|
|
Post by hoosier on Jul 9, 2010 21:57:37 GMT -5
It is my understanding that the wild (including game) animals, found within the borders of the state, are property of the State of Indiana.
A hunter must purchase a license to hunt and harvest these animals. The monies of such licensing goes to the State's coffers.
How then are outfitters and leasors of hunting land (where game is hunted and harvested) exempt from any taxation or fees paid to the State of Indiana?
Are they not profiting from the hunting and harvesting of the State's (Taxpayer's) property (game animals)?
Perhaps they pay State Income Tax. Maybe they don't. Are they required to pay more than this as they are offering up the State's property (the game)?
Just some late night musings here. I hope not to sound left-wing. I assure you that I am not. It just seems to me that the above endeavors are getting a free pass.
Oh, and if it sounds like I do not favor Outfitter's and Leasing operations, you are correct.
What say you?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Jul 9, 2010 23:27:25 GMT -5
I'm not a big fan of leasors either the whole pay to hunt thing never really sounded good to me I think it's killing our sport. I don't see a problem charging a fee to be guided on public ground like they do out west but I really hate knocking on Farmer Johnsons door to be told "Sorry son So-and-So has a lease on my ground and you can't hunt" It burns my butt that the folks my grandpa asked and they said yes and the folks my dad asked and they said yes now say no because some one with more money has lured the farmers and land owners into locking up their land and never letting anyone on. Further more the few farmers that would let guys come on their land have been burned by slob hunters so many times you can't step foot on the porch with out the farmer interupting your "Hello sir my name is...." and saying he's not going to clean up anybody elses crap blah blah blah.... So what say me? I say leasing should be outlawed and we'd all have a deacent place to hunt IF we took care of the guy who let us hunt. Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Jul 10, 2010 6:07:32 GMT -5
The other side is it's the farmers land and he is counting on that land for his livelyhood. Why should he not have the right to do that? I for one am plenty tired of the government telling us what we can and cannot do in a number of different areas. I do understand what you are saying, and it is an issue; I just think there are 2 sides to that debate and I can see both of them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2010 7:13:22 GMT -5
Dnag....your against someone "locking up their land" either by a lease or other wise. I have to ask....how many times have you invited other to hunt the lands you have available.....if you don't aren't in the same catagory as a leesor? You won't admit it but you are.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 10, 2010 7:40:03 GMT -5
The moral of the story (or this thread) is if you don't like leasing hunting land then go out and buy your own.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Jul 10, 2010 8:25:51 GMT -5
Dnag....your against someone "locking up their land" either by a lease or other wise. I have to ask....how many times have you invited other to hunt the lands you have available.....if you don't aren't in the same catagory as a leesor? You won't admit it but you are. I am often bringing new people to ground I have available, besides 99% of what I hunt is public because of the"no's" I get when I ask the farmer. Timex I've seen the prices of your hunt clubs, too rich for my blood. As far as buying my own, well it would be nice but my priorities are with my family in 3 years we"ve doubled from my wife and I to us and 2 boys. Thats my load to bare and I'm not complaining about that, my point is that something has changed over the years and we can't deny that, I still knock on doors even though I get mostly "no" answers. It just bugs me that the average Joe can't hunt like he used to. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2010 9:28:51 GMT -5
What has changed is that farmers now see that hunting can generate some much needed income from their investment.....which a large part of is their land. The same land that supports X number of deer and other critters that eat a lot of the farmers profit. Not to mention that some farmers use leasing to get a bit of protection from trespassing and those that think they are ENTITLED to hunt where ever they want or where ever they did in the past.
It's been my experience that most people that started out with a free place to hunt ended up abusing that situation in some form or fashion, thus forcing the farmer into leasing, not every time but a lot of the time.
As for my hunt club prices, I only have one that costs more than $1500 per year (Illinois). Most are under $1000 a year. Try buying and managing a farm for less than that per year......you can't.
|
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Jul 10, 2010 9:39:20 GMT -5
It is my understanding that the wild (including game) animals, found within the borders of the state, are property of the State of Indiana. A hunter must purchase a license to hunt and harvest these animals. The monies of such licensing goes to the State's coffers. How then are outfitters and leasors of hunting land (where game is hunted and harvested) exempt from any taxation or fees paid to the State of Indiana? Are they not profiting from the hunting and harvesting of the State's (Taxpayer's) property (game animals)? Perhaps they pay State Income Tax. Maybe they don't. Are they required to pay more than this as they are offering up the State's property (the game)? Just some late night musings here. I hope not to sound left-wing. I assure you that I am not. It just seems to me that the above endeavors are getting a free pass. Oh, and if it sounds like I do not favor Outfitter's and Leasing operations, you are correct. What say you? You would be wrong about one part of your post here and that is .The game does not be long to the "State of Indiana " the exact tecnical wordage says the "Deer belong to the people of the state of indiana" as it is the same verbage as is used to describe most other non migratory game animals in this state. Hope this helps and gives some creedance to why we are all so angrey at the IDNR right now for not listening to or useing the opinion polls to help manage what is by our own property as a whole. |
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 10, 2010 9:49:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Jul 10, 2010 10:12:49 GMT -5
The people who lease land to hunt are not license exempt. Outfitters employ local people providing jobs and additional monies into rural areas that have few other attractions. These outfitters that make a profit also pay state income tax. The landowners are free to do as they wish with their property and you can't blame them for trying to put a little extra money in their pockets.
