50 CIRCULAR 63 6, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



administer the area after it was established. In another State where 

 the game commission is administering a farm-game program, the 

 sportsmen reimbnrse the farmers for the time and material used in 

 improving food and cover conditions for wildlife. It has been found 

 that the average cost of supplying the annually renewable food and 

 cover is 12 cents per acre of huntable land. As it is estimated that 

 not more than one piece of game can be taken from every 4 or 5 

 acres, the program is rather expensive per head of game bagged. 



STATE-LEASED LANDS 



State game departments in a number of instances have leased lands 

 for public hunting. The rental payment is usually 10 or 15 cents 

 per acre. The objective is to keep lands open to hunting, but the 

 plan involves the fewest restrictive elements of any yet described. 

 The amount of the fee paid is controlled by the State which reduces 

 the possibilities of exploitation. The plan in practice seldom gives 

 a sufficient cash return to bring under it the better types of farm lands 

 or to provide for improvements through additional plantings, food 

 patches, or refuges. The statement has been made that the practice 

 has a detrimental effect on the general morale of both the sportsman 

 and the landowner. The owner feels that the better the hunting is 

 on his land the more his land will be overrun by hunters and. as 

 he ordinarily receives the same rate of pay for the land regardless 

 of productivity, it is not to his advantage to increase the quantity of 

 game or the carrying capacity of the land without additional cash 

 payments. The hunter is likely to be more careless of his conduct 

 on these leased lands, as he thinks he is there by right. Unless the 

 hunters' acts constitute vandalism, there is little likelihood that the 

 farmer will receive much satisfaction from the State. The plan is 

 not conducive to better cooperation, nor is it probable that it will 

 curtail posting or keep open good farm lands where hunting pres- 

 sure is intense. The possibilities are limited to marginal and sub- 

 marginal lands. In many instances, it might be more satisfactory 

 to buy them. 



STATE AND FEDERALLY OWNED LANDS 



It is not economically feasible for the State or Federal Government 

 to own or operate, for the primary purpose of game and wild-fur pro- 

 duction and utilization, large tracts that are adapted to the more 

 intensive types of agriculture. Such ownership and use must be 

 restricted to marginal and wild lands. Because of habitat require- 

 ments, these lands require considerable environmental control to 

 maintain a resident stock of farm game. Demand for hunting privi- 

 leges on private lands is usually found in States that still have ade- 

 quate public domain to provide free hunting opportunities. 



Public lands are not always open to hunting, as in many instances 

 they have been bought to establish refuges and sanctuaries and not 

 for use as hunting areas. It might be logical sometimes to establish 

 refuges on private lands and to open the publicly owned areas to hunt- 

 ing. When public lands are allowed to grow up with dense vegetation, 

 they become unsuitable as game covers, because wildlife requires a con- 

 siderable amount of open space as well as cover. Establishment of 

 such areas requires provision for proper management and care, which. 



