• Help Support TNDeer:

Ames Plantation Hunting Club Shrinking

TheLBLman said:
SOME of these refuges (and/or portions of those "some") have gone back to similar hunting regs, like pre-2007. IMO, the main thing they did wrong pre-2007 was simply not allowing hunters the opportunity to kill more female deer. Most (maybe all) now is either-sex, maybe with a higher bag limit on female deer than male.

That's good, but the deer density on many areas remains so low as to be disappointing to most hunters. I hunted 3 full days on one of these refuge's quota rifle hunts last year. Saw a total of 2 young deer. Sure, maybe I'm not the best hunter, but I was afield 3 full days. Most other hunters hunted the 1st morning, then didn't come back, even that 1st afternoon. Weather was good, and not much a factor.

One more thing:

In many instances, national wildlife refuges are surrounded by productive row-crop agriculture. Unit L was declared on these areas, where the same deer herds were overlapping those refuges' "earn-a-buck" program. This all out war on female deer decimated the deer herds, most particularly and most ironically, wherever there was a national "wildlife" refuge.

Hopefully some better middle ground is now being found between too high & too low for the deer populations on these areas.
Click to expand...
Again, agree completely. The Refuge populations aren't "back" after the decimation of Earn-A-Buck, but they are rebuilding.
 
fairchaser said:
Some grand ideas for possible wildlife management. Knowing the area in question intimately, it would be impossible to apply any consistent management as there are too many access points to control access. That and CWD complicates any QDM type goals. At best, I hope they allow access to hunters so that it doesn't become a sanctuary where deer flee under pressure.
Click to expand...
Good points.
 
From their website:
Ames Plantation was established in 1901 by Hobart Ames, a wealthy industrialist from North Easton, MA. He operated the Plantation as a hunting preserve, livestock operation, and cotton plantation until his death in April, 1945 when the property passed to his widow, Mrs. Julia Colony Ames.

Mrs. Ames conceived the idea of memorializing her husband's name prior to her death in January, 1950. In her Will, she satisfied her wishes in this regard by expressing her desire for the Ames Plantation to continue as a part of a perpetual entity she created, the Hobart Ames Foundation. She directed that the Plantation operate under the ownership of the Trustees of the Foundation to benefit The University of Tennessee and to provide grounds and administrative support for the National Championship for field trialing bird dogs.
 
It would be great if it goes to the state but, sad to see it wasn't kept intact as the lady wished it, not sure why it's being split up but that's the way of the world these days.
 
mike243 said:
It would be great if it goes to the state but, sad to see it wasn't kept intact as the lady wished it, not sure why it's being split up but that's the way of the world these days.
Click to expand...
A portion of the plantation is being sold to shore up the trust fund that runs the foundation. Over the years, the plantation has struggled with being self sustaining. Several of the plantation managers are retiring and some of the positions are consolidating. The land selling is all made of forestry vs crop or grazing land. The forestry manager is retiring soon as well. It's becoming more difficult to make the land pay for itself. Even the hunting fees are declining due to CWD.

Buying large chunks of land and then making it pay for itself is not easy. In spite of having the land paid for, the cost of equipment and personnel continue to increase vs the profit in cattle, crops and forestry. I wouldn't want to run that business.

In spite of all that, Ames continues to do cutting edge research and hopefully will for decades to come which was the goal of Mrs. Ames.
 
I always thought Maytag had something to do with Ames back in the day, or did my senile old mind dream that up?
 
fairchaser said:
Buying large chunks of land and then making it pay for itself is not easy. In spite of having the land paid for, the cost of equipment and personnel continue to increase vs the profit in cattle, crops and forestry. I wouldn't want to run that business.
Click to expand...
I'm seeing this with numerous large hunting clubs. Even though membership fees for these "high dollar" clubs are exorbitant, the massive increase in costs for planting food plots post-Covid has produced budget shortfalls. Suddenly lots of these clubs are cutting significant acreage of timber in attempt to pay for the increased management costs.
 
