# Access loss accelerates



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

My recent week in ND every single private land spot I've hunted for many years was posted. The hotel owner said that the local outfitter had approached all the farmers to post for his people only. That was depressing, ND is unfortuately now no different than the rest of the country, access wise anyhow. 
The hotel owner was concerned because many of their long term freelancers told them they will not be back and he said hunting season is his most profitable time of the year. I've always known this would happen I just didn't think it would happen so fast. Conversations with the other hunters staying in the hotel were depressed and dour quite the opposite of the previous years I've stayed there. The Plots I was hunting had groups of trucks with ND liscense plates local residents that have lost access also due to this greedy outfitter. I genuinely like farmers so I don't really know what to think about them doing this to their community.
My hunting buddies sadly are also not going to make the trip again. On the trip home we got to talking about it and one of my friends sons ( hes 28 years old ) made the observation that we would be screwed for deer and turkey the same way if it weren't for the national forest here in Georgia. Normally I would never post where I hunt but theres really no point in being secretive about it anymore the hunting is pretty well gone. Oakes ND was a beautiful place when I first started hunting it. I picked it because it was on the fringe of the pheasant range these fringe type of places used to have easy access even in states that are otherwise heavily hunted and posted I always managed to find birds and roam pretty freely. In previous years I've commented on the limited almost vacant plots in the area and I was distressed about the lost of access to Plots opening week for Non - residents, this year the plots were getting pounded in the second week! All the hunters were very concentrated making the quality of the experience very poor. With the investment in 6 dogs and my passion for bird hunting I will return( alone unfortunately) in the late season and try my luck at getting on some of the posted land hopefully most of the pressure will have subsided by then and maybe a few of the farmers will let me on. My vacations in the future will be spent bowhunting and grouse hunting in Northern Wisconsin and Michigan on the National forests. I hope you guys are able to work this access issue out but somehow I doubt it.
I really felt sorry for the residents I talked to that were caught in this squeeze North Dakota is a beautiful place in a hunters eye. I doubt many other segments population see it as anything but desolate, which is what I found attractive about it. My lifes goal was to convince my wife to move up there, now I'm glad she was reluctant, it won't be a good place for a hunter in the near future. If I were a resident and wanted my children to be able to hunt as they grow up I would consider moving to a state with a huge chunk of national forest and buying a residence there, in North Dakota your hunting heritage is rapidly ending. 
I've always believed the people of North Dakota represented the best America had to offer and still do, but I think the farmers around Oakes ought to do some soul searching. Have a good season it may well be one of your last, good luck.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

Sorry to hear about your bad experience here. I am located only 45 miles from the town you mentioned.I guess we need to step up to the plate as sportsman and business owners and get things done!
There seems to be a lot of big talk on this site (including me) but no'one going through the right channels and trying to take care of this problem. If we could organize a decent petition ?ect? and have a few trustworthy spokespersons we as NorthDakotans and sportsman could make ourselves be heard and damned LOUD!
Some say no Non Res, some say 30,000 Non Res,some say 5000 Non Res,?????What we need are commen sence figures
We need to control G/Os which is making hunting a rich mans sport.
We need to only set limits to sustain our wildlife so we all have many years of enjoyable hunting at minimal cost to us all Res and Non Res alike.
We all need to remember there is far more impact on hunting than just birds in the freezer.
Economic impact
Tourism
Friendships
Family times
Memories
ect.ect.ect. Remember..somday your kids may be Non Res..and not by choice...but because of economic impacts of all sorts

Just venting ...Curt


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Bobm; while writing this, our non resident friends from MN are packing up. The group found the same problem with much more posted land this year than previous years and foresee the end of their hunting out here. For example, in 1990, there was 3 miles of posted land on highway 46 from 281 to Gackle (a distance of about 30 miles). This year, there is only two miles of unposted land on the same stretch of highway. The same is very true of the pheasant hunting country around Oakes/Ellendale and anywhere in Hettinger county. Until some North Dakota communities come to their senses and realize that leasing and posting is driving away the 90% of non resident hunters that do not use guides and outfitters, the number of hunters, both resident and non resident, will continue to decline in certain areas.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Three outstanding posts, ......three outstanding letters.

GF Herald: [email protected] 
Bismarck Trib: [email protected] 
Fargo Forum: [email protected] 
Minot Daily News: [email protected]

*GO FOR IT!*


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

You gentlemen are hunting in legislative districts 26 & 28. These folks need to hear from you. And all of the rest of us. It won't change until we stand up.

