|
|
Post by Bwoods11 on Dec 17, 2020 11:29:04 GMT -6
Forgot how many acres you own. Doesn't 80 get you a free landowner tag? Todd County GIS says 95.5. An 80 that's zoned ag gets you a free landowner tag that can only be applied to a doe. I am sure I could go in and get the tag since I've never seen anybody at Fleet Supply checking the zoning for some land owner's property. I have seen them check on acreage amounts. But it's a doe tag. I'm not shooting a doe. The Minnesota landowner doe tag is a odd tag. Yes it is free, I have one right now, I wait until after the gun seasons are over as the ruling states that you are supposed to allow public hunting? It is just a weird tag that is all I can say. I put my old landline in as my phone number. The state needs to revisit this dumb tag. First off, charge $5 or $10, the public hunting should be optional.
We have a couple properties that have too many does, we might use, we might not? They are not easy to shoot this time of year in the cold weather.
|
|
|
|
Post by smsmith on Dec 17, 2020 11:33:02 GMT -6
IMO...if there's gonna be a "free" landowner tag then it should be anybody who owns 80 (or pick some other arbitrary number) acres, is a resident, and whose property taxes are paid up.
My taxes are gonna be over $4K next year. I'm pretty Goddamn sure I've paid enough to shoot a deer of my choice every year.
Of course, no such logic would ever be applied in this liberal shit hole state.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bwoods11 on Dec 17, 2020 11:56:15 GMT -6
Typical MN can’t figure out a simple doe tag .
|
|
|
|
Post by smsmith on Dec 17, 2020 12:02:22 GMT -6
I've always assumed the "free" landowner tag for ag land owners was something the MNDNR did to try and appease farmers.
I am kicking myself for being honest when I bought this place. I could have easily left it as being zoned ag. I'm strongly considering sitting down with our attorney and discussing what it would take to turn this place into an LLC. I imagine I would need to show a profit at some point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bwoods11 on Dec 17, 2020 12:17:07 GMT -6
I've always assumed the "free" landowner tag for ag land owners was something the MNDNR did to try and appease farmers. I am kicking myself for being honest when I bought this place. I could have easily left it as being zoned ag. I'm strongly considering sitting down with our attorney and discussing what it would take to turn this place into an LLC. I imagine I would need to show a profit at some point. If you zoned it ag, how much would your taxes decrease? All my properties are Ag, but I do have crop on all of them? |
|
|
|
Post by benmnwi on Dec 17, 2020 12:27:17 GMT -6
The tax differences for ag homestead versus other classifications is huge in SE MN. Land with ag in Wisconsin also has much lower tax than recreation land. In our MN county if you have 10 acres of tillable land that is actively farmed your land can be called ag. You should be able to ask the county what is required to be called ag, but around here you need 10 acres of tillable or a much larger area pastured. I asked if I could just fence in 10 acres and pasture that specific location and they said that isn't enough. The pasture requirement is open to more interpretation than I prefer, but the 10 acres of actively farmed tillable is cut and dry.
|
|
|
|
Post by biglakebass on Dec 17, 2020 12:30:38 GMT -6
Not sure where to post this, but it kinda fits with the stupidity of state decisions on how stuff is done.... Go to the 9:50 mark in this vid and look what the state did to a Wildlife Management Area. And the Millenial Farmer nails it with his analysis. For the life of me I still cant understand why having a shitty wide open field is better for wildlife management. Oh yea, bringing the land back to its native look 200 years ago..... lotta good that does when we dont have Bison and shit that used to be here that needed the shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bwoods11 on Dec 17, 2020 13:08:29 GMT -6
BLB--that is in my county. Sad
|
|
|
|
Post by biglakebass on Dec 17, 2020 13:16:28 GMT -6
absolutely mind boggling. When we went to SD pheasant hunting late season.... guess where we found nearly all the birds.... In frickin brushy thick wooded areas. DUHHHHHHHHHHH.
I do not understand the logic at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnaaron on Dec 17, 2020 13:41:36 GMT -6
I have a friend who is a wildlife manager for US Fish and Wildlife and let’s just say we can’t talk about this subject since there is no reasoning with him. They feel everything should be back to grass with zero trees. No reasoning with them what so ever
|
|
|
|
Post by Bwoods11 on Dec 17, 2020 13:51:01 GMT -6
There is no logic, they simply don't know what they are doing. Every farm country public parcel should have a 5-15 acre shelterbelt of trees that will hold birds and other wildlife in tough conditions. Preferably next to cattails and then have sorghum near it. I know too expensive! Just a fricken joke. But they spend big bucks are knocking trees down!
...8-12 rows, spruce, cedar, pine, plum, chokecherry, sand cherry, crabapple, maybe one row of oak for long term. I don't hunt public, but I tried to stress this at a DNR meeting and they said no we like grass.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnaaron on Dec 17, 2020 14:17:17 GMT -6
I agree the shelterbelts in other states are usually a great place to hunt. Our state is run by ecologist...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bwoods11 on Dec 17, 2020 15:09:36 GMT -6
Public land in my area is funded and run by duck stamps/US Fish & Wildlife. They don't like trees. Might be a skunk in there. Leads to poor options for deer and turkey hunters.
|
|
|
|
Post by sd51555 on Dec 17, 2020 15:17:41 GMT -6
 That is the Northern Tallgrass Prairie Refuge. If they had their way, there wouldn't be a tree in any of the counties this land grab plan covers. During Dayton's tenure, he racked up almost a billion dollars with CREP III to buy easements out there. I'm fairly certain they'd own it all if they could find enough people willing to give it back to the state for 30 pieces of silver. If they paid $800/ac, they could buy easements on 1.3 million acres of ground. No biggie though. I hear MPLS is nice. And keep in mind, this is only one funding source gobbling up all that land. There's also the lottery, sales tax, bonding bill, pittman robertson funds, licenses, anti-hunting hunting groups (PF, DU, MDHA etc), anti-hunting groups (Nature conservancy), anti-human groups, etc. www.fws.gov/refuge/Northern_Tallgrass_Prairie/what_we_do/resource_management.htmlI've planted trees inside the boundaries of this zone. Forgive me father, for I know not what I've done.  |
|
|
|
Post by nhmountains on Dec 17, 2020 16:11:02 GMT -6
IMO...if there's gonna be a "free" landowner tag then it should be anybody who owns 80 (or pick some other arbitrary number) acres, is a resident, and whose property taxes are paid up. My taxes are gonna be over $4K next year. I'm pretty Goddamn sure I've paid enough to shoot a deer of my choice every year. Of course, no such logic would ever be applied in this liberal shit hole state. Does Minnesota have a tax choice for Tree Farms? Yours is tree farm. I know New Hampshire has that designation but, don’t know what it gets you. We have a tax option for land called current use. The tax reduction is about 90%. There can’t be any buildings built but, the state gets 10% of the timber va when or if it’s logged. It passes on to whoever you sell. If you take a chunk out of current use then you pay a 10% penalty. Seems to work out well for us. We don’t plan to build and I’m not sure if we will ever get logged so we’ve saved a big chunk of money. |
|
