It's a shame what we have to pay for hunting game that are not local to us. What really makes it bad is all of the Skamers that are offering hunts. I know references, references, etc. but, If I don't personally know the folks giving the testimony, it doesn't hold much water w/ me.

What really gets me is how Outfitters are charging such high fees to hunt NA big Game. For instance ELk hunts for 5000 - 25000 dollars, that's just plain rediculous. I know supply and demmand but, people should still have more ethics.

I know several people that hunt under Outfitters that lease land for dirt cheap and the turn around and rip them a new one. Sometimes the hunters get in good w/ the Land owners and then go straight to them w/ a propostion to cut out the middle man. I'm not saying that is right but, if a man is going to charge outrageous amounts to make huge profits, he has it coming.

Not saying their is not many good honest Outfitters and Guides Out there, there certainly is but, there are alot of folks out there that are making a bad name for outfitters as a whole.

Oh well, got to vent alittle every now-and-again.

Good Luck!

Reloader

Hunting and fishing is becoming a rich man's sport - it all stems from TOO MANY PEOPLE.

Right you are. See Cairo,Egypt 1993 world population conference sponsored by the U.N. 5 year study of a sustainable human population. Best guess 1.75-2.0 billion. ooops

Too many people, too little game, to high of insurance & fuel, to little land to hunt on. Add to that the fact that you can't mass produce good hunting and you can see why hunt prices are not coming down.

quote:

too little game

That is true mostly for the highly desirable "trophy" species/specimens, not nearly as true if you just want to hunt.

White-tailed does are plenty abundant back East and they need to take more of em'.

Same with black bears in the lower 48.

The challenge in the future for wildlife managers is gonna be finding enough hunters to take as many as should be taken.

Perhaps a little less should be printed in the hunting media about, "hunting the trophy" and a little more on management oriented hunting.

Sad but true. Just look to Europe to see the future of hunting in the USA.

In some way I understand you and even agree with you, but I think that the farmer or who ever that owns the place, started to see that they can make more profits with hunting than with cattle (or with both of them), so they charge the outfitter or anyhow you want to call the man that settle all up for your hunt. Most of the time he must travel a lot to find new places and new farmers willing to start to take care of the game in their farms. At the same time he must put money to promote his hunts and he must spend A LOT of time out home away from family. It's not so easy as many will think...

From the moment the farmer see the business is better for all of us but he will want to make money so this go on and on....

I believe this is the normal way, or the aceptable way....but at the same time there are some people that are record hunters instead of trophy hunters...so they are willing to pay huge amounts of money to get a record animal, and you know, it's all reduce to offer and demand.

To each his own and everyone is free to do with his money whatever he wants, there are cars of $300,000 rifles of $150,000 hunts of 25,000 etc etc

My 2 cts

L

I think it is a matter of how you want to hunt, and what, relatively speaking, constitutes "expensive". I hunt elk in Colorado, deer in Wisconsin, Texas, and here in Iowa, and occasionally in Pennsylvania. I am 47, work about 50 hours a week, I have five kids, two of whom are presently in college, and two recent grads, a mortgage, loans, credit cards, yada, yada, yada... In other words "average". I think you just have to be creative. I hunt on my own, make my own contacts, and, although I don't get to hunt as much as I would like to, I hunt as much or more than most guys I know. It helps to get involved in organisations that have to do with hunting, like, Whitetails unlimited, pheasants forever, etc. You need to do some networking. I can't afford outfitted hunts, at least for now, but I can still hunt, you just need to work at it a bit harder.
As far as outfitted hunts, I don't see them coming down in price, the outfitters, and guides have a great deal of overhead to deal with, and I hope by the time I can afford to do it, they haven't been driven out of business. The states aren't helping either, as tag prices for non residents have really gotten out of hand. I know that if I didn't live in Iowa, I wouldn't pay their non resident tag price to hunt here.

DGK

I pretty much hunt every game animal in our state as well as a couple of other states just for mere liscense fees and every day expenses. One thing that really gets me is when you see outfitters coming in a paying one time fees to land owners to take a few hunters on their places while, I'm hunting just over the fence line for chump change and they are getting ripped a new one to hunt the same game.


It really gets me is how cheap it is for locals to hunt the same game that non-residents pay 1000s to hunt. A while back we were coming through New Mexico and stopped at a gas station and the guy had some huge elk horns laying around for sale. I asked how he got them and he said it was a piece of cake getting these monsters, he said they just went up the road on an apple tree farm that a local owned and they could shoot one just about like shooting a cow but, most of you know just as well as I, the elk hunts in that area were well over $5000.