District 26 Legislators and Candidates:
Joel Heitkamp	Senate	9457 West Ridge Road	Hankinson, ND 58041	242-7432	*[email protected]* 
Bill Amerman	House	P.O. Box 43	Forman, ND 58032	724-3833	*[email protected]*

Pam Gulleson	House	P.O. Box 215	Rutland, ND 58067	239-5389	*[email protected]*

District 28 Legislators and Candidates:
Kim Radermacher	Senate	7787 Hwy 281 S	Edgely, ND 58433	396-7431	*[email protected]*
Sheen Deis	House	7215 Highway 83 Linton, ND 58552	782-4352	
Richard Deis	House	7215 Highway 83 Linton, ND 58552	782-4352

28	Sen.	Robert	Erbele	Senate	6512 51st Ave. SE	Lehr	58460	701.378.2272	*[email protected]* 
28 Michael	Brandenburg	House	8044 County Road 34 SE	Edgeley	58433	701.493.2915	*[email protected]* 
28	Rep.	William	Kretschmar	House	201 E Third St.	Venturia	58489	701.684.7321	*[email protected]*


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Whats his name and whats the stores name?


----------



## jdpete75 (Dec 16, 2003)

Maybe Gander Mountain? PMed ya bob


----------



## stevepike (Sep 14, 2002)

> somday your kids may be Non Res..and not by choice


It is always a choice. What field they go into, whether the almighty dollar beats family/friends/lifestyle/hunting&fishing, etc. I hate to hear that someone's son or daughter HAD to move. They choose to. They just need the right reason not to.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

This is a pretty good example of "robbing Peter to Pay Paul" The same amount of money may still come into the community but it will benefit someone else. Good for one guy possibly bad for both. What happens when the hotel goes belly up and the outfitter has no place for his clients to stay. Then his business may drop off too. We need to figure out a balanced program. One that can offer equal hunting opportunities to the freelancer or guided hunter, provide benefit for the landowner, G/O and the small communities. Maybe a landowner posting only 50% of his land thus allowing opportunities for both. I would remind landowners that residents of this state are also voters and this could turn into a battle which nobody wins. I've heard of landowner only allowing you to hunt if you sign their petition and make warning that such a tactic can also be done in reverse. If the average person no longer has access to the land how much do you think they will care about the government spending money on farm programs or wildlife programs. Also remember that the leasing and G/O businesses(and that is what they are) may be profitable for a while, as long as the game is abundant and habitat is in good shape. But like any successful business re-investment is going to have to be made to those resources to keep them productive. Right now one can just sit back and expect to make a few bucks. But when things turn around and they eventually will, the business, whether farmer or G/O, that does not re-invest in his business will loose it. When a paying hunter comes to expect success he had better find it or he will not return. Meanwhile a resident hunter, if access is available, will still be putting money into the area and directly or indirectly helping to keep rural ND afloat. There will always be those that are willing to pay big bucks too hunt. The question is, is that enough to support rural ND long term?.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

Good post...good point dakotashooter2


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

North Dakota is big enough and upland game so widely distribited, that if nothing was posted for pheasants, hunters wouldn't be concentrated and the guides could operate just fine everyone could have a good hunt there is plenty to go around.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Yes, everything that is being stated is true. I am from the area that is being talked about and have stated in my previous posts about the availability of land open to hunting on the decline as hunting pressure has increased. It is now to the point that unless you have contacts in the Oakes\Ellendale area I'm not so sure that I would come. This was also a very bad weekend because MEA and NDEA conventions we being held simultaneously in Minnesota and North Dakota. Quite frankly I don't think that I have ever seen so many hunters in my area. It is something that I will have to deal with but being a local, access is not a problem but for those that just come in to freelance, I'm afraid that I can see where the litlle guy will soon be priced out of the market just like the other prime areas. This is the most posted land that I have seen in the 20 some years I have lived hear. And yes some large acreages have been sold or leased so the plague is in the earlier stages as I stated in my previous posts.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

I hate to admit this, but my SECOND favorite thing to do in the world, is shopping for outdoors clothing/products. Obviously being in the outdoors (hunting, fishing, biking, camping, etc...) is #1, but I love buying new gadgets.

I bet I am in the Bismarck Scheele's 2x/week during the season and atleast 1x/week in the off-season. I have multiple sets of hunting boots, apparel, equipment because that is what brings me joy. Now, after reading some of these posts........and if they hold water.......I am not sure I will shop in major stores anymore. I know that I spend $1000 per year in Scheele's alone..........buying softball bats ($200-300), softball cleats, golf clubs/apparel/equipment, basketball sneaks, hunting gear, camping gear, etc...

I, for one, would love to know the truth behind this story. If anyone knows of a contact person, let me know. Thanks and have a good one!


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

Bob, we used to do a lot of hunting down by oakes. For years starting in the late 80' we had three fathers and three sons for a deer hunting party. There was some posted land back then but we found a lot of places to walk including the big sloughs down there. During high school we chased pheasants and in college with all the moisture it was ducks and geese. each year it got tougher to hunt and finally in 2000 we decided it was our last trip to hunt that area. This will now be our 4th year in a different unit and we have found landowners willing to let us on and it has been a lot of fun. It's too bad the area has changed like that, but sometimes you just have to move on and try a new area. The problem is I feel like we are running out of new areas.....


