Lease Boss

So I got this topic started on another forum. I think the only ones offened are the guys chiming in they are the lease bosses/managers.

I will give you my thoughts right now. There is no way you can justify having other lease members pay YOUR spot.

For what? A few phone calls etc?? SMH

Here it is. Chime in...


I had a conversation with my bud out in East, Texas. We were chatting about leases, members etc

He has 3 leases in the Huntsville area and his main lease in the hill country. He pays top dollar for his leases.

The interesting thing he was telling me is more so in east Texas, it is common for the lease boss/manager to pay nothing for his lease.

He splits the total price among his members, excluding himself and in a nutshell they pay for him.

Sounds chicken $%^& to me but he says some of those guys have the mentality that is one of their perks. I am not sure how common it is anymore. Interesting though

I wouldn’t pay for someone else’s spot...my

Nope

Yep

Sounds like something a democrat would do.......Don't tread on me!! The boss of all people should pull his own weight.

I found our lease, my name is on the lease, the electric meter is in my name, the land owner calls me with any issues, I need to scramble to find another person should someone leave, I have to set the rules (although we really don't have that many) and I pay the exact same amount as anyone else.

I am sure I could have found a way to discount myself, but most of the guys on the lease are friends or have become friends. Plus our lease is only 10 guys, so I couldn't see adding another couple hundred bucks to them just so I get a free ride.

Nope it’s not right but it goes on.....demand for hunting spots far outweigh the availability of land. Some people are willing to put up with more than they normally would especially on a good place.

I think the cost of the spot is relative to the way I would feel about it and the work that's involved for the "lease boss".

I mean are we talking $800 a spot or $4500? That's a big difference and would weigh heavily on how I would feel about it.

I bet it happens more than you think.If your not the lease boss/don't have communication with the land owner. How do you know what the total for the lease per year is?

Why the hell are you on a lease, that grouchy old fart in Howard county lets ya hunt for free. Matter of fact he told me to tell you he's developing a little bit of a hog problem and might need some help.

I don’t see what the problem is. If you don’t want to pay for his spot get off of the lease.

cap·i·tal·ism
ˈkapədlˌizəm/Submit
noun
an economic and political system in which a hunting lease are controlled by private lease bosses/managers for profit, rather than by the members.

That would not be for me but there may be a circumstance that permits the situation for some.

I have been a lease boss for 11 years on a large LF ranch - lots of money per gun - and I pay may own way. I also fully follow all of our rules. So I get NOTHING out of it financially - I do it because I get the right guys and I love deer and management.

However ----- for you to say "for what? a few phone calls?" - I am sorry but you are clueless. Go be a lease boss for a year or two and then report back here to tell us all that it only involves a few phone calls?

In most cases the lease boss signs the lease with the landowner - therefore THEY are fully financially responsible for the entire lease bill. The LB has to find hunters to fill spots. They have to collect the money. They have to answer to the landowner for hunter mistakes. They have to enforce the rules even when it is uncomfortable. They have to deal with a lease member who decides to fudge and break the rules. The list goes on and on. So again - until YOU have been a lease boss yourself then please restrain yourself.

I was for 12 yrs so yeah move along

There is no way you can justify taking anywhere from 2 grand on up as a lease boss from others. Hell for that fill our feeders, work the camp etc.

Secretaries need not apply.

so all you did was make a few phone calls? Sounds like a lot of bitterness on your part. How about YOU move along and get over it

And by the way you missed the part about "I pay my own way" = why are you mad at me?

It's chicken s@$t alright

Whooooo easy GF. I also ate their steaks and drank their beer.

Good luck to you - hope you can work through your issues - Adios

I have never been a lease boss/manager, but I don't have a problem with the lease manager splitting cost amongst all the other guns on a big property. I hunted on a 7,500 acre lease with 14 guns for over 20 years, and I never once asked the lease manager whether or not he is paying his own way or splitting his costs amongst the rest of us. First of all, I didn't think it was any of my business; I based my decision on whether or not I thought the hunting was worth the money, not worrying about whether or not he was paying. Second of all, he did a whole lot more than make a few phone calls. He would have to sign the lease and assume financial responsibility for the entire amount (which was quite a lot for such a big place), show the place to new hunters when someone left, field calls from current members as well as prospective members, manage blind locations, ensure agreed upon wildlife management practices were followed, enforce other lease rules, deal with all complaints, handle the water and electrical bills, etc., etc.

Now with that said, If I hunted on a smaller property with only 3-4 guns I am sure I would feel differently. Far less work with fewer people and less money involved. Now I hunt on family land, so no need to worry about such things .