Must be nice.

Reloader

Well, far be it from me to defend the outfitting industry, too much experience over too many years. I've seen ugly from the inside. I was a licensed outfitter here in Montana for over a decade and I can assure you it isn't an "high profit margin" business.

Phil Shoemaker wrote an excellent article in I believe Successful Hunter, but it might have been Rifle about the costs of guiding. I recommend that you all read it and then throw rocks about costs.

One point I'd like to make is about insurance. Liability ins. for outfitters is not cheap by any means, especially when you consider the length of time one is actually exposed to possible claims. To help out nearly every state I can think of has an "equine outfitters" protection law in place. You pay to get on a horse, you assume all the risk. So, as an outfitter you are protected from your clients sueing you. The exemption does not apply to your guides. In most states guides are employees, and as such covered by workmans comp. If the words "worksmans comp." don't make your blood run cold, I guess you're not in the construction business or any number of areas that have high claims and rates. With horses it's not a question of if you're going to get stepped on, kicked, bit or thrown, it's when, how often and how badly are you going to get hurt. At one time in Montana the rate for horse packer guides exceeded anything in the logging industry!

I think one of the major differences contributing to the enormous cost difference between North American and Africa is the length of season.

With bow season an NA outfitter might have say 10 weeks a year with most species in his area open to hunters to make money. In reality many states don't have that many overlapping seasons for every species.

Now, my PH in Namibia constitutes a servey of one, but he ran his hunts over a 16 week "core" period with another 8 to 10 weeks available. Every animal on his property was available during all 26 possible weeks of hunting.

Then lets look at the species available.

In MT you guide for mule deer, antelope, whitetail, elk, black bear and possibily lion. Sure total of 6. Sheep, goat and moose are available but only on drawing with relatively low chance of success expecially for non-residents.

My PH in Namibia had 15 species of large game available on the property. Keep in mind that even in Montana game densities are nothing like those in Africa.

There are plenty of things to bitch about the outfitting "industry" in the USA, I could really bore you to death on this one, but I don't know that their cost of operation is actually one of them.

HunterMT... good post.

Regarding liability insurance, how bout being shot by a client like J. Davis's son last fall! Man...

Not at all. Competitive hunting is getting high, but hunting is not.

Once you get out of the "scores" and "points" game, and the "club" species such as dove, hunting is alive, and well. You can go shoot all the rabbits you want. Lots of farmers welcome you with open arms if you want to reduce the feral hog population. If it's just shooting pigeons, there are lots of farm-wives that would even make you a pot of coffee if you took care of the stink-birds.

Want to hunt deer? No problem. Lots of places where you can go shoot a doe. Cow elk? No problem. Idaho can't even get all it's tags sold.

Want to hunt birds? Quail and pheasant might be rough, but I can put you on a couple of dozen of ruffed grouse a day in Idaho, for the cost of a small game license. Ditto for sage grouse, chukar, even sharptails.

If you are a true hunter, it makes no difference if you hunt bucks or does, chukars or quail. It's all hunting and it all brings back meat for the table. If you want to "compete", well, competition in anything is expensive. JMO, Dutch.

The truth is, none of the financial and legal realities of the outfitting business are ever going to change in this country, and they're likely to get much worse. The price of trophy-quality game on an outfitted basis is only going to go up. Complaining will not make the price go down!

Given the competitive nature of the record book-oriented trophy hunting community, there will, I think, remain a pool of affluent hunters that'll keep good outfitters in business, at least for a time, and as long as the economy allows.

An outfitter is only as good as his last two seasons, and he's only as good as the habitat and game in his given area will allow him to be. Outfitters tend to come and go on a regular basis, which is an indicator of the rather fragile nature of the industry as a whole in the U.S. The top outfitters always seem to be coming up with new areas, new properties to hunt. The guys who are successful and make the same areas work for many years running have huge pieces of real estate to work with, and they don't hunt all of it every year.

Africa remains the world's greatest hunting bargain, and the world's greatest hunting experience. Nothing here compares to it here, and the emphasis of much of my hunting switched to Africa more than ten years ago. A good safari is worth at least ten years worth of hunting in this country. If you want to truly know about rifles, bullets, scopes, what works and what doesn't, Africa is the laboratory -- the world's best laboratory by far.

Nevertheless, if trophy North American game is what you seek, the price is only going to get steeper if you want to go guided. The best solution is spend plenty of time scouting and uncovering trophy areas in your own state. I know great trophy units to hunt here in Oregon -- areas that we used to hunt year after year. But some of these units, particularly for mule deer, have been essentially destroyed as trophy areas over the last fifteen years, and no matter what, the best mule deer and elk areas must be drawn.