|
|
|
|
Post by deerman1 on Jul 10, 2010 10:13:29 GMT -5
Oh I forgot that around these web sites we have toshow proof this is in the misculanious portion of the Indiana code of game laws!! Check the bottom of page 23 Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 10, 2010 10:20:51 GMT -5
I believe it is the same in EVERY State  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2010 10:37:30 GMT -5
I think that the purchase of a deer tag will allow you to take possession of at least one of those critters.....and at that point it belongs to you unless you transfer ownership to someone else. Never seen hords of folks trying to claim anything that I've reduced to meat in the past without my premission.
|
|
|
|
Post by evolutionsthunder on Jul 10, 2010 11:04:53 GMT -5
Leases are to rich for my blood to, but you can not blame a farmer for making more money on his property. not to many people are going to give something away when they can make money on it just as easy.and just one more thing i dont think the problem are the leases as much as the farmers have been burned by so many hunters not respecting their property. but all this is just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Jul 10, 2010 14:26:43 GMT -5
What has changed is that farmers now see that hunting can generate some much needed income from their investment.....which a large part of is their land. The same land that supports X number of deer and other critters that eat a lot of the farmers profit. Not to mention that some farmers use leasing to get a bit of protection from trespassing and those that think they are ENTITLED to hunt where ever they want or where ever they did in the past. It's been my experience that most people that started out with a free place to hunt ended up abusing that situation in some form or fashion, thus forcing the farmer into leasing, not every time but a lot of the time. As for my hunt club prices, I only have one that costs more than $1500 per year (Illinois). Most are under $1000 a year. Try buying and managing a farm for less than that per year......you can't. I never felt entitled just cheated by a guy with more money. Do you really think a responsable hunter wouldn't pick up trash on the property, drop a Christmas card off w/ a gift cirtificate or bring a ham by? We do all of those things and try to keep repore W/ a farmer, we pick up our spent shells, never dig pits on goose ground and NEVER use 4 wheelers. Big $ has changed the sport for ever, leasing doesn't ensure a place to hunt, it ensures that others won't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2010 19:52:58 GMT -5
Probably true that you won't be hunting any leased ground, but there is far more land out there that is not under a lease of any kind that you also can't hunt (legally anyway)......how is that the fault of a outfitter or lease.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Jul 10, 2010 22:25:43 GMT -5
True, I won't be hunting that ground either but the ground that I have hunted in the past is now leased, ground I have checked on is leased. It wouldn't matter if I did have a lease someone W/ more money would take it anyway. It all comes down to this, leasing takes ground away from the average hunter and makes public and unmanaged land IE: old coal mine ground more crowded, it puts more preasure on all hunting not just deer its duck upland game and other species as well....
IT IS KILLING THE SPORT! We're headed down a road of no return just like the europians it will be a sport of kings in a few generations. What land is available will be overcrowded over preasured and the land leased will never be hunted by anyone other than a select few. I could go on and on about this and I won't change your mind and you won't change mine. My feelings run deep. But you can probably see in the line of business you're in that more and more land is being hunted by fewer people due to leasing while the public ground is hammered by guys that can't afford the price tag on the lease or can't compete with a bigger wallet.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 6:47:15 GMT -5
Sportsmen today have three choices:
1. Lease your hunting property
2. Hunt on Public lands.
3. Buy your own Hunting property.
|
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Jul 11, 2010 7:06:41 GMT -5
it is a right in your ground by ownership, just like mineral rights, guess you are taxed on the income from it, anyway
the economy will slow all that down for awhile, plus newbies are going to figure out our small,tracted-up land mass, high population and go back to the other trophy states
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2010 7:28:37 GMT -5
True, I won't be hunting that ground either but the ground that I have hunted in the past is now leased, ground I have checked on is leased. It wouldn't matter if I did have a lease someone W/ more money would take it anyway. It all comes down to this, leasing takes ground away from the average hunter and makes public and unmanaged land IE: old coal mine ground more crowded, it puts more preasure on all hunting not just deer its duck upland game and other species as well.... IT IS KILLING THE SPORT! We're headed down a road of no return just like the europians it will be a sport of kings in a few generations. What land is available will be overcrowded over preasured and the land leased will never be hunted by anyone other than a select few. I could go on and on about this and I won't change your mind and you won't change mine. My feelings run deep. But you can probably see in the line of business you're in that more and more land is being hunted by fewer people due to leasing while the public ground is hammered by guys that can't afford the price tag on the lease or can't compete with a bigger wallet. First off, I'll say that I never met anyone that could afford to hunt, but can't afford to lease. Granted, some can't afford to lease 1000 acres by themself...but could assemble a group to make their portion what ever amount that they could afford. Hunting is not a chaep hobby. I spend most of my disposable income on hunting. Others golf and do other forms of recreation or blow their money on lotto tickets and smokes and beer. It's all about priorities and what your goals are. If you'd rather complain about what others have to hunt than try to find a better way for yourself, then that's the way it will be. Second, the first job I had as a young man, I earned $3.50 an hour....the last one I had paid me over $30 an hour. The first lease that I signed some 30 years ago cost me $5 an acre. The last one I signed a few weeks ago cost me $5 an acre. I got a deal, but they are still out there. Not all leases are billfold breakers.....especially if you split it up between a few friends. |
|