No issues. We have no lease bosses.

My last lease was like that. Turned out the guy was only paying one of the heirs. When the others found out, everyone was run off the property and the place hasn't been leased since.

Typical east Texas B.S.

I'd pay for my share only, no free rides.

It depends on the situation. If I lease a ranch for 20 grand and find 9 other hunters to sub lease, it's none of their business what I paid. If I underestimate the value of the individual lease the difference is out of my pocket. It's a three sided contractual obligation. I can't just walk away from it.

Now, if 10 friends lease a place together, each is on the lease and one is the designated contact, that's a different story.


Many are chiming in without defining what they think a lease boss is.

If you don’t like it, leave it, or become the boss
I pay for my part of the lease, because it seemed worth what I was paying, if the lease boss comes out ahead, well God bless him. I don’t go around worrying about if I am paying more than another or that I am working more, I agreed to a $ and got what I agreed to.

Sounds like you had a civil action against somebody.

Out lease boss is real arsehole, he wouldn't even let me or Mrs. B shoot a buck last year. Cheap bastard makes me pay for all the corn!

Had a guy call me several years ago offering me a lease spot on a neighboring property. Don't need it since I have my own place but I thought I'd see what was involved. He went through all the details, number of hunters, costs, etc.
He didn't know that I know the landowner and also how much the hunting rights are leased for.
What he was getting from each member was enough to pay for his and his wife's way on the lease, and I also found out he and the wife had a "private" lease elsewhere that the consortium on the first lease was paying for- and they didn't know it.
Just another reason I'll quit hunting before I go back to leasing.

I hate friends like that!

Not sure if the lease members were in such a position but there was definitely a judgment received by the other heirs against the guy who had been getting all the money.

I did it for a long time and payed the same as everybody else

I am trying to remember, but I think years ago while on a lease out in Sterling City, the lease manager didn't pay for his spot. Everyone else did, but he was responsible for the lease in pretty much every way. If something went wrong, it was his [censored] that felt it from the landowner. He showed the lease, and then would check feeders for everyone as well. I guess if he does enough to warrant being able to hunt for free then so be it.
If not then, he should pay like everyone else.

I "managed" leases for 16 years, but was never considered a "boss". Yes, as stated above someone has to manage finances, electric, landowner requirements, etc. Everyone had full visibility into contract, electric bills and such. Paid my own way and then some, but that was my choice.

you betcha red rider

I almost got on a lease a couple of years ago where I wasn't sure if that was happening or not. Since we were supposed to pay the lease boss directly, I had no idea if the boss/bosses were paying or not.

On my current lease, each hunter has a contract with the property owner's LLC and each person pays the property owner directly. Our land owner also lives on-site and visits with us regularly. So it's a little different than the situation where you have an absentee land owner and one guy that talks to him/her.

I'm a landowner that leases out a good bit of property to hunters. Here is my perspective, gained by dealing with hunters. First off the hunting is about the least profitable thing I do with my property. The small dollar/acre sum it generates can easily be outweighed by the PITA factor. While I like the idea of sharing the hunting, especially with the young, a high percentage of hunters are completely clueless and unmotivated about taking care of my property. The time and manpower it would take to monitor and deal with would make it a losing proposition if I had to pay someone. That is where a good lease manager comes in. It's his time and his responsibility to see that my goals and interests on my property are not the impeded. The right guy taking responsibility for that, and me not having to worry with hunting or hunters, is worth the privilege of someone hunting free to me. Doesn't make two cents worth of difference how anyone else feels about it. I've had too many dumba$$es tear up roads, fences, crops, and even try to lock me out of my own place.

Lord knows I don't like to offend people so I'll try and be gentle. What's the difference between a salesman getting a commission on a 40 thousand dollar truck, a realtor getting a commission on a 150 thousand dollar house or a lease manager/boss taking his commission in trade for putting together the lease and taking on the responsibilities that go with it.

Example.
I'm the owner of say 5 sections and I want to lease it out for 2000 dollars a section. I have a man that tells me he can get that done and his commission for putting it together and handling the hunters is he hunts free. He takes the headaches of dealing with the hunter and also the responsibilities, I take the money. To be honest I think that's the way I would prefer it, I only have to deal with one person. I'm not sure how anybody can see a problem with this. The deal between him and I is nobodies business but ours, the rest is deals between him and the hunters.

A fool and his money are soon parted...

That is just as bad as the guy that organizes a hunt for a group and gets his "day hunt" as a freebie.