I know this: The way the drawing process goes in this state to hunt my choice units, I'd have to go through the apply/draw/hunt process for about 100 years in order to come up with the same amount of hunting experience I'd get on a 21-day Tanzanian safari, and the cost would actually be much greater. That's why I primarily hunt Africa and out-of-state.........

AD

quote:

Africa remains the world's greatest hunting bargain, and the world's greatest hunting experience.

I don’t like the auspices for African hunting. Prices are constantly on the increase. As it is, Zim is on the verge of civil war and I don’t think it’ll be any better in the next couple of years. Tanzania and Botswana are both so freaking spendy now that the they are beyond the average hunter. Zambia and Mozambique are still faint possibilities, but the costs there are getting steeper everyday. Five or so years ago they were affordable, but the governments there have figured out that decent wildlife management can be a golden goose, and they’re making the eggs roll out bigger and bigger until they’re almost as bad as both the Bechuanaland Protectorate and Tanganyika.

That pretty much leaves all the action in RSA and Namibia. The problem there is that they’ve gone more and more to the package hunt. By that, I mean that they are getting pretty Texanized. No tent camps, so the African experience is considerably diluted. Instead, they want you to stay in their lodge. That is a matter of economics. The owner/operator has to maintain a household and a base of operations. The base of operations has to have rooms for the incoming and outgoing hunters. Why leave them empty during the main hunt? The number of staff increases (along with costs), and the tenting equipment needs to be maintained (again, costs). To keep their costs down, they are just dispensing with the tented camps altogether. Lodge life gets old, real fast. You get up in the AM and get in the jeep and go for a ride until somebody sees a huntable animal, and they mostly know where they are because the patches of habitat are limited, so they know where the critter simply has to be. There are getting to be 2 kinds of ranches in RSA (what I have to say also applies to Namibia in many respects); hunting ranches and game-raising ranches. The hunting ranches are small enough (even though they may enclose 10 square miles or so behind their fences) that they can’t raise enough game to have both the trophies and the necessary breeding surplus. Accordingly, the hunting ranches overharvest their crop and then replace it with new animals bought from the game-raising ranches. That means that the hunting is almost on a put and take basis. Yep, there’s always going to be a few good operators around, but they’re getting to be more and more of a premium, with prices to match. All this leads up to the end of real African hunting unless you’ve got really deep pockets.

In many ways, North American hunting is looking better and better.

I think guided hunts are within reach of more people than ever before both in availability and from a cost standpoint. No, they are not cheap but they never have been.

Jeff

HM,

Most of the outfitters I've be around had normal jobs for most of the year. I'd say clearing a couple of grand per hunter for a few weeks in the fall is not a bad little side job. It's nothing for a small time outfitter to take 10-20 hunters in a few weeks.

Dutch,

I'm not talking about just hunting local game. Sure, it's cheap to hunt locally, It's no problem here taking 10-15 big game animals a year but, it sure is nice to go to some unfamilar territory and hunt game your not used to hunting and that my friend is by no means "cheap."

It's no different than all of the other dishonest businesses out, after all, Outfitters are salesman. Some are just like used car salesman but, there are some good honest folks doing it as well.

Reloader

I think AD summed it up pretty good. I always like to plan at least one "big" trip per year, but there are lots of other ways to hunt as well.

But besides cost, you only have so many years to hunt (or live). There is a concept in economics called "opportunity cost." Too often, hunters forget to consider it.

I would add predator hunting, such as calling coyotes and bobcats, is a pretty damn fun hunt. And just about free.

Everything that everyone has stated here is true...458Win summed it up pretty good..an so has everyone else...my cut on it, starting later in life...mid-40s (I'm 52 now), my cut on it was to do my best to work at hunts that I can do myself...in Alaska...you need to start when you are 20 something to work thing out..so I have been working hard to catch up..to get some of most of NA most sought after game...brown bear, caribou, Dall sheep, Mt. goats, moose, and even polar bear..in the lower 48 I have shot most major game species..not all but many. It does take time and money... Africa is truely challanging and expensive...but we have to trade one thing for another...I have hunted and seen things that I never would have seen or hunted in the lower 48 here in Alaska...and that come with a price...But I have spent time in Africa and I will be going back soon, and that come with a price too. God knows what price I am paying, but that is the way it goes.

If it was easy and cheap, there would be no game to hunt. And I work for a living...it is tough but worth it.

quote:

Originally posted by Dutch:
Not at all. Competitive hunting is getting high, but hunting is not.