----------



## Niles Short (Mar 18, 2004)

Don't deny the post about Gander Mountain - but lets hold presses until the rumor mill can be claritfied. Put away the ropes and quit looking for trees until things are proven


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

I agree with Niles. Could be disinformation. Might be someone else.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I can understand why G/Os want to lock into some land. Their business is to provide their clients access to game. Hard to do if you you don't know if someone has already hunted an area 2 hours before you or just as you drive up. But isn't posting/leasing ALL the land somewhat bitting the hand, or at least one of the hands, that feeds you? Especially if the G/O is a local and has to live near the freelances he just shut out. I can also understand why the landownwer would take advantage of a lease he may be offered. Extra cash is extra cash but next time he is stranded along the road or needs help taking off a crop or rounding up his loose cattle is the G/O operating out of a city half way across the state going to be there to help. I'm not saying nonpaying hunters are wandering around offering their services to the landowners because that is not happening but most (as residents of the state) are at providing at least indirect year round support to rural areas that even they do not realize. I know several land owners who would not lease their land to G/Os. One, because it would shut out their neighbors (who haven't had any problem shutting them out) and also because since the land was in CRP they felt they were already being subsidized by the tax dollars of which the hunters contribute to. These landowners could use the extra money as much as everyone else but see the bigger picture. 
There are also other factors to consider. Is leasing land for fee hunting still an agricultural use? If not should that land be taxed as a non agricultural business? Landowners wouldn't appreciate that and rightly so but many non-ag businesses feel that ag land is not taxed on a fair playing field with other businesses anyway.
Should a landowner be able to post CRP or lease it for hunting? We have to remember that CRP was intiated to remove less productive land from production in an attempt (with questionable results) to reduce ag surpluses and increase prices. The landowner is being subsidized for removing his land from production (bringing in income?) and as I understand it a landowner cannot even hay (for sale or private use) this land except for special circumstances. Which bring me back to the question of hunting being an ag use. If it is, would leasing CRP for hunting purpose not be in illegal use of the land under the program guidelines or at least call for a reduction of program payments?

Lastly we come to the hunter. There is no doubt we need to improve our image. Hunting on privte land is a privilege not a right. We need to respect the landowner and the land. I am as guilty as many of hunting on NON-Posted land without tracking down the owner. Unfortunately old habits die hard. I think many landowners cold really care less as long as you don't really mess things up and probably won't bother you even if you havn't asked, but asking demonstrates your respect for them which they appreciate. On several areas that I hunt I ask every year dispite being told I don't have to ask. Just my way of showing respect to those landowners. Quite franky whining about lack of access only seems to make them less sympathetic. When I am turned down for access I usually ask why. I want to understand if they have had a bad experience or if they just use it themselves. That often can lead to an opening for hunting another type of game or a later season.

Why do you think non-residents come here? Because we still offer opportunities their states don't. But we should heed their warnings or we will be doing the same thing they are. Looking elsewere for those opportunities. No one group is at fault and if we cannot find a way to work together everyone will lose in the long run.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

G/O, Why the secrecy? if you know the name and the outfitters name post it so it can be verified and they can be approached to see if they can be reasoned with for some type of compromise. This situation isn't going to benefit either side in the long run and a lot of small businesses in the local towns will be hurt.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

g/o said:


> Everything is true as far as I know my freind said they are trying to rent blocks of rooms for next year at the local motels. By the way it is not Scheels. Should be interesting how this plays out .


What? What is interesting about that? More like disgusting! uke:


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Unless g/o posts the name on this one, any info from him should be immediately deleted in the future.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

I agree with Field Hunter. Let's get this crap straightened out!


----------



## MOSSBACK (Jun 10, 2004)

indsport said:


> Until some North Dakota communities come to their senses and realize that leasing and posting is driving away the 90% of non resident hunters that do not use guides and outfitters, the number of hunters, both resident and non resident, will continue to decline in certain areas.


I think thats what some land owners are aiming at by posting thier land.

The number of out of state hunters in the last few years is getting absolutly out of hand.

Plus out of state hunters are buying up marginal land for $900 and acre and up for hunting purposes which also pi$$ off locals so they are forced to post their land up tight so they have something for their family and friends to hunt on.

I'm sorry but it's the out of state and City hunters that are ruining hunting in North Dakota. People tend to blame the G/O's for everything but if there was'nt rich out of state and City hunters paying for that serivce there would not be G/O's.

Rural North Dakotans are used to peace and quiet and expect a few hunters during the season but all the suburbans ukons and explores driving up and down gravel roads and section lines with funny looking plates and pulling boats make us nervous.