Probably more to that than you meant. With simple math. If you paid $2,000/acre and lease hunting for $10/acre you are making a half of one percent return on your investment. If you spend your time on projects at that return rate you won't own it for long.

There is no difference. Nobodies business.

His first name Bob???

I am fortunate that I do not have to deal with it.
But my play on it is if the LB does a good job and the hunting and environment is good for all the hunters then who cares, you get what you pay for

Now if the lease boss is an arrogant a hole and is abusing the lease by letting his family and friends hunt there, breaking game laws and acting like they own the place, then go some where else! Karma will catch up with them sooner than later

Years ago some buddies and I leased a big place outside of Fort Stockton. We sold guided hunts for the pronghorn tags and several mule deer hunts to some guys from Houston. We all hunted for free. Is that wrong?

Caveat emptor.

Under your circumstances and for you, probably not. With that stated I hunted and guided in Pecos County till about the last 4 yrs. There was only 8 landowner tags issued prior to 2011 to private ranches (not many antelope). After that no tags were issued due to the significant die off in area more so in the Davis Mountains towards Alpine. So maybe not wrong on your part but illegal as hell. Also note if you tell me it was NOT Pecos County all surrounding counties pretty much banned the hunting within the last few yrs as In Brewster etc. Oh look were is states LANDOWNER CONSENT, You are not or were not the Landowner.

https://tpwd.texas.gov/regulations/outdoor-annual/regs/animals/pronghorn#permits
Pronghorn Antelope May be Harvested by Permit Only
For all pronghorn harvested in Texas, a permit must be properly and completely filled out and attached anywhere on the pronghorn. Pronghorn permits are issued to the landowner or landowner’s agent in most areas where there is an open season for pronghorn (the Trans-Pecos, Permian Basin and Panhandle); however, the department is testing an experimental, buck-only season in selected areas of the Panhandle. On properties within the experimental areas, hunters must obtain a FREE Experimental Pronghorn permit directly from the department or a participating local merchant, not from the landowner. Hunters must still obtain landowner consent to hunt (killing a pronghorn without landowner consent is a felony, see Unlawful Activities). Additionally, hunters must present the entire head (intact) of any harvested pronghorn at a designated check station within 24 hours of take. For more information on the experimental buck-only season in the Panhandle, including maps of the areas, locations where permits may be obtained, and locations of mandatory check stations, call (800) 792-1112, or see FAQs about pronghorn permits.

Hell yes it was Pecos County and we were plenty legal 30 years ago.

In this case, did y'all have the landowner's consent?

A lot of this boils down to landowner's consent & if other leasees know that a "lease boss" is hunting at a reduced rate (or none).

if a "lease boss" or any lease member engages in activities on the lease that are not in accords with the landowners instructions, or the lease members knowledge, therein lies the problem.

Of course 30 yrs ago........................

That is one of them.

So...a lease boss is essentially a property manager correct? He is doing work outside of actually being a lessee on the property correct? If this is the case then shouldn't his time and effort be worth something? Maybe not a free ride but rather a discounted rate versus what the others pay? Just sayin....

The reason this discussion is all over the place is there is no one definition for “Lease Boss”. Could mean anything from collecting the money/handing it to the landowner to hundreds of hours of work/networking.

If a man does something for me, I have no problem paying him. In fact, I insist on it.
OTOH, if a man rips me off, I’m done with him.

Openness and transparency is the key - if it’s there everyone can make up their own mind about what is fair.

Thats just it. Most say they go above and beyond. All I want to know is how does it justify not paying 2 to 3 thousand in lease fees (example only may be less ir higher).

2 to 3 paid by members for what?? That is what I ask. I made a few phone calls, kicked Joe off etc. Justification or freeloading??

Just as many have different ideas in their heads of what "management" is.

Lots of folks, in all walks of life, have a very inflated opinion of how much actual effort they've put into something. One afternoon, one or two phone calls becomes "constantly", "always", etc. when they describe how much they do.

Again, if I have the lease and I am responsible, I can sublease for whatever I get. If I'm leasing for my group I need to come to an agreement with my other lessees. That's the bottom line in my book
I've been on an annual dove lease, I don't know the other hunters. I suspect the lease manager is making money or at least hunting for free. I don't have a problem. I accepted the deal and it's none of my business what his deal is. If I lease two floors on a high rise and sublease 1 floor, it's none of the subleasees business what my deal is.

Have had lease for 14ys that I "manage". Pay my share of lease cost and feed. Other members pay their share of feed. Feeders are mine and I maintain them.

There is value in responsibility and in your money being at risk.

