# 14 day limit on NR duck hunting



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

I'm new to this forum thing so if I error on the protocols let me apppologize to all in advance.

My challenge is this. I no longer live in ND but own a nice 240A duck slough. I can't hunt it when I want. Now I would not mind 1- buying a second 14 tag & 2 being limited to my own land, but what is the deal! it never bothered me so much until the kid started hunting.. now with shcedules it's tough to use land I pay taxes on with my son.

Is there any movement out there to put an end to this?


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

I hope not! The restrictions curb the sale of lands to NR's for hunting use.


----------



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

Let's see...
I'm assuming you are not hunting on your own land?

Obviosly you would never spend time on land recieving non-ND dollars...like WPA's, CRP etc... another topic

My point is I just want to hunt MY land not anybody elses favorite spot.
Believe me, I'm not posting my tax return, but I'm not some "Rich guy" buying up land.


----------



## goosegrinder (Mar 4, 2005)

You may not be buying up land but ALOT of others are,that's where the problem occurs. If you wanna own land and not reside in the state,then buy the non-resident license and stop whining. Might also be why they call them NON-RESIDENT license instead of NON-LANDOWNER license.Residents pay a heck of alot more than just taxes thruout the years compared to non-resident landowners. Add up all the groceries,gas,etc.,etc. that residents buy on a yearly basis and you want a cheaper permit cause you want to hunt there a few times a year and you're complaing that it's getting expensive with you kid needing the license too.If you add up all the expenses just to get to your ground and hunt,the license is probably the cheapest part of your trip.

Alex


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

GWP this issue has been taken to the US District court via a lawsuit by MN! The lower court judge ruled in favor of ND and its law which has been on the books since the early 70's. The purpose back then was twofold. One to slow the rise of land costs in areas that saw a huge jump from NR purchases and affecting the ability of farmers to stay on the land and also to slow the growth of leasing of land in the at that time snow goose rich areas.

What you are asking has been debated over and over on this forum and others. It boils down to one thing! The state that you reside in. ND like most other states have a different set of rules for its residents than they do for NR regardless of the species being hunted. Those rules may include different season lengths, cost of license and in some areas depending upon species even require the use of commercial operators to access land. The Congress and Pres Bush passed a bill that affirms a states right to set and manage game and seasons within its borders, even species that are Fed regulated. A state cannot have a more liberal season or bag limit, but can be more restrictive even with its own resident hunters.

So it appears that the courts have affirmed what most of us understand. You want the same rules as a Resident of a state, you must become a resident of that state, ownership of property does not supersede that requirement!!!!

All the pros and cons concerning this have been hashed out,debated and argued over for the last 6 years or more. There is nothing new to add on either side. I hope you will take the time and read through a number of the threads concerning this and it should give you a pretty good idea of what not only most forum members see, but obviously our elected officials also and the courts!!!!!!


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

What's the over and under on how long thios thread last until bumped to hot topics!!!! :eyeroll:


----------



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

You must be reading something between the lines that is not there....
I never mention the finacial part...man if I started adding up the true cost of my hunting I'd probably collapse.

I'm willing to pay the price and I'm not worried about "cheaper". just "available". I want my kid to have access to the same type of hunting I had. pretty simple goal really.

When I left ND the big concern was the brain drain leaving the state for employment opps elsewhere. Never gave it much thought then, but.....


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

> Let's see...
> I'm assuming you are not hunting on your own land?


Don't assume too quickly..I do all my turkey and deer hunting on my own land.

You may not be "some rich guy buying up all the land" but with many more like you out there, that is a large chunk of land that is owned by NR's
It all boils down to, if you leave ND, you leave your ND resident benefits.


----------



## tb (Jul 26, 2002)

Let's go back to the good ole days when it was only 10 days for nr's!!!


----------



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

After looking over the old info it seems this topic has been beat to death.
Each state should set regs that reflect the will of it's people. I have no problem with that and I don't think most people that think it through would.
I just happen to think it more it terms of property rights, than Game and Fish regs.

