View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 27. You may not vote on this poll
which is better
11-25-2005, 07:07 PM
#2
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WC FL
Posts: 26,323
RE: which is better
Most pepole lease thier property cause they can't afford the taxes and some do it for a profit. I'm talking, 1000's of acres. Seventy of us lease over 20'000 acres for $600 each yearly.
Next to it isSan Pedro WMA, 50,000 acres that belong's to Proctor & Gamble and it cost's $250 a season plus your license and stamps. NO CAMPING!
Next to it isSan Pedro WMA, 50,000 acres that belong's to Proctor & Gamble and it cost's $250 a season plus your license and stamps. NO CAMPING!
11-25-2005, 08:17 PM
#3
Dominant Buck
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ramsey , Indiana
Posts: 22,545
RE: which is better
Owning huntable land is always better than leasing it because at the end of the day it's still yours and it will still be there for you the next day too . It's also usually cheaper to buy than to lease in the long run . Living on your hunting land is another bonus , I literally hunt in my back yard . The property is only 10 acres , but it's fairly productive for deer , turkey , and small game . I have an Indianalifetime hunting license and now I'll always have at least one place to hunt for the rest of my life .
When you lease you're at the mercy of the prevailing market, which from my understanding of it isn't getting any cheaper . There's always a chance that you can lose your lease , and there's no guarantee that prices won't rise in the future ,so you may even find yourself outbid .
When you lease you're at the mercy of the prevailing market, which from my understanding of it isn't getting any cheaper . There's always a chance that you can lose your lease , and there's no guarantee that prices won't rise in the future ,so you may even find yourself outbid .
11-25-2005, 09:04 PM
#4
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Flora, IL
Posts: 165
RE: which is better
Leasing ground has gotten way outta hand, around here anyway. But hey, if I was a farmer here in IL and could get those Chi-town idoits to lease my land for more than I gave for it, I'd do it too.
11-25-2005, 10:07 PM
#5
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 369
RE: which is better
well, in my case I think its best if I just lease some land from someone. I hate to give up the land I hunt on now, its my families land and what ever they say goes. If 500 ppl ask them to hunt then next year there will be 500 new hunters I have to deal with. Its just crazy, its almost like they are not considerate of me but they are nice old ppl and just like to please everyone.
11-26-2005, 03:00 AM
#7
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MB.
Posts: 2,984
RE: which is better
You definitely have more benefits when owning your land but unfortunately I don’t own any land and I hunt on crown land that doesn't cost me anything. I just have to put up with other hunters.
11-26-2005, 03:16 AM
#8
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
RE: which is better
I don't think alot of people realize the true value in owning land.With timber & oil & gas rights alone it is a great investment,but being able to hunt and fish your own land and have something to leave your children is a great thing.
11-26-2005, 03:20 AM
#9
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 25,116
RE: which is better
Each situation is different. I'm a teacher in the state of Florida. For me leasing would be the best. Believe me we just went through all of this.
However.....by all means if you can live 365 days on that land, and it's not a second home. owning is much better. I would love owning 100 acres and live on it. I have found out those kind of places are there because there are no jobs near by. We are presently saving to retire at a place like that.
11 more years.
SO presently ...my vote is for a discounted lease or WMA.
However.....by all means if you can live 365 days on that land, and it's not a second home. owning is much better. I would love owning 100 acres and live on it. I have found out those kind of places are there because there are no jobs near by. We are presently saving to retire at a place like that.
11 more years.
SO presently ...my vote is for a discounted lease or WMA.
11-26-2005, 08:32 AM
#10
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WC FL
Posts: 26,323
RE: which is better
ORIGINAL: Chuck7
Each situation is different. I'm a teacher in the state of Florida. For me leasing would be the best. Believe me we just went through all of this.
However.....by all means if you can live 365 days on that land, and it's not a second home. owning is much better. I would love owning 100 acres and live on it. I have found out those kind of places are there because there are no jobs near by. We are presently saving to retire at a place like that.
11 more years.SO presently ...my vote is for a discounted lease or WMA.
Each situation is different. I'm a teacher in the state of Florida. For me leasing would be the best. Believe me we just went through all of this.
However.....by all means if you can live 365 days on that land, and it's not a second home. owning is much better. I would love owning 100 acres and live on it. I have found out those kind of places are there because there are no jobs near by. We are presently saving to retire at a place like that.
11 more years.
SO presently ...my vote is for a discounted lease or WMA.
Chuck, if you don't Farm it or plant it in Pine and claim Green Belt, hope you can afford the Taxes!
