I have a friend that owns a ranch on the Stephens Eastland county line, it's 3200 acres and all wooded, no fields. It has a camp area for RV's with electric but no water. Ranch has some elevation with some hills. He's wondering if it's worth $15 an acre for year round hunting rights for no more than 12 guys, for next year. That's about 266 acres per man for $4000 each. I know the price for smaller places but not for one this size. I would think it might be a little difficult to find a group of 12 hunters.

Deer in that area are ok, 120-140" mostly, occasionally bigger.

What say the THF fellas, can he get $15 an acre?

He probably can, but 10 @ $4250-4500 ea. sounds better to me, little more room to spread out on.

He doesn't care if it's 6, 8 or 10 hunters, as long as he gets $15 per acre.

I think for good hunting property with a good to great deep population, $15/acre is about right.

All things considered, I think it will be tough to get 12 guys to pay 4000 each for that ratio of acres to hunter.
If they are Trophy type hunters I wouldn’t think it would produce enough mature quality bucks to satisfy 12 guys.
If they are not Trophy hunters it would be hard to find 12 that would pay that.
Less hunters than 12 and you don’t solve either of the above issues.
If you have a mix of Trophy and non Trophy guys then you really have an internal mess among the 12 and it will be a revolving door of turnover.
Just my 2 cents.

$4000.00 seems like an awful lot of coin for that type of hunting experience. I filled my 16k acre lease with a total of 8 hunters easily @ $5500.00 each. Less than 300 acres per hunter and everyone will be all over each other.

I agree with Freerange. Without any lodging or trophy potential I think 15 is too high. What does he want out of it besides the money? 12 hunters bringing in all that equipment and RVs and probably high turnover is something as a landowner I wouldn’t want to deal with. It would have to have year round access for that price and guest privileges for that price range…..

'm with freerange and Marc I hunt within 1.52 miles of eastland /Stephens county line and IMO opinion there are not that many deer for 12 hunters and as stated managing group of 10-12 can be a nightmare if not all on same page with management and guidelines. Quality group without turnover on that type offering may be difficult. He can probably get for first year

I gave him my recommendation. Those numbers were his numbers, I told him I thought he was a little off. I told him $13 an acre and no more than 10 hunters. I don't falt him, he's just trying to get what he can.

Nobodies faulting him, certainly not me. Just offering opinions as asked. Its easy to be a little more open with comments when the OP is asking for someone else.
As someone said, he can likely scratch and claw and get it leased first year. IMO, it will just be hard to sustain long term. Best of luck to him.

Yea, he's just Cowboy, he certainly knows about cows and running a ranch for cows, but not a lot about hunting. He had another place (720 acres) that I helped him with several years ago. Those hunters are still there. I just don't deal with ranches this size, most have been 300 to 700 acres.

Thanks for the opinions guys.

If it’s worth and can he get it are two different things.

He could likely get it…it’s not worth it for that size deer and not the acre per hunter ratio to me. I’d want 1:400 acres for that country and deer size. I’d be at $10-13 an acre

For that kind of money and deer size…I’d expect nice camp with power, water, sewer and cooler.

I would have to spend some time on the place before i would even consider it. If its a cattle ranch that make a huge differance in drought years. I had a lease in that area few years ago. Oilfield traffic another problem.

It would all depend on the place . Are most of the woods oak are mesquite. I would think maybe a mix in that area . How many tanks on it . Wheat fields are a plus in my opinion . I grew up in that area and always had more luck over fields . Oak trees are a plus as well. 12 people sounds like a lot to me as well . At 4000.00 I would be looking to shoot 150 class buck or better. 10 dollars an acre in that area is norm from my experience.

I think he could get 15 an acre if the place is nice. That close to Dallas etc. If it were mine I would be asking that.

You mentioned it has a camp area and electricity for RV’s. Would you be taking over a previous deer lease? That could be a red flag if so. The best leases have longstanding relationships between landowners and hunters and between lease members themselves. If the landowner leased the place recently, I would be curious why he’s looking for hunters to take it over. Either party may have good reason to end the relationship.

No maybe $10. an acre, for $15. i would expect better deer than 120 to 140. Water would be nice.