I'll just hunt when I can until I retire and move back....then I can be a resident and work on regaining my myopic skill sets :wink:


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I don't think it will change. It is a complexed issue. I think the biggest issue is with large corporations or wealthy individuals purchasin LARGE tracts and effectively closing them off to FREE access. I think residents would probably be amazed at how much land in ND is currently owned by non-residents, mostly in the form of property INHERITED by Dakota born and raised people. I would guess that MOST of the NR landowners are of this type and are not intentionally buying up land for their own personal hunting refuges. I do feel sorry for those in your position but I'm not sure how the law could be changed to accomodate your needs yet keep out the large land grabs. ND hunters are desperately trying to keep ND a "FREE" state.
We are one of a handfull of states with few tresspass laws and relatively little "PAY" hunting, though that trend seems to be rapidly changing. Unfortunatly hunting is becoming less a sport and more BIG BUSINESS and that is what is driving the changes.

Maybe we need to look at a Grattis type license for NR's. Possibly a license with no time restrictions but would limit the NR and a couple of direct family members to their own land. Just a thought. The way I see it a NR that posts and hunts his own land isn't any better or worse than a NR who posts and doesn't hunt or allow hunting on his land.

Another option could be an "access for license" type permit where NR landowners could secure a full season license provided they enrolled their land in a PLOTS or similar program which would make the land open to public access. That could be a win win situation.


----------



## h2ofwlr (Feb 6, 2004)

dblkluk said:


> I hope not! The restrictions curb the sale of lands to NR's for hunting use.


I have to agree with the above, and I'm a NR. 
The price of potholes/sloughs would double in a years time if ND passed a landowners lic.

FYI, this is avery touchy subject for many Residents.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

gwp guy said:


> After looking over the old info it seems this topic has been beat to death.
> Each state should set regs that reflect the will of it's people. I have no problem with that and I don't think most people that think it through would.
> I just happen to think it more it terms of property rights, than Game and Fish regs.
> 
> I'll just hunt when I can until I retire and move back....then I can be a resident and work on regaining my myopic skill sets :wink:


Where the paths cross between property rights, and hunting of game is really in our states constitution. It reflects that the Game in the state are owned by the Res of the state and managed by the G&F for the overall use good of the Res. Property rights give you control of the property, but not ownership of the game on it unless they are non wild. Otherwise a landowner could shoot game any time of the year at any time of the day and of any quantity that they would chose!!!!!!

I point this out so that you understand the separation and do not get confused. You have the right to determine who can and cannot access your land. Whether you want to charge a fee for it or not. Those fall under property rights, but the harvest of wild game, does not. Seasons, bags and other restrictions are set forth by those who are given the duty to do so!


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

> I'll just hunt when I can until I retire and move back....then I can be a resident and work on regaining my myopic skill sets


Myopic skill sets? This is why I have no time for people like you. People don't say what you want and you insult them. That is a pretty small person.

When does ownership of property give you the right to dictate policy in another state?

If you don't want to let people hunt on your property that is your right but I don't feel additional hunting days is part of your "bundle of rights" when you purchase land.


----------



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

Well my appologies if the shoe does not fit. But if you look back at the first resopses to what I realize now was not a topic worth rehashing I was not exactly greeted with the ND welcome I'm used to.

I'm not going to spend any more of my energy on this one but if you could refresh me, as obviuosly I'm late to school on this.

What was the pricipal driver of this legislation? Strain on wildlife populations? concern over driving up cost of land? Limited access to public lands?

I'll stick to subjects everyone can agree on like politics, religon or the best hunting dogs 

appologies where applicable, GWP GUY


----------



## striped1 (Aug 17, 2005)

gwp guy said:


> Each state should set regs that reflect the will of it's people.


That is the thing. Talk to the farmers, store owners, restaurant owners, motel owners, etc in prairie pot hole country. They hate the 14 day limits. The apologize for it and wish it weren't there. Their livelihood and way of life depend on it. It is the politicians and their money backers who want the opening weekends of waterfowl and pheasant to themselves it sure isn't the people living and working and trying to make a living in farm country.


----------



## shae1986 (Sep 28, 2006)

I had this same subject discussed with owning land in ND but living out of state and the 14 days of hunting. It horrible but there are positives and negatives to it. Im from MN, own land in ND, and would like to see it where i could. Some small towns are hurt by the 14 day season, some are not. This is a topic that will go on until something changes, or until MN give ND something to complain about.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'm not aware of any state in this nation that gives non residents resident status for the purpose of hunting or fishing if they own land in that state. Maybe I am mistaken, and if so tell me what state.