If you like North Dakota so much and what it has to offer move here. Thats what we need is people paying taxes and kids in our schools. Not 50,000 NR's blasting the hell out of our game. Now that may seem selfish and greedy but Hunting and fishing and quality of life is why I choose to live here and would not live anywhere else. There are alot of people in this state that feel the same way as I do.

They would rather lease their land to a G/O who can controll the number of hunters they take out and puts a dollar in the pocket of one of their local buddy's.

Yeah it would be great if it could be the way it used to be when very few land owners posted their land but with the influx of NR's and a growing Urban population in N.D. they have no choice in trying to preserve our Hunting heritage.

I have heard several people say they are going to take up bowhunting exclusivly to get away from the crowds and enjoy the tranquility of being outdoors undisturbed and I have thought of doing the same thing but why should I. I am going to support anyone who trys and support keeping North Dakota what makes this state so great.

It does not mean we are mean or unfriendly if you want to come expeience the hospitality and good people of our state come and play pinnochle with us in January you are more than welcome.


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

We could talk all day about it, but people are going to come to a great place to hunt. Talking about it won't stop it. Elect someone that will put a reasonable cap on NR and protect the resource and the way you want ND to be.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

> Elect someone that will put a reasonable cap on NR and protect the resource and the way you want ND to be.


I personally don't care if the increased hunter pressure and loss of access is due to people from Minot or Minneapolis. In my opinion, we don't need to cap NRs. Instead, we need to cap commercial hunting operations. This fight is not a Resident/Non-resident fight, but a freelance/commercial hunting fight.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

BigDaddy said:


> This fight is not a Resident/Non-resident fight, but a freelance/commercial hunting fight.


YA, What he said !!


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

Did the access problem start from a relatively stable population of resident hunters or a rapid ramp-up in NR hunters?


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

North Dakota is at a crossroad boys. The erosion of land access is changing the hunting heritage that you and I knew as a youngster. Hunting access is *slowly* disappearing; maybe that is why it has gone unnoticed or publicly unchallenged to date. The hunting public and the "land barons" of today, the North Dakota hunting guides and outfitters, and the wealthy hunting based corporations ( if you think all of the big boys have not staked out their own little piece of the action get your friggin head out of the sand), are heading for that crossroads.There appears to be no compromise that is acceptable to them. The "land barons" want it all. The acceleration of hunting land leasing has been picking up steam in the last few years. Hunting in North Dakota is at or close to, one of the peaks in the wildlife cycle. Is this why the leasing of land has become so rampant? or could it be that the amount of "prime quality" land is shrinking? Is this a good thing for "your town" North Dakota? Why do landowners lease their land to these "land barons", because there is a dollar to be made by lessee and lessor. Why do we as hunters and business people put up with it???????? over 100,000 deer licenses were issued in ND??????????????

There is a gray area in the law. The North Dakota Century Code and the North Dakota Constitution both spell out that the wildlife of the state is the property of the state. And that the heritage of hunting will be preserved.

*Article XI General Provisions North Dakota Century Code 20.1-01-03 
Ownership and Control of Wildlife is in the state - Damages - Schedule of monetary values - Civil penalty *The ownership of and title to *all* wildlife within this state is in the state for the purpose of regulating the enjoyment, use, possession, disposition and conservation thereof, and for maintaining action for damages as herin provided. Any person catching, killing, taking trapping, or possessing any wildlife protected by law at any time or in any manner deemed to have consented that the title thereto remains in this state for the purpose of regulating the taking, use possession, and disposition thereof...

www.state.nd.us/lr/cencode/T201.html

*North Dakota Constitution*
Section 27. Hunting, trapping, and fishing and the taking of game and fish are a valued part of our heritage and will be forever preserved for the people and managed by law and regulation for the public good.

www.state.nd.us/lr/constitution/Const.pdf
Do not take my word for it look it up yourself, check the links above. I am not making this stuff up!

Landowners, Outfitter, and Guide operations get around the law by telling us they are selling *access rights*, *Bull****! *I am not that naive, if you can not see the travesty of that you are blind or just do not care. I am afraid that there are far to many that do not care. If that is the case You had better not let me see you post and ***** about how bad hunting in North Dakota is becoming if you have chosen to sit on you *** and do nothing to change it. Businesses in small towns are going under *slowly*. *A small town has to save itself; hunting income will help once the decision is made*. Again that is the truth; Mott has had several articles in print this year about how bad things are. They like to blame the states NR regulations of no PLOTS hunting the first week. They would never blame some of the wealthy O/G businesses in Mott, Hettinger, and Regent, or some of their pay to play practices of the locals that many out there seem to encourage. Look at your PLOTS guide, how much "QUALITY" PLOTS land is around Mott? Many hunters quit going because the hassle of finding huntable land was not worth it. How many people do you know that can afford $200.00 to $600.00 per gun per day for an outfitter? Or $50.00 per gun per day to go onto day lease property? They sure as hell don't give your money back if you get "skunked". People from other areas of the state are also blaming the state regulations on all of their ills. It has nothing to do with gas prices as well as the price of everything else going through the roof, and all of the exclusivity and posted land as far as you can see right? Could it possibly have anything to do with advertising false reports? ND tourism Dept.? Could it be that hunters from certain parts of the state quit hunting the area because they are not welcome to spend their money there?

