Objectives of this research were (1) to describe fee hunting as it is currently practiced in Utah and (2) to assess the adequacy of fee hunting efforts in addressing the problems of wildlife habitat and hunter access on private land. To collect information, Utah landowners who charged for deer (Odocoileus hemionus) or elk (Cervus elaphus) hunting in 1986 were surveyed by telephone and mail. Compared to the average Utah livestock rancher, those involved in fee hunting have larger livestock operations and have owned their property longer. They are Utah natives. Fee hunting is concentrated in northern Utah where foothill and mountain rangelands are privately owned. There is great diversity in the way fee hunting is organized and managed. Hunting opportunities sold by lease usually include few services and require hunters to post and patrol the property. Hunts sold by permit may include more services and be personally managed by the rancher. In general, fee hunting in Utah is differentiated from public land hunting by the availability of more acres per hunter rather than by special services or trophy animals. Fee hunting serves mostly resident hunters. Average net annual cash income is $6587, or $0.66 per acre. The most common expenses incurred are for road and facility (fence, campsite) maintenance and vehicle costs. Highest expenses are those associated with providing services. Landowners initiated fee hunting in order to gain control over trespassing and cover the costs of having hunters on their property. Most do not buy liability insurance. Fee hunting is expanding the number and types of hunting opportunities and is meeting the needs of landowners to minimize costs of trespassing and hunters. However, fee hunting is not stimulating investments in wildlife habitat improvement. Because of intermingling landownerships and the migratory nature of deer and elk in Utah, investments in wildlife habitat or management have an uncertain return. It is unlikely that fee hunting can provide adequate incentives for improving wildlife habitat without substantial policy changes to enhance the ability of landowners to capture a return on such investments.

Ranching communities in Texas have long recognized fee hunting as a natural resource with the potential of directly affecting agricultural incomes. Hunting as an industry today, appears to be developing into an economic substitute for Texas ranchers who are accustomed to the variable nature of agricultural markets. To determine the economic impact of this market relative to its functional utilization by landowners, this research analyzed a large group of landowners in Central and South Texas. Information was collected through a personal interview process of 146 landowners. Data collected primarily related to the individual landowners' specific fee hunting operations and the economics associated with their enterprise operations. Response data was tabulated and examined through use of comparative analysis and bivariate methods when appropriate. Output yielded a descriptive demographic profile of landowners along with landowner opinion/attitude on ensuing constraints and values of enterprise operations. Additionally, costs and returns to operations were summarized through development of an enterprise budget by ecoregion. From this analysis, it became clear that many landowners possess strong 'feelings' about their lands and appear to share parallel ideologies relative to their properties as an earned entitlement and privilege to be passed along to their heirs. However, these Texas ranchers are well aware of the economic pressures under which they must operate and their commitment to sound land management practices increasingly includes wildlife management. This, much in part, is due to the dramatic increase in revenues generated by fee hunting enterprises over the past decade. However, the budget analysis indicates possible constraints when landownership size becomes smaller such as through the sale of parcels for business purposes or through inheritance.

The purpose of this thesis was to investigate Saskatchewan farmers’ perception of lease hunting in Southern and Central Saskatchewan. Wildlife habitat on privately owned farmland has been shown to provide significant public benefits to society at large. One method that has been shown to provide a greater private benefit to the providers of wildlife habitat is lease hunting which creates incentives to farmers to provide some of the direct use value of wildlife habitat. Since lease hunting with the current legal structure is not an option in the province of Saskatchewan, this study investigated farmers’ attitude to a hypothetical lease hunting option. A total of 84 in person surveys were administered to Saskatchewan farmers and 10 telephone interviews to outfitters operating in the province. The survey results indicated that Saskatchewan farmers are evenly split between supporting and failing to support the introduction of lease hunting. Econometric analysis using a probit model showed that farmers who are renting additional land to agricultural production, who allowed hunting on their land in the past are more likely to support introducing lease hunting. Farmers who have been asked permission to hunt on their land by recreational hunters were less likely to support lease hunting, confirming the lease hunting literature that states that the most important characteristics of lease hunting is the control over who accesses their land. Since farmers who have already been asked for permission to access their land already possess the control over their land they were less likely to support the introduction of lease hunting. Demographic variables such as age and education do not have an effect on attitude to lease hunting. The price of a day hunting lease was estimated among those farmers who were in support of introducing lease hunting. It seems farmers are willing to accept $90 per day for a day of recreational hunting access to their lands. A tobit model showed that farmers who rent more land for agricultural production would charge more for a day of recreational hunting access. Also those farmers who have high perceived quantity of wildlife on their land would charge more up to a certain point where wildlife nuisance quality becomes more prominent.

Ranching communities in Texas have long recognized fee hunting as a natural resource with the potential of directly affecting agricultural incomes. Hunting as an industry today, appears to be developing into an economic substitute for Texas ranchers who are accustomed to the variable nature of agricultural markets. To determine the economic impact of this market relative to its functional utilization by landowners, this research analyzed a large group of landowners in Central and South Texas. Information was collected through a personal interview process of 146 landowners. Data collected primarily related to the individual landowners' specific fee hunting operations and the economics associated with their enterprise operations. Response data was tabulated and examined through use of comparative analysis and bivariate methods when appropriate. Output yielded a descriptive demographic profile of landowners along with landowner opinion/attitude on ensuing constraints and values of enterprise operations. Additionally, costs and returns to operations were summarized through development of an enterprise budget by ecoregion. From this analysis, it became clear that many landowners possess strong 'feelings' about their lands and appear to share parallel ideologies relative to their properties as an earned entitlement and privilege to be passed along to their heirs. However, these Texas ranchers are well aware of the economic pressures under which they must operate and their commitment to sound land management practices increasingly includes wildlife management. This, much in part, is due to the dramatic increase in revenues generated by fee hunting enterprises over the past decade. However, the budget analysis indicates possible constraints when landownership size becomes smaller such as through the sale of parcels for business purposes or through inheritance.