$15 seems high. Also, 12 hunters on that acreage would be a no go for me. $10/acre seems more reasonable with 8 guys.

I always hesitate to give out much info on my hunting lease but this example hits too close to home to resist. I also hesitate to ever use my lease as a comparison because its just very unique and would be hard for many to replicate.
We lease almost the same acreage (a hair more) as this example and are joined by much more acreage of the same families thats basically not hunted. Many amenities at the HQ that I wont list. Our cost per acre is more than fair compared to others and less than your example.
The BIG DIFFERENCE is we only have 4 hunters so we pay a lot per person.
{{What allows this to happen is the hunters and the landowner both share a common mindset in wanting low numbers of quality hunters that allows Trophy quality management.}} The hunters have to be willing to pay more per person for this privilege and the landowner has to be willing to take a little less per acre than he could get if he crammed in more hunters.
Its a WIN for us hunters cause we have less hunters to deal with and more Trophy bucks in the equation.
Its a WIN for the landowner cause its easier to keep a smaller group of quality hunters over the long term.
If he charged more per acre he would lose the high quality of hunter because that type hunter doesnt want to be crowded. So he has to have 2 to 3 times as many hunters and the type hunter that would be happy with that many hunters are not likely to be top notch quality guys. And, then, of course, way too many mature bucks get killed and the new group turns over and you go to a new group thats willing to settle for even less Trophy potential(cause it got shot out). So,its a constant revolving door of new hunters that are deplenishing the resource and poorer quality minded hunters each generation it turns over.
Also, keep in mind, that its much harder to keep turn over down on a larger group than a smaller one. Its not only the simple math, both also the dynamics within a small group allows for a tighter knit bond than a larger group. I managed a lease with 20 to 25 guys on it for 15 years and made it work. But it wasnt easy at all, so I know a little about big group vs little group.

The scenario we enjoy, that I laid out above, is easy to understand in theory but very difficult to pull off in the real world. The high cost of leasing makes this type situation difficult to find. For those that can make the money work, have a great group of guys and have the type of landowner that doesnt have to squeeze every penny, then I suggest keeping these key philosophies in mind when trying to structure a deal.
Stompy, I hope this isnt too far off base for your friends situation. Maybe if he understands this thought process and can find the right guys that do too, then maybe it can help all parties with longterm happines.

Freerange hit on an often overlooked facet of leasing. If the quality of hunting on your friends 3,200 acre property is currently worth $15/acre in that local market, parameters that will maintain or improve the current hunting quality to command that price/acre are necessary to realistically sustain leasing for that sum. Either keeping hunting pressure low enough to sustain the current herd dynamics or spending money on habitat improvement to support a larger population are the two ways to address that. My experience is fewer hunters paying more for more opportunity per hunter has a much better long term outcome. In my experience they will also take significantly better care of the land owners property.

Edit to add: I don’t know the market in that area but I would assume $15/acre is a premium. If in fact that is the case, hunter’s looking to take animals in the upper quartile for that area are your friends target lessee. Meat hunters can not make those numbers work.

I'm not even close that would pay that kind of money for a deer lease...ever, for those that do I can say I wouldn't want to be the lease manager....probably don't have one..lol

I agree with everything free range said. Smaller groups on big property is a win for the hunters and land owners plus quality deer.

A hunter I know hunts on 5000 ac.s . I don't know the total number of hunters but he is the sole owner. He has heads that will go beyond 170. Where I hunt 50 miles east, the best we get will be 130 to 135. Some say there are some 160's but i personally have not seen one yet.
I managed a 500 ac.s and if I got bucks with racks, 120-130, then I have done great. Where I hunt a buck is considered a trophy at 125.
I talked to a rancher around north of here as he was advertising 54 dollars an ac..I don't know what he ended up leasing it for.
With advertising you can get a lot for leases these days.

He could probably get $15 per acre. I think he'll have a hard time keeping hunters though. 120-140 is possible but that's the top 2 or 3 bucks they will see all year. That area even with 3,200 acres would have a hard time producing 12
legal 13'' bucks much less 12 trophies.

You can get 10guys @ 13-15 if you give them a locked in 5+ plus year deal.


If I owned it I would do $12 and no more then 8 spots with 5 year renewal