Landowners seem to have a bone to pick with hunters from certain parts of the state. In retaliation they do not allow hunting on their land if you are honest and admit that you are from there. How childish is that? Grow the F#ck up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have many thousands of hunters, outdoor persons, and businesses in ND and a few hundred that want ND hunting to be their exclusive little "play ground". Why are they winning? They are winning because just like this site people will piss and moan about things all day long but they do not do anything to change it. Those of you that have worked so hard and put in so much of your personal time for the betterment of all outdoor enthusiast, *Thank you! *Those of you that do not like the way things are going now, well, this is no time to be silent! If you do not know how to approach a legislator, ask, there are many here that will give advise on the do's and don't's of the legislative process. and I do think this has to do with NR's the ones that I know and hunt with agree that change is going to be required, ask a few that have posted here how it is now compared to then! I have used some blunt language in this post and Chris if you want to kick me off so be it, I will not apologize for the way that I feel.

Bob


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

It seems like people are surprised at how much land is being gobbled up by G/O's! There is nothing to stop them. The farmer we used to stay with is a friend and we still stay in touch, we talked about how many people rent out their houses to hunters and talk to neighbors to post their lands for those hunters. Some of these hunters are paying $30 a night to lodge in a farm house but are getting thousands of acres to hunt that is off limits to everyone else. This is the same thing as a G/O but is hidden in the "renting" of a farm house. There is a person in that same town who moves in with a friend during hunting season (6 weeks) and rents out their home, with that rental you get access to about 10,000 acres of prarie potholes and wheat fields. The man of the house is careful not to do to much "guiding" because he is aware of the rules to be a guide and doesn't want to pay for the license. 
If I were coming to ND for the first time this is the situation I would be looking for.
The only way to stop this is to quit blaming the NR for everything and get some laws passed. The flood of NR's will slow down when access gets to be a problem but that same problem will also shut out the ND resident.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

BigD,

If there were zero o/g, pressure/competition of the levels we've had recently will still drive exclusivity in the form of buy/lease. O/G is just one form of lockout and, unless you otherwise disincent buy/lease, "the market" of even non o/g hunters since ND has become Page 1 news will continue the lockout trends. And for waterfowl, even 100% access means nothing if all of the birds are quickly pushed out of state.

The only way to make it a non-R/NR issue is to establish one overall cap and everyone gets one ping-pong ball. Not much reason to maintain a 58XXX zip code in that case.

Hard problems - no easy solutions. A little o/g work here, a little nr cap there and we probably get something that will sustain itself for those who follow us. One or the other only, and we just slow the rate of burn.


----------



## Rick Fode (Sep 26, 2004)

I'm for a cap at 5000 NR's, if that will happen how many of these G/O outfits could survive? If we had a lottery, even these big city bigshots might not get to come to ND, luck of the draw. So would they continue to lease land and drive pasture prices to 600 dollars an acre? No way, they'd go to Nebraska or somewhere else or they could live in ND and their problem is solved. Way more than half of the N/R's that come here don't want a guide, they want to hunt like the residents do, get out and scout and drive around and find things out for themselves. Our hunter vote alone could elect Satrom, if the 100,000 deer hunters and their spouses vote, it's game over for Hoeven and a strong message will be sent out!


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Rick see below, we will never know residency status of the clients of O/G operations.

20.1-03-38. Licensing guides and outfitters by the department - Rules - Inspections.

1. The director may license guides and outfitters and may adopt rules to regulate guides and outfitters. If the director requests a trade secret or proprietary information, the director shall request the information on a seperate form, and that information is confidential and is not public record subject to section 44-04-18 and section 6 of article XI of the Constitution of North Dakota. The director may release this information, however, if it is aggregated so as not to identify any giude, outfitter, or client. Before engaging in rulemaking activities with respect to guides and outfitters, the director shall appoint a committee composed of guides, outfitters, and interested individuals and shall consult with the committee when preparing rules.

Hmmmmmmm. I wonder who the "interested individuals" were when it came time to make these rules? makes you wonder if they have to report the income from their secret clients?

Bob


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Licensing guides and outfitters by the department :


> and interested individuals


, would this be like the NDGF Advisory Board, composed of Farm Bureau members? It's a can of worms and the deeper you go the worse it smells.