Once again. If that’s all you did as lease manager then there was no reason for you to be a lease manager. I pay my own way but I spend hours upon hours doing the job. 12 hunters. Collect money. Handle feed delivery and payments, organize work days, find the RIGHT new members, show all prospective new members the ranch , answer multiple questions, keep land owners updated and happy, take ALL the risk as my name is on the lease - I am liable for all the money due .... I can go on and on. And I pay my own way

One year to help out the lease manger (boss) I took on the responsibility of keeping the books on payments for the lease, payments on the improvements to the camphouse and getting 1/12th of the electric bill from each member (12 members). I will never do that again. It is amazing how 12 well to do guys are so hard to get a payment on time (God bless the few that paid it all up front). They never show up with a check and have more excuses than a bad employee. And the entire time everything was in the managers name, he had to make payments regardless.

You are dead on - as with anything in life there are those that do and those that do not. The definition of what a lease manager should do ranges all over the place. Being open, up front, and transparent with other lease hunters is the only way to do it IMO.

I share every dollar we spend with all members and give a full accounting to everyone each season. I cannot tell you how many hours I spend making sure our lease runs smoothly and is enjoyable for everyone. I am not complaining about it - I accepted the job.

In return, I receive ZERO compensation - I do it because I love hunting and a great hunting camp with great friends. I also can say that there is nothing more satisfying than seeing a member kill the biggest deer they have ever taken. It has happened many times over my 11 years and THAT is my compensation.

Problem is that the OP is saying that all lease managers are on the take. Maybe many of them are and maybe I am naive - all I know is how I run our lease. So to insinuate that all lease managers only "make a few phone calls" is totally misguided.

You said Adios like 3 days ago and keep coming back?

I’d have no problem with it if the guy was earning the money and the overall value was solid.

Changed my mind - now you are no longer confused

my take on it is pretty simple.....

If everyone is treated fairly, everything runs smooth, and the lease boss deals with any and all headaches, he is working, pure and simple. If I agree with the lease fee, what he pays is none of my business.

On our lease, the lease boss is the hardest working guy on the lease, and spends more time on maintenance and upkeep than most of us spend at the lease at all! I have never even thought of asking him if he is paying a share or not, and I dont frankly care one way or the other.

I have a lease with seven other hunters that sub lease from me. I do more work on the lease than all of them together. I am responsible for everything. Everyone has the option of hunting on that lease or finding a better spot. The price is agreed on up front, paid on time, no turd stirrers, no nonsense and no new (replacement) hunters if someone leaves the lease. I pay 1/8 of the total cost because that is the way I want it. It works for us. Life is good.

I can agree it's nobody business.

I have no problem with it either way. EXCEPT, when you put another person between you and your customer you increase the potential for graft and corruption. Even “respectable” folks on this forum think it’s fine and dandy to bribe the lease boss to keep new offers from the landowner.

We have a lease "manager" that's just one of us and pays the same as us. Although I'm sure he'd love to be called "boss". He is a friend of mine, but loves to try and give orders, most of which are ignored by the rest of us. I've been around plenty of men that say the word "we", as in "We really need to work on the blinds," when they mean "I want to direct and supervise you doing the work." Screw that, I've paid my dues. If you want to work beside me, I'll give it all I've got. But I don't work FOR nobody no mo.

The owner wanted just one contact in the group, and I completely understand that. Now that he knows us though, he comes and talks to me all the time about things we need to know or do.

I never thought about doing this. Interesting idea.

So I could find a landowner looking to lease like $24K worth of land for the season or maybe year round. I fork over the $24K and secure the lease. Then I find 8 hunters to pay $3,000 each. Have reasonable lease rules. Plus there might need to be some sort of expenses related to electricity etc.

At the rate people seem to fork over money to get leases this would not be a problem. I mean some people pay before even seeing the property.

Nonetheless I'll bet you will earn your share just dealing with people.

Just because you've never thought about this, doesn't mean thousands haven't. If it was easy, you wouldn't hear all the hunters on this site complaining that they can't afford to get on a good lease.

Do tell

As far as the OP, if I was getting on a lease and agreed to the price, I really don't care if the "lease boss" isn't paying. I lease a place based on what I get out of it, not what everyone else is.

As far as the practicality of it, if it is a big lease and the owner is a pain in the arse, I would almost say the guy deserves it.

As far as I know, I have never been on a lease that everyone didn't pay equal though.

must be a story behind that statement

There certainly is. It’s a good one. I’ll let t-Rex tell it..

My story and yours won’t be the same...

