# Public service announcement for hunters



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

If your a hunter you should be aware of these things. I'm sure those who want to derail hunters will attack this.



> TIME TO WAKE UP! The legislature is being hit with bills that will impact ALL of us as resident hunters and we need to do something about it NOW. If you care about your hunting and fishing, get involved!
> 
> subscribe to ND Game and Fish Dept. legislative update and stay informed about bills that will impact your hunting & fishing. http://gf.nd.gov/legislation
> contact the members of any legislative committees and express your opinion about pending legislation. Tell them how it will affect YOU and tell them how you'd like them to vote.
> ...


----------



## upland420 (Dec 27, 2004)

I can understand some concern about this issue by ND waterfowl hunters, in a xenophobic, small minded sort of way...but to play the " save our proud heritage of hunting & fishing" card, is simply ludicrous. While the issue MAY inconvenience a handful of locals, I'm pretty sure allowing hunters from other States an extra 7 (possible) days in the field, is in NO WAY encroaching on your "heritage of hunting and fishing". That's some seriously paranoid, emotional garbage, right there.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'm not one of those non resident bashers. Every time I meet a fellow nodakoutdoors guy from Minnesota or Wisconsin or where ever I enjoy visiting with them. When you come from a state with populations measured in the millions to a state with only about a half million and think it isn't crowded your thinking from a very crowded perspective. Many North Dakota people feel like they are being swamped. A few years back there were 33k non residents and 35k resident waterfowl hunters. What other state has nearly as many non resident as resident? You may think your having a good morning when the next guy to you is 300 yards away. A native North Dakotan thinks he is having a good day when the next guy is three miles away. It's what we love about our state. I don't have anything against non residents. However, I would prefer fewer each year, but hope you have a much better hunt when you do come. Myself I would rather have a very good hunt every other year than a mediocre hunt every year. I want you to enjoy yourself when you come, but some years there are so many non residents that residents feel like giving up hunting. I hope you can understand what I am saying without feeling like I don't like non residents.

In reality I could put up with someone a half mile away. At 400 yards falling shot perhaps isn't going to hurt, but it's disconcerting anyway. I have been hit twice, but I have no idea if it was residents or non residents. Either way it was people comfortable hunting to close. I like space.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

The fellow who wrote this call to arms, Mark Masaheri, has been at it for awhile. Here is an old flash from the past. 2002

http://www.refugeforums.com/refuge/arch ... 33626.html



> Fetch_ND
> people have become frustrated with the lack of land access and the explosion of land set aside
> for fee hunting as the reason for the declining numbers of North Dakota pheasant and waterfowl
> hunters. Hunters at the forum said the governor's attempt to move up the pheasant opener is
> ...


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

One also has to consider how these bills originated. Since non residents can't vote here one might assume it came through the resident guides. If the guides are able to cater to more non-residents then it is a good chance they will have to lock up more land.... which could be a secondary result of this bill....... THAT does affect our heritage of hunting....I have no beef against the non-resident who might hunt a field or slough a day or two then move on but if a guide gets that field or slough it is basically closed to the resident hunters for the season. It really doesn't affect me but in some areas the land is locked up pretty tight keeping out the resident hunters who don't want or need a guide.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

dakotashooter2 said:


> One also has to consider how these bills originated. Since non residents can't vote here one might assume it came through the resident guides. If the guides are able to cater to more non-residents then it is a good chance they will have to lock up more land.... which could be a secondary result of this bill....... THAT does affect our heritage of hunting....I have no beef against the non-resident who might hunt a field or slough a day or two then move on but if a guide gets that field or slough it is basically closed to the resident hunters for the season. It really doesn't affect me but in some areas the land is locked up pretty tight keeping out the resident hunters who don't want or need a guide.


Your exactly right. Also, in years past North Dakota had lower income than people from other states. People who came from states where wildlife has already been commercialized came to North Dakota and often were paying to hunt. The commercialization of wildlife has been the greatest threat to our North Dakota hunting heritage. That gave rise to the high fence shooting galleries like Dwight runs.