If you look at g/o's original post, I have to wonder if the situation he described is *soft* outfitting? You lock a pile of ground, provide no other service other than brokering clients to access. No outfitter license, no reporting. Just the cash.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Dick
All I can say about the area is that I was denied access this season because I live in Fargo and my views on this site, (I asked why I couldn't hunt). The area where I asked all pretty much had the same response. HMMMmmm!

I was politly asked to leave their property and never come back. I can live with that, but it reminds me of children when they get their feelings hurt and don't want to play anymore.

I wonder how much tax revenue is lost due to "Cash" transactions? isn't that why Capone went to the big house? I am not up to speed with all of the fine print farm program requirements, are there any income stipulations attached?

Bob


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o

Different views, different philosophies, we have had our agree to disagree discussions. How is that habitat you planted? holding wildlife? I am going to keep up the fight till there is a resolution one way or the other. to me it is way to important to let slide.

With the current situation what would happen if they did get busted? I would venture to guess the answer would be nothing!

In the end we will get to "Chill" for a long time, I ain't ready yet! 

Bob


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

G/O I don't know who the outfitter is. My basis for the comments was what the owner of the E & I motel in Oakes told me about in a conversation about the situation when my friends told her they would not be returning due to the huge increase in posting that we encountered. This conversation occured during our last night as we were settling up our bill. I did not ask for specifics at the time because I was too depressed about it I guess. I didn't really think it was important at the time I guess I wasn't really thinking ahead, I was just tired and disappointed to see the change.
You're are correct I don't know the farmers that own the land on a first name basis, I have talked to some of them and always made a point to thank them for something I sincerely appreciate more than most North Dakotan because I know how incredible the priviledge is to freely hunt anywhere you please without hassle, a great priviledge long lost in the south. When I saw all the posting I knew in my heart it was some type of concerted effort because of the sheer amount of change that it couldn't of been coincidence. I never ask to hunt posted land early in the season because I've always felt that if someone posts it they want to hunt it or save it for their friends and family and I respect that. As I stated in my first post I planned to look them up later in the season and ask permission. Many of the posted signs were not signed or had no phone number so I wasn't going to spend a lot of my extremely limited hunting time to look for the land owners, thats a job for the off season. I'm a person that appreciates my solitude and don't like to be pestered, and tend to treat others the same way so I don't like to bother farmers the signs specifically stated NO HUNTING or TRESPASSING period there was no caveot about "without Permission".
There was so much unposted land in the Oakes Ellendale area that Prior to this year I never felt the incentive to bother the few that posted their land, I just assumed they were hunters and wanted it for their family and friends. I never want to put one of the many very good farmers in the uncomfortable position of having to say no, I try my best not to impose on people.
I did however talk to many local North Dakotans that were caught in the same squeeze so this isn't simply my shortcomings and lack of preparation for an unforseen problem. North Dakotans have the most to lose they live in an economic climate that has fewer opportunities because they love the outdoors and what it has to offer. I have the option to hunt elsewhere and will try to adjust my trips to make the best of it. I love North Dakota and its people and as silly as it sounds look forward to my trips there like I did to Christmas as a child. My last day or two I get depressed because I hate the prospect of leaving and have been actively lobbying my family to move there. G/O this trip made me realize that the freedom to roam in ND is over or will be soon so I will have to set my sights on a state with a lot of public land, your side has won. The thing I've never understood is why you can't operate without the posting, I have hunted Oakes for years and never seen any high hunter densities until this outfitter tied up all the land and forced everyone on to the Plots most years I don't see 5 other hunters all week except for the gangs of hunters out of the Prairie Pothole lodge. They pound the Plots around the area pretty hard even though they have tons of posted land around the lodge, smacks of pure greed to me. North Dakota is plenty big enough for all the pheasant hunters that come if they are allowed to disperse thoughout the pheasant range evenly.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

somehow it double posted sorry about that


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

OK
I looked up the O/G operation that Bob M mentioned They advertise High Fence Hunts as well as all of the WMA's and PLOTS in a multi county area.

It is against the law for an O/G operation to guide or hunt Plots land!

20.1-03-39 Guides and outfitters restrictions-Administrative sanctions.

1. The license of a guide or outfitter may be denied, revoked, or suspended, or placed on probation by the director if:

a. The licensee, while carrying out the business of guiding or outfitting, engages in conduct detrimental to the image and professional integrity of the guiding and outfitting industry;

b. the licensee willfully and substantially misrepresented the person's facilities, prices, equipment, services, or hunting or fishing opportunities as a guide or outfitter;

c.the licensee has been convicted of a offense not listed in subsection 2 which is determined by the director to have direct bearing on the licensee's ability to serve the public as a guide or outfitter;

d. the licensee is addicted to the use of intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or stimulants to the extent the licensee's performance of professional duties is affected; or

e. The licensee has become not qualified, or has violated any rule for the licensing of a guide or outfitter by the director.