And mine will be just what you told me. From the landowners perspective.

With your spin on it...again.

Nope. I just checked my dictionary. Under bribery, the 2nd example is “such as when one buys steak dinners and golf games for the ranch manager (or lease boss) who then hides higher lease offers from the rancher”. Black and white. No gray.

Truth is this folks: there are so many different hunting and lease scenarios that all are different. Each of us has their own perspective based on what we have witnessed, endured, and seen. There are very well run leases and horribly run leases. There are are good lease members and horrible lease members. There are awesome land owners and horrible land owners. There are good lease bosses and really sorry lease bosses. Same as everything else in life now days.

IMO a bad lease manager is there to benefit themselves and profit off of others. They make rules for others but think they do not have to follow the same rules. If you have experienced that then no wonder you are sour on lease managers.

A good lease manager does it because they want to be a part of a team that works to improve the property and deer. If you have experienced that then you are a lucky hunter.

So the debate between the two can go on forever but the truth is this topic is no different from every other debate in todays world. There are thing done well and things done not so well

Not all owners are micromanagers or even care about the hunters. They hire a ranch manager to make the best decision without bringing every issue to them. Taking a higher offer from a random that located the property on the internet and tried to undercut the current hunters in a shady way doesn’t seem like a good bet compared to a group that has been good stewards of the land and resources and pays on time for over 30 years.

My guess is this has more to do with the decision than a round of golf and a steak. Plus, when the ranch manager gets a percentage of profit, would think a round of golf and a steak would pale in comparison.

But what do I know...you have the dictionary

The reality is this: it's not YOUR decision or the ranch manager/lease bosses decision. It's the landowner's decision. Paying someone to prevent the information reaching the decision maker who has the most invested.... is bribery. Plain and simple. Look it up. All definitions describe it exactly that way.

I know it doesn't feel good. But it's the shoe YOU chose to wear. Suck it up buttercup.

It wasn’t my decision and I had nothing to do with the decision. Reality is that it is between the ranch manager and the owner. Couple of steaks and a round of golf didn’t sway his decision and weren’t meant too no matter how you spin it.

Feels fine to me

Our landowner could get quite a bit more than we pay. He was offered double years ago and turned it down. He rather deal with us who don't ask him for a thing and don't expect anything. Probably talked to him 3 or 4 times in 8 years. We aren't on a trophy lease so that helps.

Right. But it’s his decision to make. Not a lease boss or manager. The money in trophy game is typically the driver in most ranching operations. And even in the rare cases that money isn’t an issue, the owner still is interested in current value.

If it felt fine you’d own it.

Well versed. Been on all sides of above and earlier this spring I moved off a very nice property due to IMO questionable lease boss antics. I did not have another lease/place lined up to move to (still looking) but I just could not fathom staying and paying my fee (which was very reasonable and not an issue) to this lease boss with the mistrust feelings stirring in me. It does not really matter to me if the lease boss is getting a good deal for him or covering his hunt fee spot as long as rules are clear, followed by all and honesty and integrity are upheld. If the lease/property provides the hunting value that I'm seeking, then all is good. However, I do prefer to deal directly with landowner and have signed lease contract directly with landowner.

It is not a lease bosses job to manage maximize profit for a landowner. Maybe for a ranch manager if that is in his job description. But he has a people factor too that plays one of the biggest parts in making everyone happy. LO should handle the money part of his operation and anyone wanted to one up the current leasers can just call the LO themselves. Easy to get phone numbers and email or mail a letter.

I do own it. I just like listening to you ride that horse

Our land owner isn’t involved at all. We deal with the ranch foreman/manager. Most the hunters have never met or even seen the owner.

rancher do you not get the concept that not every owner wants to be involved in or even cares about the day-to-day operation of running a ranch?

They don’t know chit about running a ranch, what’s best for the ranch, every decision that’s made, etc. Many of them don’t want to be bothered with it because they have bigger fish to fry - namely, doing the things that made them the money that allowed them to buy the ranch in the first place. That’s why they hire ranch managers and trust them to make those decisions with all factors in mind. And not every decision needs to be made with the $$ that come in this month or this year as the bottom line. Short term profits can turn into long-term losses if things aren’t run with the long term health of a ranch in mind.

Jeff Bezos probably owns as much Texas ranchland as anyone. But I can assure you he doesn’t spend much time worrying about running them. He spends his time running Amazon.

You just assume everyone should do things the way you do them. That’s your Achilles’ heel on just about every subject.

If you’d read my responses you’d know I acknowledged that there are some land owners who don’t care for a number of reasons. Could have save yourself most of those keystrokes above.

