# Landowner Tags



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Please help me understand how the landowner tags are issued. Do the property owners apply for permits? If so, how much do they cost? I am trying to figure out why landowners are entitled to make so **** much money selling off the permits? The animals are the property of the state, correct? Yet what does the state of Utah benefit from these tags? Do these LE tag holders/ landowners have to give a percentage of funds to the state?

Here's an example of what I am talking about......
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=218&ad=30367568&cat=225&lpid=0&search=&ad_cid=5


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Fowl,
They are allowed to make that much because we live in the USA. It's free market. They get the tags because the animals are fed and breed and water on the private property. The hunters buying the tags are the ones setting the value of the tag. If hunters refused to only pay $5.00 for a Book Cliffs tag then that's all the Landowner would get. But no we as hunters put a higher value on the tags so we pay it. When I say "we" I'm referring to hunter and sportsmen in general.


----------



## humpyflyguy (Sep 10, 2007)

Quick question that I have, how can this person be selling land owner tags for the book cliffs public ground? I thought land owner tags was just for the persons property not for public ground as well


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

humpyflyguy said:


> Quick question that I have, how can this person be selling land owner tags for the book cliffs public ground? I thought land owner tags was just for the persons property not for public ground as well


 The ad states it's for 2 LE permits......So that brings up another question. Can you sell off your LE permit for as much as you can get? Or are these even actually landowner permits?


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Look into the laws and you can answer your questions. Yes you can hunt the entire unit with a Landowner tag. A landowner tag is different than a CWMU tag. Look into the laws and you can see.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r657/r657-043.htm#T4

Here is a link if you want to see the rules for landowner tags.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

I'm surprised the state of Utah doesn't ask for a percentage back from the sell of the tag. So a guy spends a couple hundred bucks for LE permits and makes $15,000 off the states property. That part kind of suprises me.......:? Again I just don't see what the state has to gain by releasing these permits. And if these hunts take place on public land, why doesn't the state just add these permits into the LE draw? Or auction them off themselves?


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and The Public Trust Doctrine have been and continue to be compromised and mangled until it's bastardization will become beyond repair. Yet those like '73 and a truck load of others of the same ilk do nothing but propagate that decline and justify it as "it's the American Way!" As long as we make $$$$$ on our wildlife as their future becomes more and more uncertain, it's all good...

BTW fowlmouth, the state doesn't own the wildlife, we the people do, and they are 'held in trust' for the people by the state. Thus, the Public Trust Doctrine.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Just a tidbit......part of the logic is that it is beneficial to promote property owners who manage/preserve their property to benefit wildlife. Remember that much of the best winter ground is private property that could easily be developed in ways that would be detrimental to wintering herds. I'm not a big commercial hunting guy but I see the value in throwing a bone to those who maintain good habitat as habitat is the most valuable and irreplaceable factor related to the animals that we all want to have around for generations to come.-----SS


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

Nobody owns the wildlife...not me, not the landowners and certainly not the government.

I accept that without regulation we as humans would likely have depleted this natural resource until extinction by now. I don't like paying the state to hunt wild animals or to use public land but I do understand the need for regulation and the protection of our resources.


----------



## hawkeye (Feb 18, 2008)

I will start my post by disclosing that I am not a fan of landowner or CMWU tags. While it is true that the landowner owns the real property in question, the public owns the wildlife. I agree that in some limited cases the state needs to compensate landowners for the impact that wildlife has on their property. In most cases, however, the pendulum has swung too far toward commercializing hunting. For instance, the guy on KSL that is listing 2 Book Cliffs choice of weapon tags is going to make 15k off those tags. That is a significant amount of money from a public resource. Given the amount of money in question, he better own a huge chunk of property in the unit that is experiencing significant impact from wildlife.

There are other options to address these issues without handing out unit wide tags. For instance, the state could limit landowner tags to the private property in question so that the landowner is not selling a unit-wide tag. This would drive the tag prices down and prevent a landowner with a small chunk of private property from hunting the entire unit. We could also limit the re-sale of these permits so that they have to be used by the landowner or his immediate family members. We could even do away with landowner and CMWU tags so that a landowner, his family members and the high dollar tag buying crowd are forced to stand in line and draw a tag like everyone else. Landowners could still make money buy charging a reasonable trespass fee for the property. However, the people paying those trespass fees would be average Joes who drew a tag in the big game draw. Therefore, the price would be much more reasonable. Another alternative is to to allow the landowner to shut down his property to hunting. Frankly, this option is fine to me if that is what the landowner chooses.

Unfortunately, the state and the conservation groups have no incentive to reduce landowner and CWMU tags because they support the commercialization of hunting. If you ever attend a SFW banquet you will notice that they have a Paunsaungunt landowner tag for sale at nearly every banquet during the year (and sometimes more than one). The crowd that advocates for more conservation permits is generally the same group that supports landowner and CWMU permits. There are some limited exceptions in the CWMU program, where there are some well-run operations. However, go back and read the posts regarding CWMU's. As a general rule, they are less than flattering.