2. The license of a guide or outfitter may be revoked if:

a. The licensee is convicted of violating state or federal criminal law pertaining to hunting, fishing, or trapping.

*b. the licensee acted as a hunting guide or hunting outfitter on land owned or private land enrolled by the department for the purpose of hunting or on land for which the department pays in lieu of tax payments; or *
c. The licensee provided guiding or outfitting services to a person that had not obtaineed the appropriate license for the species sought by that person.

3. For the purpose of administrative sanctions, an outfitter is liable if a guide intentionally violates a state or federal criminal law pertaining to hunting, fishing, or trapping if the outfitter knowingly aids in the violation or knows of the violation but fails to report the violation to the department within a reasonable time. a guide is liable if a client violates a state or federal criminal law pertaining to hunting, fishing, or trapping if the guide knowingly aids in the violation or knows of the violation and the guide or client fails to report the violation to the department within a reasonable time.

Bob


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

g/o,

POST THE NAME!!!! It's really quite simple. I don't need all the other info....but thanks! If you post the name I'll be the first one to acknowlwdge that you are trying to compromise with the rest of us.....Until then all you 've done is stir the pot with mis-information.
(could it be that you are connected in some way with this outfitter?)

I never said I don't believe an outfitter or guide....and I'd bet that you Are not suprised by my comments. The same old rhetoric from you guys is gettng a bit old!


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

If there was such a sale I believe it would be public information by the sales tax dept. IRS.Game & fish ect. Thats if it was a legit sale.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

G/O said 


> I talked with a g/o freind from the Oakes-Ellendale area the other day and I thought you guys may appreciate this. Apparently a gentelman from the Twin Cities leased a tremendous amount of land in the Oakes,Ellendale,Ashley areas and provides hunts in these areas.


G/O now claims


> Bobm, Your information was nothing more than here say BS. What you do not understand farmers post there land for many different reasons but the number one reason is they want to know who is on there land


You now says this is "hearsay BS" you can't have it both ways, you genious. Did you lie about your conversation with your G/O friend???
And don't lecture me about respecting landowner rights I always have and still do. I've knocked on plenty of doors for permission and recieved it( 25 years in sales I'm not shy about talking to anyone) but if your post was the truth about the leasing for hunting purposes permission would not have been granted now would it. Although you telling the truth is highly doubtful based on your last two posts


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o
Thanks although you know I will never take you up on the offer, and I think you know it is nothing personal.

Dislike the profession, respect the person, that is my take on the Outfitter Guide Industry. I do not see them as "snidley whiplash" lurking in the shadows waiting to snatch all of the little children as they pass. Well maybe one of them. They are doing what they see as a way to make a better living just like I do, the difference being I am not taking away anyones opportunity for outdoor activities, and collectively they limit the resources availabe. My take is simple; Run an O/G operation ONLY if you own the land, No land leasing, no soft outfitting.

As I have stated in prior posts, there is always going to be a need for some O/G operations, Why? because there will always be people that want to hunt, don't have a clue how to hunt, and have the money to pay for whatever they want.

We need the O/G industry to get over the all or nothing attitude, and then maybe we will also. Last session they were approched and talked compromise like they ment it and then stabbed the sportsmen in the back every chance they got, (second hand information from a reliable source)

If a reasonable compromise could be reached, many here would endorse it! it is as simple as that 

Bob


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

> If a reasonable compromise could be reached, many here would endorse it! it is as simple as that


Absolutely! :beer:


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

G/0 local guide or NR Guide they both want the same thing and I didn't attach one issue to the other they are already joined. They are both contributing to the exploitation of the publics game and the loss of access in the Oakes area and North Dakota in general. You want to feed on the resentment some on here have for NRs go ahead you're no better than the guide from Minn St Paul. Maybe worse, you're screwing your own neighbors and the communities they reside in. 
My comment about the local outfit Praire pothole lodge just further described the greed your side has, post all the land you can, then hunt the cream off the surrounding Plots saving your posted land for later after you've burnt off the Plots ( which I was surprised to hear Bob K say is illegal).
Everyone on this site know what you're about , so try as you might to twist your comments I doubt it will fly. As for you not caring what I think thats no surprise its obvious you don't care about anyone but yourself. The hell with the future of hunting for your North Dakotan neighbors as long as you can line your pockets uke:


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Until today I never knew it was illegal and I never said the outfitter was on the Plots. I said the trucks full of hunters that are in his cabins use the plots and that I have seen, probably his loophole. Pheasant hunters don't need to be lead across the grass. As for a stake in the area you G/Os are harming the local hotels and restaraunts not that you will ever admit it.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o

Do I have to like what you do to like you as a person? I don't think so.

I know from past discussions that you own your land, you have invested a lot of sweat and money into habitat, and that you lease some land for agricultural purposes. I belived you when you posted these facts even though I can not verify any of it because I have no clue who you are. You could be Sheldon for all I know.