----------



## shae1986 (Sep 28, 2006)

Why does everyone think that we are asking for resident status.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Shae it is very simple, way back before most of you where hunting is when the restrictions on days was put in place! This was done then for the reasons I stated and those same reasons apply today. Yes, Joe bar owner, Becky the cafe owner do not like the regs, many farmers whom you meet do not mind the hunters, and do not look at the affects that a removal of the restriction would trigger.

Next time you are conversing with them why not suggest that if you could hunt all season you might consider buying that 1/4 section of CRP with the wetlands in it! See how they react then!!!!!!!

Some seem to think none of us have any roots or contacts in the rural area or do not own land. I listened to a number of FARMERS over the past weekend talking about a couple quarters of land that sold in my home area and who bought it and how much it went for. The buyer was out of state and was willing to go another $200.00 an acre more than what it sold for. There was three farmers who where interested but had no chance to get it and make it cash flow beyond what they bid. Now to top it all off, the new owner has rented the land to a farmer from the Watertown SD area which is roughly 150 miles and also out of the state!

While many can connect the dots, about once a month we have this issue resurface and the same arguments get brought up!!!!! I normally stay out of them, but I looked at the fact this thread was started by a new comer to the forum so I passed on a bit of history. I thought it would not continue much beyond that, but you brought up one of the old and lame comments we here all the time and I thought it needed addressing!


----------



## shae1986 (Sep 28, 2006)

QUIT YELLING AT ME!!!!
I ask a simple question on why people think we are asking for resident status bc im not. When ND gets to fish all season in MN does that mean they have resident status, no, so im not asking for it either. You guys are making this a lot more harder then it has to be. Do you see me saying MN needs a cap on fishing, no, dont care, fish all you want. And beleive me at Detroit Lakes where Muskie fishing is popular there are more ND vehicals than MN.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Shae my apology! I was addressing striped1's post!


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

I wonder if Minnesota put the same type of restrictions on fishing in MN for NR's as ND has for waterfowling if people in ND would possibly see it as an injustice. I think a lot of people in ND that have cabins in the Alex area might be a little miffed that they could only fish two weeks a year, not on opener and in different zones.

For the record I am in favor of higher license fees for out of state people, as a guest of the state you should pay more. I also do not think that out of state land owners should get special benefits. But you start to lose me when we start discussing hunting days restrictions and hunter numbers caps.

In additions, I think that the argument of "since you are an out of stater, you should have no legitimate say" is a bit flawed considering my federal duck stamp and tax dollars are in play here.

I know that many of your forum veterans will jump down my throat saying that this is a rehashed topic but obviously many people still feel it is topic worth discussing.


----------



## shae1986 (Sep 28, 2006)

Agree, the price of out of state license is just. I think that ND cost for a license is pretty good. It has to be done to help revenue for the government. It costs me $100 to pheasant hunt in ND and i have no problem paying it, its my choice to go and i must pay the cost.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> considering my federal duck stamp and tax dollars are in play here.


You can hunt all you want in your home state. Well, within federal regulations anyway. You can hunt any other state also. However, you are subject to North Dakota restrictions when coming here. The courts agree as has been stated. You have a choice of hunting the restricted season or not hunting at all. 
If some people had any sympathy (myself included) it is disappearing fast. I see your point, but it isn't valid.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

And for the last time, you cant compare an aquatic species to a terrestial species, so enough with your fishing in minnesota argument.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

The only way to curb non-residents buying land would be to make the waterfowl license a lottery. You get a point when you dont get a license, and if you only get a license every other year, thats the way the cookie crumbles.

Now, some will say "your dealing with a migratory bird" blah blah blah. But......arent they under ND jurisdiction while in ND?

Some will say "I have federal duck stamp dollars" blah blah, but you had to buy that to hunt waterfowl in ANY state, not just ND. And, if you only hunt in ND, dont buy the waterfowl stamp until you know you got a license.

Yes, a lottery system would be a tough law to get through, but I think thats the only way to stem the flow of non-resident landowners, at least the ones that buy land purely for hunting. And the excessively rich ones will still buy land anyway.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Bareback......I have one question....do you favor guides???