Still I judge non residence individually and like most that I meet. Those that call me I'm willing to give some tips if I can help. I think all hunters have to stick together. In that light I hope non residence can understand some of our frustrations in North Dakota. Non residence can be our allies in these struggles with politicians who worship every dollar they can bring in. I'm caught between a political group that worships it's perversions and one that worships money. We need a third or perhaps a fourth and fifth party. For those of us who have outdoor experiences as one of the measures of quality of life we are not being represented by our legislature who's main measure of quality of life is the dollar bill. Small wonder organizations like North Dakota Tourism joined the North Dakota Farm Bureau against conservation and hunters. I do think it was extremely short sighted of North Dakota Tourism because most tourists would rather come and see a Mule Deer than a John Deer.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plainsman said,



> The commercialization of wildlife has been the greatest threat to our North Dakota hunting heritage. That gave rise to the high fence shooting galleries like Dwight runs.


Plains, you're a hoot. Farmed elk are not wildlife. And I sold all my elk bulls to a large operation in Utah. I have discontinued the high fence hunting. Over the years I have met some of the finest gentlemen you can ever meet. Nine times out of ten they belong to the NRA or will crawl 50 miles over broken glass and gravel to advocate for guns and hunting.

Plains, what are you going to do when you don't have me to badger anymore about the HFH?


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Id like to see three weeks for non resident pheasant hunters does this only affect waterfowl hunters?


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

I appreciate the folks writing in so far in being able to keep on topic without bashing nr's. As a nr property owner, I have felt welcome both by the users of this site and my neighbors in ND. I can certainly understand the concern and fear of loss of hunting opportunity, either by leasing or expansion of guide services (also involving leasing). 
But how real is this concern? To my knowledge, not one hunter from my camp has ever employed the services of a bird guide, nor have they ever paid a lease. I know of no farmers/ranchers in the area that lease their lands for hunting, and have never encountered any obviously guided hunters. In fact, it is rare that I have had to look for an alternate site because my first choice has already been occupied.
That said, NR hunters generate a lot of varied spending. Expansion of the amount of time would add to that. Since ND already limits the sale of agricultural lands, could you not prohibit the sale of hunting leases, and/or eliminate guided hunting?
Again, thanks to Plainsman and all the others on this site who work to address the issue without NR bashing.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> To my knowledge, not one hunter from my camp has ever employed the services of a bird guide, nor have they ever paid a lease.


It's people like this that we love to see come to North Dakota. People who are just another hunter. Attitude is more important than political boundaries and those with your attitude are one of us. With those attitudes your not Minnesota, Wisconsin, or North Dakota your just another hunter.



> Id like to see three weeks for non resident pheasant hunters does this only affect waterfowl hunters?


Bob I'm not much of a shotgun hunter so I loose track of those things. I think the only restriction on upland is that the opening week was resident only. I think our legislature after passing that now want to repeal it. Our legislature is in a get even with hunter mode this year. They see themselves as rulers not servants, and when anyone puts a measure up to the voters they want to get even. Childish. They are not so radical to bow to Mecca in the morning, but they may bow in the direction of the closest U S Mint.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

oldfireguy said:


> I appreciate the folks writing in so far in being able to keep on topic without bashing nr's. As a nr property owner, I have felt welcome both by the users of this site and my neighbors in ND. I can certainly understand the concern and fear of loss of hunting opportunity, either by leasing or expansion of guide services (also involving leasing).
> But how real is this concern? To my knowledge, not one hunter from my camp has ever employed the services of a bird guide, nor have they ever paid a lease. I know of no farmers/ranchers in the area that lease their lands for hunting, and have never encountered any obviously guided hunters. In fact, it is rare that I have had to look for an alternate site because my first choice has already been occupied.
> That said, NR hunters generate a lot of varied spending. Expansion of the amount of time would add to that. Since ND already limits the sale of agricultural lands, could you not prohibit the sale of hunting leases, and/or eliminate guided hunting?
> Again, thanks to Plainsman and all the others on this site who work to address the issue without NR bashing.


oldguy,

It doesn't sound like you frequent a guide or outfitter much and could live without them. Are you sure you want to ban a property right such as leasing or ban a business guiding? We could go on and on about things that we don't do individually and do not use personally so just ban it.