In Trexs case though, the ranch manager indicated that his landowner didn’t fit that MO because he made a point to bring up the fact that his owner “wouldn’t find out about the offers because he preferred trexs group”.

I know Ted Turners ranch and operations manager. And if ol Ted found out that his employee was hiding info about the entity that provided most of his ranch income in response to a bribe, he’d find a new ranch manager pronto. His manager makes it perfectly clear at every opportunity that if the ranches don’t bring value he’ll be replaced.

So yes, there are some landowners who have ranches as passive investment only. That is a small number though and that’s not what we’re talking about. See above before you waste more keystrokes.

Wasn’t talking about who’s job it was to get that info to the LO. The issue is actively hiding that info from the LO. And paying for that info to be buried.

Wow what a can of worms this turned out to be?..

It was my fault, I knew where it would go but couldn’t resist...my apologies

Yes, that's exactly what I pointed out was a risk in my first post. As a landowner, if you put someone between you and your customer, you are inviting exactly what you described. The landowners intermediary accepting bribes in exchange for hiding what could be valuable information (and at least letting the landowner who has a bigger stake decide). There are landowners who don't care how much they lose as long as someone else is handling the headaches. But those are few and far. And based on the fact that in your case the manager decided NOT to tell the landowner, your landowner ain't one of them.

If you have had the same leasees for the past 20 years, are they at the mercy of having to always be the highest bidder?


Some ranchers are ran by board of directors, they set the price. Rancher/Operations Manager is there to make sure that price is met, while insuring the “liabilities” are kept to a min.

It depends. If I have a good relationship with them I’ll decide based on that, as well as current values ((surely you know values change over time), and other criteria.

My point is that the LO needs to be given the information on the income source that is the biggest money earner on most places in good deer country.

And for the fourteenth time we aren’t talking about the handful of ranches owned by Jeff bezos types. We are taking about the vast majority of ranches, that include trexs one.

A ranch run by a Board of Directors. Count me out. Owning, serving on the board, leasing...whatever.

So BoBo, say you’re away on a sheep hunt in Mexico and you leave a hand in charge of selling your cotton crop. Your hand decides since you care more about a sheep hunt than being there to sell it yourself, that you don’t really care how much you get for cotton. He gets chummy with the buyers rep and sells your crop for 20% less because well.. the buyers rep is a nice guy and takes your hand on a gulf fishing trip.

Pretty dern near exactly what went on in Kansas. The names have been changed to protect the “innocent”. Lol

You can count them on one hand. Even ted turners isn’t run that way.

That’s dumb and weird example market sets the elevator price not the buyer. Plus most guys contract out for a certain amount...

If I empowered him with the selling ability, then it comes with perimeters. If his sell price fell with in those perimeters, then not getting maximum price is on me. If it fell below those perimeters, I would suspect he would be gone before I got home.

If I wanted maximum money, I’d bonus him on total NET profit

Well that one hand is represented on this thread... so might me more then you think.

Actually I can kind of see that on cotton, due to how it’s sold but then again, market price is so visible it’s hard to fathom it.

Any way, none the less I’m not for sale on my cash leases. I have turned down higher offers many of times. I’ve also had some of the same families cash lease farming for going on three generations. Some of those relationships aren’t for sale. Thier price and stewardship follows with in a threshold I think equals fair ROI while meeting my stewardship objectives

Man, I thought this thing died along time ago. Somebody must have broken a tooth while biting on one of his gold coins.

It was a hypothetical knucklehead. Don’t get lost in the fine points that don’t matter. Just remember the facts. A ranch hand was bribed to hide a better offer to YOU. And you never had the opportunity to accept or reject the offer.

And you’ve made it clear that profit is important to you. BTW, that’s nothing to be ashamed of, is more common by 90+%, and is the biggest driver in a capitalistic free market. You aren’t against that are you??

It ain’t dead til I say it’s dead. Or a mod decides to flex.

Bunch of high school drama in here...

What if you were offered a steak and a round of golf?

Somehow I had a feeling that the bribing the ranch hand thread would come back around.

Uh, it’d have to be a steak and golf round worth 10 or 15 grand. And then it would be my decision. If I found out that the steak and golf were being given to hide another dollar per acre... someone would lose their job.

Obviously ranch hands are underpaid... at least my buddies hand sold illegal hunts to earn real money. Lol.

Think it is more Summer time boredom. Most of us are arguing for the sake of arguing.



It was fun enough the first time for a second go at it

Ha! And trexs only took bribes.