Hawkeye


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Springville Shooter said:


> Just a tidbit......part of the logic is that it is beneficial to promote property owners who manage/preserve their property to benefit wildlife. Remember that much of the best winter ground is private property that could easily be developed in ways that would be detrimental to wintering herds. I'm not a big commercial hunting guy but I see the value in throwing a bone to those who maintain good habitat as habitat is the most valuable and irreplaceable factor related to the animals that we all want to have around for generations to come.-----SS


I do understand that private grounds are critical to deer and elk. My concern mostly is the money these folks get from selling permits. Heck, wouldn't it be nice if we could all legally be ticket scalpers?


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

To answer the original question... You need at least 640 acres minimum to get a tag. Yes, they do have to apply to get the tags. Based on the size of the acreage and the habitat quality a biologist is supposed to determine the amount of animals the land supports. The tags cost the exact same that they do for any other resident. $50 general buck, $280 for LE elk (I think), etc. They are able to sell the vouchers off at any price that someone is willing to pay. That person then takes the voucher to the state and exchanges it for a tag.


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

Fowl,
So would you feel better about it if they only got 40.00 for each is the tags? Would you like it better if they sold them for cheaper but were issued more tags?


----------



## chukarflusher (Jan 20, 2014)

If you go east to the whitetail states and mostly private property do the land owners get tags as well?? I don't know I'm just wandering I don't think they do but could be wrong


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Muley73 said:


> Fowl,
> So would you feel better about it if they only got 40.00 for each is the tags? Would you like it better if they sold them for cheaper but were issued more tags?


 Yes, whatever their cost is should be what they are allowed to sell them for. 
No I don't want to see more tags issued.

I'm trying to understand how it is fair for one person to get a tag(s) and sell it for whatever amount they can get, and the rest of us that draw a tag can't do the same thing. It's a double standard. Like I said before, wouldn't it be nice to legally scalp tickets?


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

^^^couldnt agree more^^^


----------



## Muley73 (Nov 20, 2010)

It goes back to owning the land that supports the resource. Nothing more nothing less. It's not about the animals. We as hunters are the ones that put the value on them.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

chukarflusher said:


> If you go east to the whitetail states and mostly private property do the land owners get tags as well?? I don't know I'm just wandering I don't think they do but could be wrong


They may or may not get tags but the majority of them lease out their land to hunters which can bring in big bucks, and I don't mean the 4 leg kind.


----------



## Christine (Mar 13, 2013)

In Illinois, if you have 40 acres you can get a *free* land owner tag.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Muley73 said:


> It goes back to owning the land that supports the resource. Nothing more nothing less. It's not about the animals. We as hunters are the ones that put the value on them.


 It really is about the animals because without them, or the tag to hunt them there is no way folks ore going to be paying $7,500 to get on private property to sight see. I guess I would feel better about it if people would advertise the permit for $40 and the trespass fee $7,460


----------



## Blanding_Boy (Nov 21, 2007)

You all keep using the word tag. I've said this before time and time again. Unless you are in some sort if depredation mitigation system, landowners DO NOT GET TAGS, they get a voucher which is redeemed through the state of UT by one purchasing the tag for the price we the people have determined that animal or the opportunity to hunt that animal to be worth.

Now if a private landowner provides more towards that opportunity such as better habitat, a place to sleep, higher densities of animals and so on i have a hard time understanding why anyone cares the price they can fetch for that increased opportunity. Certainly i think we could and perhaps should put forth some restrictions on unit wide vs the private ground but i fail to see why it matters what one charges for goods or services that one provides as a business. 

Lastly and i have asked this before you all complain about this but not one of you have ever pitched or provided input to the wildlife hoard on how to compensate landowners who provide habitat some provide substantial in both food and cover.

All I'm asking is instead of us complaining about how unfair it is (and i know for a fact if you had land you would be singing a different toon) lets provide some viable input as to different alternatives.


----------



## Mathis (Aug 27, 2013)

Hi, This is my first post... I use this site mostly for info. Great site!

Just my 2 cents to add about this topic.
I have 1600 acres up by Scofield. I get landowner tags (buck) and depredation tags (cows). I looked at the ad on KSL and I believe he is selling depredation tags. My landowner tags are only for family and are not transferable nor can I sell them. They can be used anywhere on the unit. As for my depredation tags. I can sell these to anyone for any amount but the tag can only be used on our property. 