Because a lotto system or a NR cap will push NR right into the hands of guides and outfitters. Because if I want to hunt ND every year all I would need to do is book a guide. IF you don't see how this works...look at my other posts. Look at other states. Guides get a percentage of lisc....garunteed lisc i might add. So all a NR has to do is hire a guide and they will get a lisc.

So with a cap you will be encouraging guides to buy more land or lease more land. Because if a guide can handle X amount of clients on X amount of acres....more acres means more clients!!!!

Now I am not bashing guides or outfitters. They have a place in all of this. But if you preach FREELANCE HUNTING and DEATH TO G/O er's you better not be pushing for a NR cap.

Chuck


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Call me ignorant but why can't you compare ducks and fish? Both are a managable resource. MN pumps millions of dollars into stocking programs that come from my tax and license dollars. Unlike waterfowl (read fed duck stamp), the money for stocking comes from inside MN, so why shouldn't there be a cap?

Maybe I am missing something.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Goose guy....

The main difference is one is confined to a lake and another can move out of state with pressure. But I know what you are trying to get at.

It is like comparing fruit...but one is an apple and one is an orange. They both are fruit but still different.

Comparisons:

1. Both change patterns due to pressure.
2. Both are a managed resource

Differences:
1. one will move out of state/country due to pressure other to a different part of lake.
2. One is state regulated and another is state and federal.

You see both are simular but different.

Chuck


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Chuck,
There is a simple remedy for the guide outfitter deal. Don't allocate any automatic licenses to them. I personally don't think you should be able to buy your way into a license when the rest of the people have to get theirs by lottery.

I personally don't feel obligated to give the guide and outfitter industry licenses to publicly owned game so that they can make a living. That's the biggest crock of bullshiat I have ever heard of. If guides and outfitters automatically get licenses than they are the modern day market hunters. They sell game for profit at the expense of all who pay to manage it. Especially since the people who don't pay them have absolutly no chance of getting one of their allocated licenses.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Chuck Smith said:


> Goose guy....
> 
> The main difference is one is confined to a lake and another can move out of state with pressure. But I know what you are trying to get at.
> 
> ...


One other huge difference....probably the biggest one....

You have access to all those lakes that have fish......you don't have access to all the land,in fact you don't have access to most of it.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

You bring up good reasons but the fact that you pointed out fish are state regulated while waterfowl is federally regulated proves my point. Since my money is going to ND in the form of federal stamps and your (assuming you are from ND) money is not coming to MN to help fish, why shouldn't we limit fishing in MN? People that fish here from other states are benefitting from my license and tax dollars while people in ND are benefitting from EVERYONE's tax/stamp dollars.

As far as access to lakes in MN compared to access to land in ND. The state builds and maintains those boat launches at the price of my tax and license money so everyone has access. Comparable to state land owned in ND.

The pressure deal is a little iffy as well. When Big Winnie gets invaded by Wisconsinites for perch in the winter forcing them to shut down or when everyone from out state comes to Vermillion and hammers every muskie spot and forces them to shut down it is very comparable to people pushing ducks out of the area. The difference is that in ND you have a good chance to get new ducks with the migration. In MN we don't have that option when fishing.

My whole point is that it is comparable and people in ND would be equally miffed about new fishing restrictions in MN as some people are miffed about ND.

In my opinion there is enough fishing and hunting opportunities to go around for everyone. I think greed over fishing and hunting, not conservation rule the day. We don't own the wildlife but we all act like we do (myself included.)


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

What ticks me off about such discussions is how it exposes how little many folks actually know about basic civics. That Plainsman had to point it out at all is scarey - and he even soft sold it.

This guy hit the nail on the head:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_1_h ... ation.html

You're from MN? Big deal, you could be from Malaysia. Same thing. You're a NR. This ain't one big happy country lead by one big centralized national government. We have a federal government - where individual states control EVERYTHING, except what they have delegated to a centralized federal government. The states call the shots (within limits decided by the civil war), not the other way around.

I'd love to see Thomas Jefferson's ghost come back and start slapping folks....

M.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

> I'd love to see Thomas Jefferson's ghost come back and start slapping folks....