And so goes the way of the world...mans word, loyalty, friendship, proper management of land, improvements to the land, and increased value of certain assets all contributed to another mans property aren’t worth a dollar an acre to a land owner. Should be sold out from under them for $1/acre to a random off the internet

Mine got screwed!!! A round of golf and a cheap steak

Don’t get mad at me about you bad hypocritical...lol

You arguing with out all facts. Not my place or lease although I know it well.

I look at a dinner and golf as a thank you more so then a bribe, especially in this case.

Nice try nimrod, but that’s not at all what I said. I said if an employee lied by omission I’d fire him/her. I said it should be my decision. Every rancher with my tenure has had and probably turned down offers for more money. But it always needs to be my decision. I don’t need employees susceptible and willing to be bribed to hide information from me. Good employees are hard to find. And they’re valuable. Cause there’s always some “good ol boy” trying to get them to screw their boss for a little graft.

He told us all the facts. It is benchmark bribery. The steaks and golf kept the price of cotton from the guy making money off cotton. It’s as simple as that. It ain’t hard. Even you could figger it out.

That is exactly what you said. As you told Bobo, caring more about profit is ok...just own it and let’s move on

And this isn’t about YOU as much as you think it is. Thankfully there are people that value the items I listed more than the almighty $1 and people that truly understand that a golf game and a steak aren’t a bribe when you have known someone for 25 years.

Now, if I had bought him the steak and round of golf in an effort to convince him not take the offer to the owner...you might have half a point.

When did I ever say that I took the rancher golfing and cooked him a steak so he wouldn’t take the offer to the owner? I couldn’t care less what the rancher did with the offer and sure didn’t do it with the intention of maintaining my position on the ranch.

Sounds like some buddies.........I wouldn’t be associated with folks like that, myself.

My buddy is the LO. The hired hand was arrested over a year ago. This forum help bust him. Made GW field notes a month ago.

Would your buddy like it if his ranch hand "only" accepted a bribe to hide offers from him?

A-ha. Good. Wonder what the charges were exactly?

Link.....

Well it would have been less damaging than what he did do and get caught! It was not his job to find or entertain anything from anyone. Job was to work cattle and fill feeders for family only. They don't lease out except a smaller part to one person the LO only deals with. Ranch hands are not ranch managers. The people factor is bigger than an extra few bucks when selecting hunters for a year round lease.

How much more was this offer y'all keep going round and round about? If current group is paying a fair rate and causes no issues at all, why change it? I would leery of someone offering more than market rate and didn't know them personally.

“Well it would have been less damaging than what he did do and get caught! It was not his job to find or entertain anything from anyone. Job was to work cattle and fill feeders for family only. They don't lease out except a smaller part to one person the LO only deals with. Ranch hands are not ranch managers. The people factor is bigger than an extra few bucks when selecting hunters for a year round lease.

How much more was this offer y'all keep going round and round about? If current group is paying a fair rate and causes no issues at all, why change it? I would leery of someone offering more than market rate and didn't know them personally.”

Txduckman:

Bribery isn’t defined or limited by what relationship or duties you perform. It’s an act:

bribe
brīb/Submit
verb
1.
persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement.

In my case on one ranch, that one dollar/acre you seem to easily discount represents $18,000. I know, I know, there are people for whom 18 grand isn’t a blip on their radar. I’m not one of those people. And I have in fact turned down an offer for more on that ranch this year.

My point is and has been, it needs to be the LO’s decision whether or not to turn down that $. Regardless of how large or small that sum is.

Just curious, do you think your buddy would want to at least know about someone offering him/her 18 grand? For anything. Don’t get hung up in the what for, because that’s irrelevant.

Was on a place a couple of leases ago with 4 total guns. Two of them knew the land owner and had the "in" so to speak. One of them worked with the LO and got permission a couple of years earlier to hunt hogs. They would help him around the place from time to time for that hog hunting privilege.

The guys that had been on the place forever rightfully got a bit bent that the LO was letting them hunt hogs and put up a blind on the place they considered their lease. Note the lease read that the LO could have whoever he wanted out as long as it didn't interfere, so this was always outside deer season. When they left these two guys talked him into leasing it to them.

That's where I come in - joined them on the lease. After a while I found out me and the other gun were paying twice what they were. I brought it up, they justified it because they knew the LO and had helped him over the years (again, to hunt hogs). By the time the lease was up things had gone south... I think there's an old thread on it. One of them considered himself the lease "manager", which we always found ridiculous - he did nothing more than us. When push came to shove, it turned out he was wrong and got a big dose of reality. The LO gladly leased to me and the other gun ONLY the following year.