Once you get out of the "scores" and "points" game, and the "club" species such as dove, hunting is alive, and well. Want to hunt deer? No problem. Lots of places where you can go shoot a doe. Cow elk? No problem. Idaho can't even get all it's tags sold.

If you are a true hunter, it makes no difference if you hunt bucks or does, chukars or quail. It's all hunting and it all brings back meat for the table. If you want to "compete", well, competition in anything is expensive. JMO, Dutch.

Couldn't agree more Dutch. The macho, "It has to have big horns, or it's not hunting", mentality is a part of the problem. In my local club the guys just castigate you if you shoot a doe. You are not a "real" hunter if that is all you get. On my Texas lease 13 guys pay $1800 each for 5300 acres and they don't want you to shoot any does, or bucks under 150. Last year that meant two bucks for $26,000. Sorry I don't get it. I actually killed a doe and a smaller buck there last year and they have "encouraged" me to wait for a good one this year. Guys, I am an Arkansas school teacher and I can't afford over $2000 a year to maybe get a nice buck every five years or so. I have not ever seen a 135+ deer on the hoof, and I will shoot the first one I see down there.....then maybe I'll wait for the 150+. That the other 12 are willing to "trophy hunt" at such a price and talk a lot about what a good deal it is astounds me. Guess I am off base...........

Reloader,
You are correct, I always had another job, or rather another business. It's tough to just quit for a few months unless you are the boss.

However, insurance isn't sold for a few weeks, you pay for a year, horses eat year around and the vet bills are there too. Granted some rancher outfitters use their horses year around, but a lot of ranchers I know have "horses" named Yamaha and Honda because they are a lot cheaper to feed.

Capital equipment that is only used for those few weeks of hunting season has to amoritzed during those few weeks.

Garanted it seems nice to make a few grand for a few weeks work, but don't forget it takes several times that gross to produce even that profit. The client pays for the costs.

If you want someone to do your scouting for your, buy tents and other equipment, provide a cook and meals, and pack your game out, you have to pay for it.

Hunting is expencive, the difference is whether you do things yourself (and spend your time and effort and money) or hire someone to do them for you ( and pay them for their time and effort and expences).

quote:

Originally posted by befus:

quote:

Originally posted by Dutch:
Not at all. Competitive hunting is getting high, but hunting is not.

Once you get out of the "scores" and "points" game, and the "club" species such as dove, hunting is alive, and well. Want to hunt deer? No problem. Lots of places where you can go shoot a doe. Cow elk? No problem. Idaho can't even get all it's tags sold.

If you are a true hunter, it makes no difference if you hunt bucks or does, chukars or quail. It's all hunting and it all brings back meat for the table. If you want to "compete", well, competition in anything is expensive. JMO, Dutch.

Couldn't agree more Dutch. The macho, "It has to have big horns, or it's not hunting", mentality is a part of the problem. In my local club the guys just castigate you if you shoot a doe. You are not a "real" hunter if that is all you get. On my Texas lease 13 guys pay $1800 each for 5300 acres and they don't want you to shoot any does, or bucks under 150. Last year that meant two bucks for $26,000. Sorry I don't get it. I actually killed a doe and a smaller buck there last year and they have "encouraged" me to wait for a good one this year. Guys, I am an Arkansas school teacher and I can't afford over $2000 a year to maybe get a nice buck every five years or so. I have not ever seen a 135+ deer on the hoof, and I will shoot the first one I see down there.....then maybe I'll wait for the 150+. That the other 12 are willing to "trophy hunt" at such a price and talk a lot about what a good deal it is astounds me. Guess I am off base...........

What concern is it if someone wants a trophy. As a hunter I shoot doe's or bucks in my home State, but if I pay to go on a hunt, I want to get a trophy or else I would just hunt at home.

This comes down to what your idea of hunting is. But in my opinion, when you as a hunter judge another hunter you are no better and in my opinion you are worse than a anti-hunter. Anti-hunter groups look at it as "Look even hunters don't like it" You wither support hunting or support non-hunting. There is no such thing as being on the fence and picking a choosing what you deem right or wrong.

I don't do any traditional hunting such as long bow or flintlock hunting, but I support anyone that goes it. So get over your high and mighty attitude and respect other wether you agree or disagree with there method. Yes hunting is hunting, weather for trophy or food.

befus:

According to you, you violated club rules about horn size and plan on doing so again if given the chance, you need to save your money before they kick you out as they should. You've got some very nice deer in Arkansas that you can hunt for a lot less money. You are off base. Find a club that better suits your hunting goals.