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm reading 1776 right now and I am amazed at how intelligent the people who founded this country were and also how far removed from intelligent thinking most of us are.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

gandergrinder....

I agree with you. But if you look at every state that limits lisc sales for NR the g/o industry gets a designated amount of lisc or thier clients get preference point towards gaining lisc. or the guide can buy up land owner tags and give them to the client. Look at the big game out west or SD for ducks.

Because the state is going to look at it like this.....The guide lives and operates with in the state. They need these clients to maintain a business. So they will help that business out so they can tax it. They want to keep businesses in ND. again look at SD. The g/o industry gets a percentage of nr lisc sales. I don't even think that percentage goes against the NR cap. But I could be mistaken.

Chuck


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

I am pretty sure that Abe Lincoln would slap some people that still believe that state rights are supreme in the US over the federal government.

The fact still remains, ND sportsmen benefits from FEDERAL tax dollars and FEDERAL stamp sales yet claim that the other states have nothing to do with it. State rights, state rights.....I am surprised that John Calhoun and Jefferson Davis are not state icons in Nodak.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Gooseguy10 said:


> The difference is that in ND you have a good chance to get new ducks with the migration. In MN we don't have that option when fishing.


Yeah you do - it's called last ice in the winter and pre-freeze in the Fall. Risk/reward, boon/bust, just like our late season waterfowling, when most have hung up their gear and what's left, if you can find it, is not for the feint of heart but finally offers a little solitude.

I know lots of avid ND R waterfowlers who now spend very little time afield in ND in October. Early goose, R opener, and then hope the birds are around and you can find them when the throngs depart. The recent Octobers don't resemble what most of us have come to know as ND waterfowling, and many find other things to do ( and/or other places to hunt waterfowl) in that period and hope for more-sane opportunites later. How's that for economic development?


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

> I am pretty sure that Abe Lincoln would slap some people that still believe that state rights are supreme in the US over the federal government.
> 
> The fact still remains, ND sportsmen benefits from FEDERAL tax dollars and FEDERAL stamp sales yet claim that the other states have nothing to do with it. State rights, state rights.....I am surprised that John Calhoun and Jefferson Davis are not state icons in Nodak.


If you are a duck hunter in the central flyway and have any understanding of duck production in the central flyway and any measure of common sense. You would want all of your duck stamp dollars and equipment tax money to go to ND, SD and MT even if you couldn't hunt in any of these states ever.

Where do you think the vast majority of ducks that are shot in the central flyway come from? The Priarie Pothole Region that's where.

The Federal Duck Stamp gives you the opportunity to hunt in the United States that is why you only need to buy a single stamp. The state license gives you the right to hunt the ducks in that state no matter where they hatched as long as you play by the states rules. The ducks are property of the state they are in, doesn't matter if they hatched in ND, Canada or New York. They were never federal ducks. Ownership transfers as soon as they cross a border. When they land in your state, you have jurisdiction and ownership.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

I will keep it really, really simple so everyone can understand our views. You guys from Minnesota can change your fishing regulations to whatever you want and I will not tell you what to do but I will just decide whether or not I want to come and enjoy the resource. Comprendo??


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Dj....I totally agree with you. If a state makes a law that is the way it should be......but.........

On a forum when people ask for opinions and idea's others will give them. So it is not NR people telling the people from ND how to run the state. They are giving suggestions, idea's or opinions. Just like if some one from MN would ask......What do you think about these new fishing regulations..... I would hope people would post that either agree or disagree with them and state an opinion or reasoning on why. I know also the old saying about opinions......they are like a$$holes....everyone has one. :wink:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Chuck Smith said:


> Dj....I totally agree with you. If a state makes a law that is the way it should be......but.........
> 
> On a forum when people ask for opinions and idea's others will give them. So it is not NR people telling the people from ND how to run the state. They are giving suggestions, idea's or opinions. Just like if some one from MN would ask......What do you think about these new fishing regulations..... I would hope people would post that either agree or disagree with them and state an opinion or reasoning on why. I know also the old saying about opinions......they are like a$$holes....everyone has one. :wink:


Agree Chuck.....but that's not what people are saying when they threaten to put restrictions on ND fisherman coming to Minn.That is pure retaliation.....not "we are doing what we think is best for us."