As for the amount to sell the tags for.... our country was built on capitalism. If you are willing to pay the high price, more power to ya.
I honestly do not believe in selling tags though. I give my tags to friends to fill there freezer.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Mathis said:


> Hi, This is my first post... I use this site mostly for info. Great site!
> 
> Just my 2 cents to add about this topic.
> I have 1600 acres up by Scofield. I get landowner tags (buck) and depredation tags (cows). I looked at the ad on KSL and I believe he is selling depredation tags. My landowner tags are only for family and are not transferable nor can I sell them. They can be used anywhere on the unit. As for my depredation tags. I can sell these to anyone for any amount but the tag can only be used on our property.
> ...


Welcome to the forum and thanks for the clarification!


----------



## hawkeye (Feb 18, 2008)

Todd, thanks for the response. You definitely are have a lot of knowledge and experience regarding this issue but you also have a bias.

The goal with landowner tags is to compensate the landowner for the contributions their land has made to wildlife (feed, cover, habitat, etc.). However, the DWR and sportsmen as a whole should carefully scrutinize how much those vouchers are selling for on the open market. It would be a different scenario if the landowner vouchers were only good for the private property in question. But that is not the case. Landowners in limited entry units are provided with vouchers for unit-wide choice of weapon tags, which they can sell to the highest bidder. Going back to the KSL ad in question, it is perfectly fair to ask whether contributions made by the landowner toward wildlife in the form of (feed, cover, habitat, etc.) justify the the roughly $15,000 of compensation he is receiving from the DWR. If not, then he is getting a windfall at the public's expense. If landowner vouchers were only good for the private property in question then most of those vouchers would sell for a fraction of the current price.

In summary, do landowners have a right to control their property and keep hunters off their property? Yes. Do landowners own the wildlife on their property? No. Should landowners be compensated with landowner vouchers? In some cases, probably. Do sportsmen have a right to question the number and value of vouchers provided to landowners? Yes. Is all of this leading to the further commercialization of hunting and wildlife? Yes.

Hawkeye


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Blanding_Boy said:


> Lastly and i have asked this before you all complain about this but not one of you have ever pitched or provided input to the wildlife hoard on how to compensate landowners who provide habitat some provide substantial in both food and cover.
> .


 I believe landowners are compensated if they participate in the walk in access program. Maybe more land owners should get on board with that program if they feel they need to be compensated for providing habitat, food and water.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Fowlmouth said:


> I believe landowners are compensated if they participate in the walk in access program. Maybe more land owners should get on board with that program if they feel they need to be compensated for providing habitat, food and water..........*and opportunity, letting people on THEIR land, giving up a fair amount of THEIR privacy*.


a little more to it than meets the eye.


----------



## Blanding_Boy (Nov 21, 2007)

Hawk clearly what landowners are getting is closely watched and scrutinized hence this thread. The only reason we care or that you care is because it's a big game and you all see it as taking something away from you that could otherwise be given to you or your friend or your relatives or whoever. At least you now you have a bit of an understanding of how the landowner sees it when it comes to loosing what was his to a public resource.

I absolutely agree with you we all have the right to question and scrutinize anything when it comes to our federal and or our state government. That's what makes America so great.

Bottom line is it's a program that was established by we the people. We the people can change or modify the program. Again that's the beauty of our system if you don't like something and get enough support and get it changed.

I've said it for years I've asked for years if there's a better program out that justly compensates the landowner for what they are actually losing I'm all ears let's talk about it


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

KineKilla said:


> Nobody owns the wildlife...not me, not the landowners and certainly not the government.


 Utah Code Section 23-13-3:
"All wildlife existing within this state, not held by private ownership and legally acquired, is the property of the state."


----------



## GBell (Sep 2, 2013)

Good catch 22 here. 

Landowners are entitled to compensation
For crop loss and damage caused by wildlife. 

That being said, I am biased just as much as Todd is
Just in different directions. 

I believe that landowners see these hunt prices and they
Are encouraged to further restrict access. To be fair to Todd's 
Point of view this also means better habitat for our herds and 
Better escapement. 

As I said, I believe in fair compensation, I don't believe in turning
The peoples wildlife in to a cash crop.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

chukarflusher said:


> If you go east to the whitetail states and mostly private property do the land owners get tags as well?? I don't know I'm just wandering I don't think they do but could be wrong


As a landowner in OK and AR, I know they don't.

Otherwise it depends on the state, but most that I am aware of do not give any incintive to a landowner unless you sign up your property in either a state or federal sponsored program, however some do give out reduced cost licenses to landowners.

If you are suffering damage, the dnr or G&F will issue depredation tags to he landowner or help midegate the damage. You report the damage, an officer checks the claim and then they decide what course to take.

You always here how everything is leased back east, but that is mostly bs to drive up prices and open up wallets. While it's true a good portion of land is leased, just as much is not. Not everyone is greedy for $; some folks even will let you hunt at the asking, you just gotta ask around.

