially choose to spend a part of their time on the land they own.

However, our wildlife groups big and small preach about conservation this, habitat that; when the reality is that private landowners in this neck of the woods are the breadwinners in terms of available habitat. Ultimately, I'm of the opinion that the level of success of the wild turkey in MN, directly hinges upon daily decisions made by these landowners.

In regards to this topic, the general attitude of the wildlife managers I've spoken to is that they so value the additional acreage and access they provide, they're reluctant to tighten any rules which might further restrict landowner participation in the program.

Maybe this appears as special rights? Perhaps this is the source of the inequality debate? I'm not sure?

Maybe the DNR realizes how important private lands in MN are to the success of wild turkey hunting here?

I've been wrong before many times, and I'm prepared to be completely in the wrong here again. I mean not to dominate the topic, and am sorry for my wordiness. Turkey hunting is my truest passion, and this is a topic I've personally debated with myself, and many others. These opinions are only that, and could be complete bunk. I just hope people think about the big picture when calling for the removal of any program such as this.

Joel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the answer is, we do away with landowner program for turkeys. It should be changed to the standard that the DNR established for pheasants. Its a simple fix, no tag needed hunt on your own land. Then landowners could apply for a tag also (just like pheasants) and hunt one bird with their tag on any land in their area just like everyone else. Simple and fair to the landowners. The common guy who uses this info for a decent place to hunt is SOL.

CW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 'we have more fun' FishingMN Creators

Well I've stayed out of this for awhile. I can see both the good and bad in the program. Reality is that the landowner program has a minimal impact on taking away permits from those non landowners who apply for licenses.

I have had long time relationships with landowners who I have met through this program and who allow me to continue to hunt their land even if they no longer utilized the program. I've run into a few negative experiences as well but it has been primarily positive. It is what it is. But I do see that it does give others access to turkey hunting ground beyond the more traditional "public" land.

Maybe MN needs a walking program like many other states have. Who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say do away with the program. Even with-out it you could still ask for permission right? Why have the program??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If participation based on % license allocation is that low, then abandon the program based on poor participation.

I have contacted 5 landowners over the past 10 years. Two said yes, one said no, and the other two said sure, but my land does not hold turkeys we hunt over by .... they gave me the landowners names!!

Originally, the program was likely put in place to reward landowners to manage their land for turkeys. But I suspect the number of landowners that manage their land for turkeys is small except for hunter landowner types.

That said - sure set aside 10% of licenses to landowners with no open land program - BUT these landowners are restricted to hunting their own land.

This protects private habitat if it exists through landowner incentives.

Turkeys are pretty mobile and unless they own a large block of land, turkeys will move around naturally and in response to pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: brittman
If participation based on % license allocation is that low, then abandon the program based on poor participation.

Participation isn't low....enrollment is. Meaning that the folks who "take-away" tags via the landowner program are much less than advertised. In the zones I hunt, willing landowners break out a sheet of people that I have to work around when gaining permission on these grounds. Most fill up. There are many people who would like to hunt such lands, that don't want to pay anything for them. Abandoning the program would create an even greater stress on accessible land.

It's what I'd call a great situation. Plenty of folks getting access, few landowners "taking" tags.

 Originally Posted By: brittman

I have contacted 5 landowners over the past 10 years. Two said yes, one said no, and the other two said sure, but my land does not hold turkeys we hunt over by .... they gave me the landowners names!!

As stated, there are abuses. I would report such situations. As far as being turned down, did you contact the landowners by phone or stop by in person? Did you do it early, long before turkey season? I know of plenty dissatisfied hunters that miss the boat simply because the early bird already got the worm. I'm not saying this is the case in your situation, but it's a common cause of disgust.

 Originally Posted By: brittman

Originally, the program was likely put in place to reward landowners to manage their land for turkeys. But I suspect the number of landowners that manage their land for turkeys is small except for hunter landowner types.

I spoke with Gary Nelson, DNR Area Wildlife Mgr., Rochester earlier this week regarding the program. Gary presided over the re-introduction of turkeys in MN, and was doing this wild turkey work back in '78 during our first season. Originally, this landowner permit system was derived back then for much of what you say. His take on the situation was similar, in that he felt it has been bad in certain years with abuses, but is generally getting better through enforcement, and is largely a successful program. It's been contested and up for removal several times, and was even changed a few years back to do as you suggested brittman; require those folks to hunt on their own land. That was overturned, as it provided even less incentive for landowners to take part of the program.

Regarding management, any farmer that maintains large trees, wooded cover, alfalfa/grass for nesting, and/or corn and other food sources is managing for wild turkey whether they know it or not. There is varying quality sure, and fenceline to fenceline corn doesn't get it done; but just because a farmer isn't planting chufa and defoliating understory doesn't mean he's not managing for turkey.

 Originally Posted By: brittman

That said - sure set aside 10% of licenses to landowners with no open land program - BUT these landowners are restricted to hunting their own land.

This protects private habitat if it exists through landowner incentives.

Turkeys are pretty mobile and unless they own a large block of land, turkeys will move around naturally and in response to pressure.

I applaud you for proposing a solution. But, if less than 20% of tags are applied for, 5%, 10%, whatever.....the rest go to the general lottery. And, as mentioned, this has been done before and overturned after only one year. For very good reason. There's not incentive for the landowner to participate.

