You didn't lose your lease....you gave it up.

You could still hunt but you have chosen not to do so.

If you can't hunt without your family/kid....it is your choice.

Landowner has the right to set the rules and you follow or leave.

So many things wrong here don't know where to start

First, you did not lose your lease. You elected not to hunt.

Second never heard of anyone getting into a "heated argument" with the landowner and have it turn out well. Did you really think getting heated with the landowner would work?

Does the LO lease to a group, or a bunch of individuals? If a group, then I would have suggested to the LO address his problem as a group - namely telling the one parent that the specific problem kid was banned.

If leased to individuals, then the LO should address the problem with that individual.

It sounds like you have/had some sort of personal relationship with LO since you were hanging out at his house. I would address the issue of kids with him WITH MY DAUGHTER PRESENT. For two reasons. First, to show that your child was different and respectful. Secondly, to have to the child hear the ban from the LO directly. Perhaps they would hesitate or make an exception when having to explain to child directly.

Finally, if you really made the decision to leave and the circumstances were untenable - you should have just quietly, discreetly gone anyway with your daughter. The worst thing that could have happened is that you would have been asked to leave - which you were going to do anyway.

Lastly, things like this are never best to be challenged or confronted directly or immediately. Let a day or two pass, then think about a strategy to reapproach the issue with the LO.

LO's, generally, are older folks with long years experience with kids. They know a single bad apple doesn't mean the whole bunch is spoiled - and know that parents come into play.

Just having a single kid that doesn't want to go out in the field doesn't sound right as to the whole story behind the sudden ban on kids. Sounds like there might be more to the story - so I would be hesitant to condemn the kid, LO, lessors, or parents until I knew the whole story.

I would demand a refund, and if he refused to refund and still refused to let your little girl come out then I'd skip the season and file a civil law suit. Uou been hunting there for 5 years with your little girl. He can't surprize you with a rule like that on the day you show up, with your child. That is a bunch of bull.

Personally, I'm glad there are no 5 year olds at our camp. it's just too young for our crowd. I have a 10 year old boy who hasn't gone yet (for different reasons). No need to force it, the language at our camp is course and there is much celebration. I'll take him and mama after the first of the year and fish the big pond.

To me if you cant take your kids with you because of what your doing or the people your around then maybe you shouldnt have had kids !
That just makes me so mad for people to say Sh@t like this after all your missing out on all the fun with your kids and teaching them what the outdoors are all about

To me if you cant take your kids with you because of what your doing or the people your around then maybe you shouldnt have had kids !
That just makes me so mad for people to say Sh@t like this after all your missing out on all the fun with your kids and teaching them what the outdoors are all about

guys its Coarse language not course language.

LO may have had an experience with a child that could have been life threatening and made LO want to eliminate the possibility of children in camp to avoid a possible injury, death, or lawsuit. I do not agree with it, but LO may have made the decision to remove children from the situation because an adult was not caring for his/her child. Most children problems occur because parents either are not watching them or do not discipline the children when the time comes. Adding children to a dangerous situation involving guns, open fires, SUVs, climbing into deer stands, snakes, etc. on top of a parent that does not properly supervise his/her child can unnerve older people who probably have the most to lose. I would have to bet that a lackadaisical parents is probably behind this new LO's rule.