Wildlife as a Farm and Ranch Business

Introduction

Wildlife is a big business in Colorado. Hunters and anglers spend about $2 billion in the state each year. Wildlife, born and raised on private lands, can be enjoyed by both landowners and recreationists. However, the relationships between farmers, ranchers, recreationists, and wildlife have not always been positive. Some landowners treat wildlife and recreationists as assets while others consider them to be negative.

A business needs a supply of products and the demand to use them. Elk, for example, have increased in Colorado since the turn of the century and have become the state’s number-one generator of hunting revenues. Deer have their ups and downs. Pronghorn antelope maintained a relative static level due to management goals of keeping numbers within tolerable limits on private lands. If landowners want more antelope, the population can increase. Hunters want more antelope and they usually must wait to accumulate preference points before being awarded a license. Demand exceeds supply!

A Ranching Business

Wildlife is part of the ranching business, no matter how one looks at it. Landowners can manage private lands by tolerating wildlife, by making claims for damage payments, or by planning for wildlife as a part of normal operations. 

Wildlife provides recreational opportunities and a cash flow potential without additional investments or out-of-pocket cash expenditures. However, wildlife has a cost to landowners either directly, through forage used by wildlife, or indirectly, through time and effort associated with managing hunters and other recreationists. 

Landowners manage hunters indirectly, regardless of the system, either by allowing access, closing and patrolling land, or charging an access fee. The combination of wildlife presence and good hunting possibilities can mean good business for landowners. 

A lot can be learned about rancher/hunter relations and livestock/wildlife management from the way things are done in Texas. Texans are proud of their cattle and their hunting. They coexist nicely because ranchers profit from wildlife. Some ranches have decreased cattle numbers to encourage more wildlife and greater profits. Ninety-eight percent of the land is private. Texas private land supports 10 percent of the cattle and 20 percent of the deer in the 48 continental states. 

Colorado is the best overall big game state. One-third of Colorado’s land is publicly owned, but private lands support significant quantities of wildlife and can provide higher quality experiences for hunters than public lands. Thirty percent of big game populations in Colorado are on private lands and 80 percent of animals likely use private lands most of the time. Many hunters prefer experiences on private property.

What Hunters Want

Speculation about the value of private lands for hunting in Colorado led Colorado State University to conduct several studies over the past 30 years. One study indicated that resident big game hunters thought private land access needed to be improved. That same study showed that 25 percent of nonresident hunters paid access fees and 50 percent of the nonresidents desired private/public land combinations for hunting.

A 1979 survey reported that 78 percent of nonresident hunters and 48 percent of resident hunters would consider paying fees.

Hunters want good experiences for their money. A 1975 University of Colorado study and a 1979 Colorado State University study identified respectively that hunters desired larger game populations and greater chances of getting a deer. One study also indicated that hunters prefer fewer other hunters in the same area where they are hunting. About one-third of hunters and anglers in a 1992 study from CSU were concerned with on-site crowding.

For most hunters, the combination of good wildlife populations, higher chances of success, and fewer other hunters nearby can be found only on private lands.

Leasing Systems

There are two primary ways to grant hunting or fishing access for a fee:

• Season-long leases
• Daily leases

Season-long leases (i.e. a specified number of hunters are given access rights for an entire season) are generally the most popular option.

Landowners and clients make formal usage agreements, which don’t need to be complicated. These agreements can include payments, procedures, and acceptable behaviors. Lodging can be provided or a place to set up camp determined. Guide services and horses may also be part of the agreement.

Landowners generally increase profits and overall satisfaction when offering fee-based recreational services. One advantage to the season-long system: Hunters often take pride in helping to oversee and patrol the property. Landowners also benefit by knowing who will be using their land.

Daily usage fees are simple to operate. Usually only land and water resources, with no recreational services, are offered. Processing and directing more people each day remains the biggest disadvantage of the daily fee model. However, profits may be higher compared to season-long leases or fees.

When one of these two systems or a combination is selected, landowners should provide quality experiences for and expect quality behaviors from hunters. Eliminate any surprises by developing a lease contract that clearly outlines responsibilities of the seller and buyer.

Cooperatives and Partnerships

Some ranches or farms are large enough and have sufficient number of wildlife to be independent. When land areas are small and when wildlife populations roam unpredictably over several properties, cooperatives or partnerships among landowners are best. 

Write contracts among or between landowners to ensure thorough understanding of how the operation will function and the responsibilities of each party. Usually one or more people within the cooperative run the operation. 

Cooperatives are useful when animals feed on one property then leave by the hunting season. Profits from access to some partners’ lands are then shared with partners whose land helps feed and maintain the game animal supply.