BSK said:
I'm seeing this with numerous large hunting clubs. Even though membership fees for these "high dollar" clubs are exorbitant, the massive increase in costs for planting food plots post-Covid has produced budget shortfalls. Suddenly lots of these clubs are cutting significant acreage of timber in attempt to pay for the increased management costs.
Click to expand...
Our club is owned by an abesentee landlord (Herb Parsons heirs) and they sold off some chunks of land. Now they have sold the timber. Not really to sustain or pay for increased management costs, but just for the money. The farmer holds both the farming and hunting lease. With CWD, I don't think anyone currently in the club would be willing to pay anthing more than the current price. I wouldnt be surprised if they continue to sell it off.
 
BigAl said:
Our club is owned by an abesentee landlord (Herb Parsons heirs) and they sold off some chunks of land. Now they have sold the timber. Not really to sustain or pay for increased management costs, but just for the money. The farmer holds both the farming and hunting lease. With CWD, I don't think anyone currently in the club would be willing to pay anthing more than the current price. I wouldnt be surprised if they continue to sell it off.
Click to expand...
Very sad to see.
 
fairchaser said:
Buying large chunks of land and then making it pay for itself is not easy.
Click to expand...
This is a whole'nother thread but to some degree ROI, solvency, and/or liquidity boils down to land purchase price, appreciation, and use over time. Managed like a business with the expectation of a return (ex: timber companies or developers) yields an altogether different financial outcome than strictly as a preserve or hunting club.

I've never really thought about solvency for a preserve with primarily club dues and ag cash rent (until now). Yeah, I can definitely see where things could enter upside-down territory. Insurance, taxes, labor, and equipment burden in the face of flat/falling revenue AND the owners must follow the provisions of the established trust…absolutely. Agree, probably not easy (and possibly heartbreaking).

I recently watched a story about a 4th generation dairy farmer who had to decide between losing the family legacy in the face of a dire market + crushing operating costs or diversifying. As hard as the decision was, the family is slowly transitioning from dairy to a longterm sustainable operation.

I don't envy the Ames decisionmakers…the options and scenarios they had to work with might have been like handcuffs.
 
Boll Weevil said:
I've never really thought about solvency for a preserve with primarily club dues and ag cash rent (until now). Yeah, I can definitely see where things could enter upside-down territory. Insurance, taxes, labor, and equipment burden in the face of flat/falling revenue AND the owners must follow the provisions of the established trust…absolutely. Agree, probably not easy (and possibly heartbreaking).
Click to expand...
Thinking of some of the clubs I work with, some have in excess of 250 acres of food plots to mow, plant, spray and everything else. And these are not in big fields that can be maintained by a single large piece of equipment. They are all broken into 0.50 to 2.00-acre plots. They all get maintained several times a year, and many planted once if not twice a year. Then think of the herbicide bill for that? A couple of clubs I've mapped have in excess of 40 miles of interior dirt roads to maintain. To do all this work, they often have 3 to 5 tractors, a bulldozer, a track-hoe, and all that equipment must be fueled and maintained. They may have 5 or more full-time employees that must be paid a living wage. I even know clubs that run their own put-and-take quail hunts as well as one that raises its own ducks (by the hundreds) to improve the local duck hunting.

I'm not exaggerating when I say I know a club with a total management budget of around a million dollars per year. Pretty hard to pay for that when there is little income coming from the property other than club dues, considering they make nothing off the crops they grow (they are just for the wildlife to eat). About their only revenue beyond dues is timber sales.
 
I must add this comment about the Ames staff. They are the best in the world imo. The hundreds of miles of trails and roads are always cleared and mowed. The habitat is maintained unbelievably for the wildlife. The row crops looks like a magazine cover. There is always heavy equipment going somewhere and doing something productive. If there is a tree down across a road, it's gone in a couple days or sooner. How they do what they do with a small staff is remarkable. When I ride my e-bike down some of those farm roads, I can visualize ole Hobart Ames riding down through there on his horse with a brace of fine pointers. I can see how he fell in love with the place. I've instructed my family to spread some of my ashes there when I'm gone.
 
Some lands are purchased by the state. From what I read most of the land is purchased by Foothills land management or some similar group. And turned over to the state. Then the state puts TWRA over that. conservation groups use most of there money on the public places you hunt. And they take donations to get it mostly. If the big tracks of land are not purchased by said group or the state. We will have no new WMA's of any sized acreage at all. Cause large tracks over 1000 acres will and are split up into smaller ones and then those are split up to even smaller ones. And then you don't have enough land to make a sizable piece of public. May already be to late.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top