The "no does" rule sounds strange for managed lease as well, but I suppose there are still some people who don't know how to get better and bigger bucks. BTW, if there is a no doe rule, why'd you shoot one?

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
befus:

According to you, you violated club rules about horn size and plan on doing so again if given the chance, you need to save your money before they kick you out as they should. You've got some very nice deer in Arkansas that you can hunt for a lot less money. You are off base. Find a club that better suits your hunting goals.

The "no does" rule sounds strange for managed lease as well, but I suppose there are still some people who don't know how to get better and bigger bucks. BTW, if there is a no doe rule, why'd you shoot one?

Gatogordo, Very well put.

The lease I am on in Maryland, Me and my buddy made the rules. The farmer wants deer shot, we shot deer. Doe's and Bucks. It is always nice to find a nice trophy to get mounted. Last season I got a 10 point that is being mounted and I also got a nice doe I am having mounted. A trophy is what you make of it.

quote:

Originally posted by Reloader:
It's a shame what we have to pay for hunting game that are not local to us. What really makes it bad is all of the Skamers that are offering hunts. I know references, references, etc. but, If I don't personally know the folks giving the testimony, it doesn't hold much water w/ me.

What really gets me is how Outfitters are charging such high fees to hunt NA big Game. For instance ELk hunts for 5000 - 25000 dollars, that's just plain rediculous. I know supply and demmand but, people should still have more ethics.

I know several people that hunt under Outfitters that lease land for dirt cheap and the turn around and rip them a new one. Sometimes the hunters get in good w/ the Land owners and then go straight to them w/ a propostion to cut out the middle man. I'm not saying that is right but, if a man is going to charge outrageous amounts to make huge profits, he has it coming.

Not saying their is not many good honest Outfitters and Guides Out there, there certainly is but, there are alot of folks out there that are making a bad name for outfitters as a whole.

Oh well, got to vent alittle every now-and-again.

Good Luck!

Reloader

You live in the wrong place, my friend. Depending on how draws work out, I can get 2 whitetail tags, 3 mulie tags,(if drawn), a moose tag and elk tag, antelope tag for less than 3 hundred bucks. Thank GOD I live in Canada

I do not know how much whitetail or muley guided hunts are here in alberta,,but I know it will cost my wife and I about 6-7,000 dollars for a nice two week vacation and not get to hunt a damned thing..So with airfare here and a hunt I do not think it would be too far out of line..I am sure saskatchewan is similar priced..Guess i am lucky to live here with the moose elk and the nice deer as well as bears!!

"GETTING" TOO EXPENSIVE...I think we are way beyond that point..for whatever reason/s.. Black Bear hunts over $5000.00 and some in the $7500 + someones livin' "high" off the hog and then some !!!

Frank:

That's what is great about capitalism. If $5000 or $7500 is creating great profits for someone, then someone else will likely jump in and offer the hunts for less and still make a nice profit. Maybe you should go into Black Bear outfitting?

I've no doubt that some guides/outfitters make a very nice living, but there's a lot more to it than most people realize and the good ones, like good lawyers, charge more over time as their reputation develops.

I guess I look at it that if I were an outfitter and someone would pay me $10,000 for a hunt why in the world would I offer it for less? I certainly have never turned down a raise or a bonus in my career. As a consumer I have the choice. If something is out of my price range then I can either save for it or do something else. That's just life, whether it's a big house, fancy car, college for the kids, whatever. I spend way less time worrying about what I don't have than I do taking advantage of what I do.

Jeff

Well said Skibum. The plain and simple fact of the matter is that hunts cost what they do because there are people who are willing to pay for them, just as there are people willing to pay for $20,000 rifles, and $45,000 SUVs and $500,000 (and more) homes. The economy has been good to many people, and the stock market has been even better to many people. Those people have money and after waiting sometimes for years for the ship to come in they are now prepared to spend some of it, and damned be the cost. Hell, if I had Google at $50 a share and sold it at $299 a share I would be booking those $15,000 hunts myself!

So long as there is affluence there will be those who will provide service to those who are affluent.

What is the answer for all of us who cannot afford those hunts. Well, there is complaining about it. But there is also, as another poster has mentioned, realizing that one only has so many years on this earth and if one really wants to hunt these animals the best thing to do is work another job, or make some prudent investments, or do without some unnneeded items, and in general find a way to make the hunts you want to make. I agree with Alan. Unless there is a major recession or market crash, none of these hunts is going to get any cheaper because the supply of tags is limited and the demand is great, and anytime you have demand exceeding supply you are going to get inflation, whether it be in hunting or home prices or gas prices or anything else.