America, the land of the free..... with an asterisk.



> I think our legislature after passing that now want to repeal it. Our legislature is in a get even with hunter mode this year. They see themselves as rulers not servants, and when anyone puts a measure up to the voters they want to get even. Childish. They are not so radical to bow to Mecca in the morning, but they may bow in the direction of the closest U S Mint.


Plains,

you made the same claim on FBO. How is that working?

http://www.fishingbuddy.com/measure_5_backlash?app_p=6


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Working???? It's an attempt to make people think. It's not working on you or your buddy. Maybe others catch on though. Funny how residents and non residents are getting along and here you are driving a wedge. I suppose a non resident who doesn't hire a guide is a worthless person in your view. If you don't get money they are worthless. I am happy you are out of the little pen shooting gallery though.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

> I suppose a non resident who doesn't hire a guide is a worthless person in your view.


You can if you want and don't have to if you don't. Choice, it's a great country isn't it?



> If you don't get money they are worthless.


You'll have to show me where I ever leaned in that direction.



> I am happy you are out of the little pen shooting gallery though.


Had I gave them away free, you would have been one of the first ones in line.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Had I gave them away free, you would have been one of the first ones in line.


You couldn't be more wrong.

We all get it Dwight, you don't like conservation because your afraid one of those organizations may get an acre you could have. Everyone is a second class citizen when compared to a farmer. We understand your attitude. We just don't all agree. I think farming is a business no better no worse than any other business.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plains said,



> Everyone is a second class citizen when compared to a farmer.


How long have you harbored these feelings of being a second class citizen?


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

Shaug,
I absolutely do not want to prohibit the guiding business, nor do I wish to see any constraint on who a farmer/rancher can lease their property to. I raised the issue, not as an advocate, but to ask if folks who fear the expansion of such activities had thought that aspect through.
A friend of mine once pointed out that anytime a new law or regulation is put into effect, "someone's ox gets gored".....and lobbyists get paid to advocate the goring of "the other guy's ox".
May I assume you also oppose the current constraints that control who a farmer sells his property to?
Back to the subject:
I do not believe there is a cause/effect relationship between the length of time a NR can hunt, and the amount of acres leased, nor the amount of guiding services utilized.
Scenarios:
1. NR's like myself hunt 2 weeks and never lease or use guide services. Effect: No change
2. NR's who hunt 2 weeks and have a lease.....well they already have a lease. Effect: No change.
3. NR's who hunt 2 weeks and do not have a lease. What indicators exist that they will suddenly decide to lease property because they have another week to hunt? A: None exists.
4. Guide Services: I would defer to the guides (again although I do not use your services, I see no reason to eliminate them).
Q: How many parties do you guide more than once a season? Have you ever guided the same party for an entire two week NR season? I would assume (yeah that's dangerous) that an increase in the number of NR's might create more guide business, but not an extension from 2-3 weeks. Where I have seen a demand for guides is where time is limited. If a party has only a short time to hunt, they feel the investment in a guide is a real benefit.

I am hoping that this bill is approved. Last season I shot 22 birds in 2 weeks. Given a 3 week season, I would probably shoot about the same. ace it, you can eat only so much duck and the possession limit remains unchanged. More time allows me to take a day off, do some fishing, relax in town etc.

I truly believe the fears of loss of hunting opportunity are not connected to the expansion of NR season. But I am a proponent of sunset legislation just to allow a review. How about trying it for a 3 year period with a "continuation" vote required?

Thanks again to this site for providing the opportunity for discussion. The folks of North Dakota remain the best.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

> oldfireguy wrote,
> Since ND already limits the sale of agricultural lands, could you not prohibit the sale of hunting leases, and/or eliminate guided hunting?





> 4. Guide Services: I would defer to the guides (again although I do not use your services, I see no reason to eliminate them).


Your kind of debating with yourself.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

Shaug.
Read my last post again please. One can raise a question without being an advocate for that question.


----------