Minn should do whatever they think is best for them,not retaliate against us because they don't like what we are doing.....as DJ says.If I don't like it I won't go there or move there.


----------



## nadz_MN (Sep 25, 2006)

Just a question??

IF MN was to (our decision and I agree), would put higher license fees and post lakes for residents only! How would that affect the ND's who do come into MN for our resources...Remember just a GENERAL question and nothing more with general opinions...

This would IMO serve no purpose...


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ken ......I totally agree that people are using the walleye issue as retaliation.

But again the walleye/fish resource has been getting exhausted. Look at LOW and Rainey lake. In the past you could catch walleyes on top of walleyes. Now it is not so much so. You still can catch a lot of fish but not the constant action like in the past. Also the size is down compared to years back. Look at Red Lake......The crappie catch has been very poor compared to the past 10 years. Look at the perch in Winne or the Walleyes on Millac's. Now I am not saying it is all NR pressure but I do see alot of out of state lisc plates at these resorts and lakes.

Heck look at your own devils lake!

Again I think it is an apples to oranges discussion.....Both are fruit but both are different.

Again I totally agree with ND limiting NR to 14 days, I agree with the higher fee's, I agree with the R only opener. But what I don't agree with is when people discuss a cap. Again 1 mans opinon.

Chuck


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Chuck wrote,



> I agree with you. But if you look at every state that limits lisc sales for NR the g/o industry gets a designated amount of lisc or thier clients get preference point towards gaining lisc. or the guide can buy up land owner tags and give them to the client. Look at the big game out west or SD for ducks.


Chuck,
If your friends jumped off of a bridge would you do it too?

I'm a huge fan of the post-mortem analysis of things in life, both business and personal but I prefer doing the analysis after someone else throws away their money and time.

Looking at the other states as an example I would say that the guide outfitter industry does get stronger with restrictions. So if I was going to write up a plan I would say that if we are going to have restrictions than we won't give G/O automatic tags. Don't you think that would be a good idea. Instead of following a poor model maybe a little tweeking would be good.

If you know a model is flawed why would you use it?


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

nadz_MN said:


> Just a question??
> 
> IF MN was to (our decision and I agree), would put higher license fees and post lakes for residents only! How would that affect the ND's who do come into MN for our resources...Remember just a GENERAL question and nothing more with general opinions...
> 
> This would IMO serve no purpose...


That's precisely why the comparison doesn't hold water. This whole issue is about keeping pressure fair for everyone on limited private land that is available to have a decent hunt on. Bodies of water are PUBLIC and you can't post lakes.

Just remember that except for a small minority, ALMOST NO residents west of West Fargo CARE about Minnesota fishing. The guys here from anywhere west of the Sheyenne want nothing to do with your Jet Ski free for all, your lake property or overfished lakes. It's a good thing you have 10,000 of them to spread out the pressure from your fellow residents or YOU too would be crying foul about all the pressure.

Words to chew on...

Ryan


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

You may not tell us what to do but there would be plenty of ND people complaining.

In any event, agree to disagree. I enjoy hunting in ND but wish I could hunt more weekends than just two out there each fall.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Gander..... I agree. But everyone on this site that wants caps points to SD. They think SD is a mecca for waterfowl hunting. even though SD has more R lisc sales than the whole state of ND's R and NR lisc sales combined! But if you think if a cap gets passed that the guide/outfitter industy won't get there share you are very mistaken. Because the state wants its revenue too!

Because a guide needs to have a guiding lisc....$$$$......they get taxed differently.....more $$$....thier clients have to pay.....more revenue that can get taxed $$$$.....you see.

A state goverment is in place to help businesses with in the state. Look at all the grants for new construction, renovations, instate operations tax breaks, operation costs grants, rejuvination grants, etc. All states have this infra structer in place for all froms of industry and business. This granted lisc's would just be another example of that. If you don't believe me look up on how to start a business in your state and then ask for some monetary help. It is out there and a lot of it! Trust me I know from experience.

Chuck


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Gooseguy,
There is a whole other world out there besides ND as far as waterfowling goes. As a person who lives in ND and does a fair amount of hunting. There are places as good or better than ND and they can be had with the same amount of effort it takes to hunt in ND. :wink:


----------



## nadz_MN (Sep 25, 2006)

All NR's, not just ND's. I will leave it at that..I am not on the bandwagon of border bashing..period... Im chewing but it has no flavor!!!


