impediment to recreational and hunting access that is 

 provided based on compensation to the landowner. 



Discussion 



The proposed option may hold some promise for 

 additional private revenue and increased benefits from 

 an alternative use of farmland. ^^ If there is strong 

 public demand for access to private farmland, farmers 

 could earn income to supplement farm earnings. This 

 income would be derived from the compensation allowed 

 for providing increased public access. With so much 

 negative feeling aroused because of game damage, farmers 

 may gain increased satisfaction for maintaining wildlife 

 habitat if they are compensated in the manner proposed. 

 However, tradition may limit public acceptance of this 

 option. The public may view access to land as a right 

 by heritage even though such access is to private land. 

 This perspective may be particularly held by hunting and 

 sporting enthusiasts, who also must pay for hunting 

 permits and licenses. 



Furthermore, liability questions could complicate 

 matters. According to some experts, while the economics 

 exist for many small landowners to achieve greater 

 revenue from recreational or sporting uses for their 

 land as compared to income that might be earned by 

 raising a crop, liability exposure could be too great to 

 permit development of increased access to private 

 land.^"^ 



Finally, it does seem that providing an alternative 

 use of farmland could be very important at this time. 

 Under the federal Conservation Reserve Program, which 

 was enacted as part of the 1985 Farm Bill, as many as 



69 



