increase hunting access proposal

[Buckmaster7600]

Haven’t read the whole thread but from my understanding @Phantom wants to make access easier. Why is everyone’s goal these days to make stuff easier, the fun is in the work! The harder the work, the greater the reward! I hunt Mass regularly and it’s confusing as hell, so I stay on state land. The one time I hit a buck that went on private I got the landowner’s permission called him and he was very thankful and told me to go get him.

[JohnPlav]

I couldn't imagine hunting on private property that I don't have permission to be on.  That to me, is trespassing.  I get that NY has a somewhat vague law about undeveloped unposted land, but I simply don't like it.  The onus should not be on the landowner to prevent trespassing. 

[Bucksnbows]

1 minute ago, JohnPlav said:

I couldn't imagine hunting on private property that I don't have permission to be on.  That to me, is trespassing.  I get that NY has a somewhat vague law about undeveloped unposted land, but I simply don't like it.  The onus should not be on the landowner to prevent trespassing. 

It’s a States Rights issue. States like Vermont force the landowner to either post lands or allow the public hunting and fishing access if not posted. Conversely, states like Montana require the hunter or angler to know what is public and what is private regardless of whether or not it is posted. 

[Wolc123]

The poll results is a very good indicator of the sheer stupidity of this suggestion.  

Edited November 8, 2023 by Wolc123

[Nomad]

When I hunted Montana,there was a program where land owners got a few bucks for each time a hunter signed in and hunted the land . There was little boxes like at trail head where you signed in ,but these were very large ranches where 25 guys would never see each other .

I will also say in the days of old , we hunted land for miles ,if it wasn’t posted the owners didn’t care ,if a farmer wanted a spot for himself he posted it ,that was the general understanding.

[blackbeltbill]

12 hours ago, Nomad said:

When I hunted Montana,there was a program where land owners got a few bucks for each time a hunter signed in and hunted the land . There was little boxes like at trail head where you signed in ,but these were very large ranches where 25 guys would never see each other .

I will also say in the days of old , we hunted land for miles ,if it wasn’t posted the owners didn’t care ,if a farmer wanted a spot for himself he posted it ,that was the general understanding.

    Again your 2nd paragraph above hits the Nail on the Head! That is what has been going on for Decades in 3 areas near to me. 

   This paragraph  here is related to Hunting Access.- Years back at a Public Meeting for the ongoing Huge Development just North of Sterling  Forest State Park  and close to Tuxedo Park- Someone speaking  for Sterling Forest State Park insisted that the 500 foot boundary of No Hunting close to any Homes be " on the developer ".

   The Speaker did not want Mega Mansions built right up to the State Land Line which would impact Hunting as now areas open to Hunting would be off Limits as Hunters can't  be close to Homes.

   This Development  will take years to complete. I figure Money Talks.  The Homes will probably  be built right up to the State Land Line...

 

 

[Phantom]

On 11/8/2023 at 8:43 AM, Buckmaster7600 said:

Haven’t read the whole thread but from my understanding @Phantom wants to make access easier. Why is everyone’s goal these days to make stuff easier, the fun is in the work! The harder the work, the greater the reward! I hunt Mass regularly and it’s confusing as hell, so I stay on state land. The one time I hit a buck that went on private I got the landowner’s permission called him and he was very thankful and told me to go get him.

Here's the revised version of your text with corrected grammar:

"Well, if you watch the video I posted above, he mentions that in New Hampshire, where he's located, if it's not posted, you're allowed to hunt there. That's all I was wondering—why don't parts of Upstate, where there are very few people anyway, adopt the same policy? I'm not sure if it would be a good idea in densely populated areas, but in less populated areas of the state, it could work. The vote's going to come down to who wants to hunt on private land and who wants to hunt on public land. Basically, everybody who wants to hunt on private land is going to vote no, and the people who prefer hunting on public land are going to vote yes. Most people here seem to rather hunt on their own private land, so it is what it is." 

[Phantom]

On 11/8/2023 at 5:36 PM, Wolc123 said:

The poll results is a very good indicator of the sheer stupidity of this suggestion.  

No actually it  just shows that most hunters here prefer to hunt on private land and don't want to be bothered understandable. 

 That's the regulation in New Hampshire and a few other places, I believe, so you should send your comments to them. The results here don't surprise me, though. I mean, if you're keeping land and the only reason you got the land is to hunt on it, obviously you don't want anybody else on it. But a lot of people who own land and are not hunters don't care as long as it's not close to their homes, obviously. And if you gave them a tax break, forget about it—they would be happy to make it open to hunters.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Phantom

[broomeguy]

Seems like this poll belongs in an absentee landowner forum. 

[mowin]

1 hour ago, broomeguy said:

Seems like this poll belongs in an absentee landowner forum. 

I was hoping it would just die.  

[Buckmaster7600]

2 hours ago, Phantom said:

No actually it  just shows that most hunters here prefer to hunt on private land and don't want to be bothered understandable. 

 That's the regulation in New Hampshire and a few other places, I believe, so you should send your comments to them. The results here don't surprise me, though. I mean, if you're keeping land and the only reason you got the land is to hunt on it, obviously you don't want anybody else on it. But a lot of people who own land and are not hunters don't care as long as it's not close to their homes, obviously. And if you gave them a tax break, forget about it—they would be happy to make it open to hunters.

I’m well aware about the laws in New Hampshire, I hunt there regularly. The guy in the video is someone I know pretty well also. 
 

The laws in New Hampshire won’t work in New York. Most places it would work the land is already open for the public via land easements. Not always marked but easy enough to figure out with a little leg work. 

[Phantom]

56 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

I’m well aware about the laws in New Hampshire, I hunt there regularly. The guy in the video is someone I know pretty well also. 
 

The laws in New Hampshire won’t work in New York. Most places it would work the land is already open for the public via land easements. Not always marked but easy enough to figure out with a little leg work. 

Yeah, you're right. I was thinking, though, in the sparsely populated regions of New York State, it might be beneficial to implement something like that and provide a land tax break as an incentive. However, it wouldn't be feasible to implement it uniformly across all areas. I can understand how it would definitely not work in certain regions. 

[Joe T]

Isn’t there a different way to encourage private land owners to allow hunting? Like offering tax credits?