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Chuck,
I know what you are getting at and I know that you are trying to be pragmatic.

If the guides and outfitters were allocated licenses on a bill I would be the first person to try and kill it even if it was attached as part of a restriction bill.

If there were no incentives for residents like the Res only week and the Resident only PLOTS week I would also be the first person to start sending out my application and it wouldn't be sent to any place in ND. How is that for economic development. My bride would be smiling from ear to ear too, as she would be happy to leave ND.

If they removed the 14 day restriction on nonresidents I would move away, make more money and start buying land. When I reached retirement age I would spend my falls in ND and my winters down south. So not only would I not add to the tax base throughout my career, I would take money out of the state from land rental.

How many guide and outfitter operations would it take to replace the two of us? Not to mention the volunteer work we do here.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Gander. You are absolutly correct. But due to time constraints in the fall b.c of my job (teaching), it makes it hard to go too far. Devils Lake is a nice 6 drive from where I live in Virginia, MN which can be done on a Friday night.

I have thought about going to Nebraska over Christmas break (last week of December) but have not explored that option too much....yet.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

We have G/O on both Devils Lake and Sak.Yet I have never seen or heard of anyone complaining that they didn't have a place to fish on either lake.Because we are all on the same playing field when fishing.

That's why you really can't talk about retalliating against ND for making non-res. hunting restrictions.

Again MN should do what they think is best for their residents....in your state....you come first.We will go by whatever laws you decide,since we don't live there.....all we ask is the same here.

About the only non-res. restriction I think Minn. hunters have a right to complain about is the PLOTS restriction.Since your money pays for it like ours does.But......that is what the ND legis. came up with to give residents here a bonus for living here.


----------



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

Could everyone please refer to my first post on this topic?

I really was just wondering if there might be a way that I could spend more time with my kid hunting ducks on my property.

This is the first time I ever participated in a forum and can see it's pretty easy to get caught up in passionate statements when all you have to do is click a few keys. Hopefully face to face meetings between sportsman at least have the make up of respectful disagreement.

Like it or not, there are not to many things that are truly black and white in any catagory, let alone hunting.

Since I don't think anyone is really getting their opions changed on this topic is there a way I can retract my original question????

I have spent most of my adult life in ND and MN....tons of great people in both states.

If I can't vote in the state of ND I am subject to the laws they pass without input....that's the way it is.

Having souch a neat spot that I can only spend two days on with my 12 year old this year is a bummer... but it is what it is.

Have a great hunt all in whatever game you pursue or in whichever state you can do it.

GWP GUY


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

Just curious, but why only two days?


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

gwp guy,
Don't take things personal. We stand on different sides of the fence. I'm sure you just want to go hunting like the rest of us.

One thing I find interesting about the forums is that people get really upset about what others say. I find debate interesting and fun. Probably the environment I grew up in and my career choice have had a great deal to do with my attitude on things.

In my family there are no subjects that are off limits. Religion and politics were and still are subjects open for debate. If one were to observe my family christmas and thanksgiving meals, you would think that we all hate each other. Defending your position and beliefs on an issue are a requirement and you can expect to have your ideas attacked if you don't back them up with a reasoned response. Dogma doesn't fly.

Its not a matter of hurting feelings. Feelings have no place in reasoned, well thought out discussions.


----------



## HonkerExpress (Sep 23, 2005)

Gandergrinder, are you sure we aren't related? It sounds alot like my family holidays. Thanksgiving and Christmas is the only time all the family I have is usually together, so we always find something to disagree about. I find debates to be a fun issue to express your feelings/thoughts. I am sure alot of guys take some sort of offense to what I say, but I don't mean any thing by it. I just like to discuss certain topic's, and my thoughts on them. And I thought I was the only one with a disfuntional family holiday gathering. lol.


----------



## gwp guy (Oct 9, 2006)

Only two days because my days off not aligning when he has team sports and school. I actually negotiated a third day since this started....you think it gets interesting on this forum...try winning one with the MRS. at myhouse on missing school!

We'll just spend more time in the grouse woods here. My GWP is on fire this year.


----------