I would not pay for someone else's lease for this kind of thing, that is just because they found the place. If they took care of everything, including corn/feeders, and it was a turnkey deal... maybe so... but that isn't what I'm interested in anyway.

If that is part of the employees job, yes. If not, no sense in getting mixed up in that. Just tell them to contact the LO themselves.

As a leasee, it is ones job to not do anything to change the current situation.

Well put. But then you get a guy that knows he's smarter, or is sure he's a better hunter (or usually both), and/or gets a little greedy, and problems ensue.

Each year I try to readjust my thinking about our lease and try to enjoy the situation for what it is. It, and me, aren't gonna be around forever. I try to enjoy the land, and the company and I'm not going to be the guy that gets us kicked off. We lease one pasture out of 4. 4 different groups of hunters, one strong-willed and usually frustrated square-head rancher/LO - what could possibly go wrong?

The original topic was about lease bosses and whether they should pony up the same as others. The answer to that is a personal decision with what you are comfortable with. As others have mentioned, this should be transparent otherwise you should be worrying about the gear you leave in place if they are shady enough to not give you a full picture. Besides, this is often resolved by lease agreements which are legally binding. I've had one LO tell me he only works on handshakes at which point I said thanks but no thanks (he quickly asked me to draw up a deal and then threw a fit over mutual termination notice timing). Everyone, I repeat EVERYONE, on a lease should be signing something legally binding in today's environment given the back dealing, foreign land grabbing, etc that is going on.

The whole bike rack squabble going on as a sidebar still applies to this concept. Rancher, as a LO (I'm assuming here), you should be putting the appropriate terms into that lease agreement. If you don't like the steak dinners and golf games then do something about it proactively. I'm not saying it's your fault, but I would be lying if I said you didn't prevent it from happening either. Similarly, don't put a ranch hand/manager in the position to even weigh in on the decision or receive information if you're going to be uneasy at any conceivable point.

To continue with the sidebar, my biggest complaint is LOs who blackmail lessees. This is no less immoral in my mind, and the whole thought of a $1 an acre to give the land to someone else is asinine. The amount of time, money, and sweat equity I put into land that isn't even mine is ridiculous to hold over my head (i.e. blackmail) and always be raising the ante. I make a LO's property better and it's not just by proper game management.

Don't mince my words -- I'm not saying you would take that offer (even though you said $18k is a considerable amount that you wouldn't reject on the spot), but give me a freaking break. This is why I don't take handshake deals, this is why I carefully invest in someone else's land, and this is why it's so friggin hard to find a valuable lease (don't read that as B&C scores or antler points -- I can get a trophy hunt cheaper than what I put in YoY).

Oh, and by the way, if you aren't the LO and it was your $1/acre offer that was rejected...grab a box of tissues because life ain't fair buddy.

Let me step off my soapbox and grab my popcorn again for the regularly scheduled programming...

Not sure how you could misunderstand from my posts, who owns my ranches. Also not sure how from my posts you could think that I would be susceptible to a third party bribing one of my hands. Yes I have ranch hands but all have known they’d be fired on the spot for accepting bribes.

I have ranches where I have handshake agreements, and I have ranches that have lease agreements. All understand and acknowledge that you trespass on my land at my pleasure, and at the price I, and no one else sets.

I’ve never kicked anyone off because I’ve gotten a better offer. But I keep track of lease values, I don’t ignore offers, and I wouldn’t tolerate anyone hiding offers from me.

Your one man on a lease perspective chiding me about a measly $1 per acre (totaling 18 grand) is amusing though. I’m pretty certain you haven’t made 18 grand year over year improvements to anyone’s place.

Glad to see we are both making assumptions. You mentioned Kansas, who the hell am I to know whether you own land there or not. Just like you have no clue what I do for land. Resume your personal battle in a public forum -- at least my post was additive.

I never mentioned Kansas in any way it could be misconstrued that I owned that ranch. And I’m pretty stinkin safe in the assumption that you don’t make 18 grand year over year improvements on someone’s land that you lease. You’re the one that jumped up on that soapbox to preach to me. You had to know it was a fragile box so quit whining like you said you would.

His Kansas analogy was solely for my reference. I farm not far from the border.

Just a good Ol fashion offseason debate.

He is having a hard time with this one because he overstepped his knowledge, and made assumptions to fill in the gaps. In his defense ol’ trex kind of set him up.

Rancher is good people.

I dont agree with this type of working system but its very common in Argentina also.

WILD CAT