What I would like to see more of, is enforcement action on landowners that cheat the system. That means all of us need to be ready to report rules infractions just as we would if we saw a slot walleye on Mille Lacs taken home.

Another thing that Gary mentioned, for those of you who wish to axe the program, is that it must be purely legislatively driven. Meaning, that you need to get your local legislator involved if you want to see something changed. You can be sure I will agressively and actively promote the continual of the program, but everyone's voice must be heard.

Joel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another untold story that Borch and I were chatting about is the numerous turkey grounds we've found through this program, that we would've otherwise never knew existed, or had the time/energy to check out.

We've both maintained some great landowner relationships as a result of this program, long after they've broken away from the program or decided not to turkey hunt anymore.

The benefit of this program for myself and others continues even after these farmers quit applying for a landowner permit.

Joel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • Brianf.
      I'm not there, so I can't tell exactly what's going on but it looks like a large area of open water developed in the last day with all of the heavy snow on the east side of wake em up Narrows. These two photos are from my Ring Camera facing north towards Niles Point.  You can see what happened with all of snow that fell in the last three days, though the open water could have been wind driven. Hard to say. .  
    • SkunkedAgain
      Black Bay had great ice before but a few spots near rockpiles where there were spots of open water. It looks like the weight of the snow has created a little lake in the middle of the bay.  
    • LakeofthewoodsMN
      On the south end...   Thanks to some cold spring weather, ice fishing continues strong for those still ice fishing.  The bite remains very good.  Most resorts have pulled their fish houses off for the year, however, some still have fish houses out and others are allowing ATV and side by sides.  Check social media or call ahead to your favorite resort for specifics. Reports this week for walleyes and saugers remain excellent.   A nice mix of jumbo perch, pike, eelpout, and an occasional crappie, tullibee or sturgeon being reported by anglers. Jigging one line and using a live minnow on the second line is the way to go.  Green, glow red, pink and gold were good colors this week.     Monster pike are on a tear!  Good number of pike, some reaching over 45 inches long, being caught using tip ups with live suckers or dead bait such as smelt and herring in 8 - 14' of water.   As always, work through a resort or outfitter for ice road conditions.  Safety first always. Fish houses are allowed on the ice through March 31st, the walleye / sauger season goes through April 14th and the pike season never ends. On the Rainy River...  The river is opened up along the Nelson Park boat ramp in Birchdale, the Frontier boat ramp and Vidas boat ramp.  This past week, much of the open water skimmed over with the single digit overnight temps.   Areas of the river have popped open again and with temps getting warmer, things are shaping up for the last stretch through the rest of the spring season, which continues through April 14th.   Very good numbers of walleyes are in the river.  Reports this week, even with fewer anglers, have been good.  When temps warm up and the sun shines, things will fire up again.   Jigs with brightly colored plastics or jigs with a frozen emerald shiner have been the desired bait on the river.  Don't overlook slow trolling crankbaits upstream as well.   Good reports of sturgeon being caught on the river as well.  Sturgeon put the feed bag on in the spring.  The bite has been very good.  Most are using a sturgeon rig with a circle hook loaded with crawlers or crawlers / frozen emerald shiners. Up at the NW Angle...  Ice fishing is winding down up at the Angle.  Walleyes, saugers, and a number of various species in the mix again this week.  The bite is still very good with good numbers of fish.  The one two punch of jigging one line and deadsticking the second line is working well.   Check with Angle resorts on transport options from Young's Bay.  Call ahead for ice road guidelines.  
    • CigarGuy
      With the drifting, kind of hard to tell for sure, but I'm guessing about a foot and still lightly snowing. Cook end!
    • PSU
      How much snow did you get on Vermilion? 
    • Mike89
      lake here refroze too...  started opening again yesterday with the wet snow and wind...  very little ice left today...
    • Hookmaster
      A friend who has a cabin between Alex and Fergus said the lake he's on refroze. He texted me a pic from March 12th when it was open and one from 23rd when it wasn't. 🤯
    • SkunkedAgain
      I don't think that there has been any ice melt in the past few weeks on Vermilion. Things looked like a record and then Mother Nature swept in again.   I'll give my revised guess of April 21st
    • leech~~
      As I get older it's really not just about sending bullets down range.  Some of it's just the workmanship of the gun and the wow factor. The other two guns I have really wanted which I'll never have now because of their price, is a 8mm Jap Nambu and 9mm German Luger.   Just thought they always looked cool!  
    • jim curlee
      I had a guy hit me with a lightly used 1969 BAR, he wanted $1650 with an older Leupold scope. More than I think they are worth, I made an offer, he declined end of story.   You know if you look at the old brochures, a grade II BAR sold for $250 in the late 60s, $1650 would be a good return on your investment.    Why would anybody want a 50 year old gun, they are heavy, have wood stocks, and blued metal.  I guess mainly to keep their gun safes glued to the floor. lol   You can probably buy a stainless rifle that you never have to clean, with a synthetic stock you never have to refinish, is as light as a feather, and for half as much money, perfect.   I'm too old for a youth gun, although I've shrunk enough that it would probably fit. lol   No Ruger 10/44s.   Jim      
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.