We don't lease any of ours for deer or turkey hunting, but will ocasionally lease a few crop fields to waterfowl hunters.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

You guys are tooooooo funny .

This has been going on for 25+ years ....

I bought my first landowner voucher back in 1992.
An Anintaquin ( now Wasatch) LE elk permit for $1,100.00

I'm curently working on a Voucher for 2015 .. we'll see what happens.

There are MANY reasons these programs are ,,, The way they are.

But if your just figuring out they exist, Well, there's alot of history that makes them this way...


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

goofy elk said:


> You guys are tooooooo funny.


Translated: "You guys are all idiots and I know everything."

We know we know. We've been told many times by the enlightened crew on here. We're trying. Please be patient with us.-----SS


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

If I have read some of the previous comments correctly, it sounds like a landowner can sell a UNIT WIDE voucher for any amount of $$$ he chooses.

Question:
If a landowners property is getting damaged from deer/elk, why wouldn't the vouchers only be issued for that property? Why would a deer/elk that's 50 miles away on public land that will never visit the private property need to be killed?


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

Interesting discussion, since I have been involved with managing my wife's family property I will add my two cents.

I have acquired several types of tags, we used to have some property in a CWMU, the DWR determined the amount of tags available by the amount of land and the unit involved, CWMU tags can only be used on that CWMU property, if the private property surrounds public land you can request that that public land be included in the CWMU, ours had a few school sections included. The CWMU was comprised of several land owners, it was for elk and you needed a minimum of 10,000 acres for a CWMU, a Deer CWMU does not require as much land but I have forgotten the size for deer.

I have purchased landowner tags for deer and elk, you can get one buck tag for every 640 acres, these tags have to be issued to a family member but they are unit wide tags, also you can combine property to add up to the 640 acres and the property can be in different units, for example one tag I get for the family is land combined in 3 different units and I can pick the unit that tag goes to at the time I apply. We only apply for the landowner tags when someone in the family doesn't draw on the regular draws.
The land that was in a CWMU is now in an association, we get less tags but the tags are of more value because the association gets unit wide tags in an LE unit. This is for Elk, and depending upon the sale price of the tags which have sold for anywhere between $7K and $15K each we receive about one to two dollars per acre after administrative costs.

Then there are depredation tags that are determined upon the amount of animals in the unit and the amount of damage that your land receives. These are vouchers that can be sold to anyone but they have to hunt on that property, they are not unit wide.

This is just from my experience and I know that there are also other tags that I have not researched.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

I'm okay with landowner LE tags being allowed to hunt the entire unit as essentially it is to compensate the owner for "housing" the animals. However, do the landowners have to disclose to the DWR how much they were sold for? Some would argue it doesn't matter and is not my business. I think if it is to compensate, the DWR should know what certain tags are worth in order to accurately compensate in the future. I think the price for these tags will go up in the near future as the probability of drawing a tag decreases and that should be taken into account.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

I also wanted to add that on the CWMU and the Association tags, the amount of tags are determined by the unit and the size of the herd(s) for that unit, and I don't remember the percentage but "X" number of tags goes to the public draw per "Y" number of tags that you get to sale. The price is determined by what the hunters are willing to pay. You have to give the public draw holder very similar hunting opportunities as the private but you can limit the type of access, like foot or horse only, no 4 wheelers or trucks, etc.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

JuddCT said:


> I'm okay with landowner LE tags being allowed to hunt the entire unit as essentially it is to compensate the owner for "housing" the animals. However, do the landowners have to disclose to the DWR how much they were sold for? Some would argue it doesn't matter and is not my business. I think if it is to compensate, the DWR should know what certain tags are worth in order to accurately compensate in the future. I think the price for these tags will go up in the near future as the probability of drawing a tag decreases and that should be taken into account.


I don't remember a requirement to tell how much they are sold for, ours was on a type of auction, the guides would say how much that they would pay for the tag for their client. But I don't think it is private how much one pays. For example I know that some of the Alton Paunsaugunt CWMU deer tags go for $15K. I know that some of our LE elk tags have gone for $15K and some of them have gone for $7k.

I know a lot of the cost is determined by the size of the animal taken in previous years, for example when the elk taken score in the high 300s to low 400s the price will go up the next year, if the bulls taken score below 350 the price will drop.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

bowgy said:


> I also wanted to add that on the CWMU and the Association tags, the amount of tags are determined by the unit and the size of the herd(s) for that unit, and I don't remember the percentage but "X" number of tags goes to the public draw per "Y" number of tags that you get to sale. The price is determined by what the hunters are willing to pay. You have to give the public draw holder very similar hunting opportunities as the private but you can limit the type of access, like foot or horse only, no 4 wheelers or trucks, etc.


I posted a thread with more info on this:

http://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/84234-information-recommendations.html

Has all the links you need...


----------