You can do what ever you would like with your land you own it! I just don't feel that it should be mandatory that I like and accept what you do for your extra income.

Do you know the concept of the Public Trust Doctrine? Look it up if you don't I have made several posts on the subject. Do you feel that ND should get compensation for game harvested other than the few hundred dollars that you pay for a O/G license? or do you even have a license? you do not need one if you are operating on land you own under current law, you don't even need to do any reporting under current law. Your industry had the rules made up by your own from the industry with a few self interest insiders consulting, Boy I wish I could make up the rules that I have to abide by in business, Your industry and organization has talked out the side of their head everytime compromise has been sought. I guess you all must feel with the Governor, FB, Tourism Industry, and Economic Development in your hip pocket you can look down your nose at any compromise because you do not have to compromise.

I have a very difficult time seeing how your industry works in the best interest of all ND residents. What are the benifits that you offer to Joe Citizen for his acceptance of what your industry does.

You sell yourself and your services to you clients or you wouldn't have the 5 grand in your pocket as you posted earlier. sell yourself to us!!

Later

Bob


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o

I was just looking for the "pitch" that you give your clients.

I could accept your statement about making rules except the plumbers and electricians are governed by a national codes NEC and UL, for the most part these are "watchdog" organizations making rules to limit liability. Not even close to the O/G rule making situation.

Your clients are just as entitled to the game as I am, they have paid the license fee, i do not accept the fact that you are able to sell wildlife. Commercial Hunting was outlawed a long time ago, what is the difference between you and a commercial hunter?

I could accept your premise about the Legislature if the land owners were pushing proposals and not the O/G industry. Do you represent the sentiment of all the landowners in your area being a landowner yourself?

I hope your industry will understand someday that we are not the enemy as I do not consider you or any other O/G an enemy. I consider you a good person ( a gut feeling) and there are many, many good people in your industry. there is room for compromise all around but first the all for me attitude of the O/G industry needs to stop.

You want a place to take your clients, I want a place to hunt, where we clash is with a virtual lockout in prime areas due to land leasing for habitat instead of requireing O/G's to plant more habitat on land they own.

Bob


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

PM me your address I will come up we can have a cup of coffee. g/o *I DO NOT WANT YOUR BUSINESS TO FAIL!!!!!* I want compromise with your industry that will benefit all involved!

Bob


----------



## deacon (Sep 12, 2003)

Give it up G/O, this sites from what I can tell is about free lancers and anti-guide. With which I agree, guides are the biggest problem in ND, yes there are plenty of other issues but guides are at the top.


----------



## Drakekiller (Apr 3, 2002)

Bob
Last session we tried to compromise with Rep Nelson,Cyle B. pres of G/Os, and more, a total waste of time and effert. This session we won't waste much of our time working on compromises.Live and learn.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Bob, I would be very carefull about any brash judgements you make about Prarie Pothole or any other g\o. To generalize about Prarie Pothole and blame this top notch business for your lack of access in the Oakes\Ellendale area is totally out of line and a gross misrepresentation on your part. I personally know the people who you are talking about and you will not meet nicer people and if you were stuck in a mudhole or snow drift out in the middle of Dickey county, which all hunters eventually are, they would be the first one's to help you out. Here again is someone from outside North Dakota telling us what is wrong with the conditions in our state and the fact of the matter is that people like you are a major part of our problem.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

I'm not blaming Praire Pothole for the loss of habitat the only statement I made about them is that the hunters drive out of their driveway and go down the street past huge amounts of land that Praire pothole has posted to hunt the local plots and that I've seen going on for years. I stated that I think its greedy to charge for hunters to hunt at any guiding operation and then see them hunting the Plots. I've hunted along side their operation for years with no real problem it was just an observation period. I have no doubt the man that owns it is a good person everybody I've ever met in ND is. However if you're going to post your land then hunt it and leave the local Plots for the local residents and freelancers, which with all the increased posting from the guy G/O alluded to is almost all they have left. As for blaming the G/O's for access dissappearing they are specifically to blame for commercializing hunting and are the largest reason access is declineing, thats the truth and the truth is not a "BRASH STATEMENT". IF they didn't lease it and post it all of us could hunt anywhere just for the asking as in the past. As for your stupid comment about a NR telling North Dakotans what their problems are I'm pretty sure all your North Dakotan "Friends" are painfully aware that guides and commercial are the source of this evil, so your cheezy attemp to claim my comment isn't worthwhile is BS. No suprise coming for a buddy of the Commercial crowd though. 
I'd rather call a tow truck than owe commercial crowd anything, for what they are doing to the hunting tradition and their fellow North Dakotans ( you claim to have such affection for) I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire!.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

With your attitude, please don't come back!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

We discussed G/O hunters hunting public land last year....it is illegal for someone paying a G/O to hunt PLOTS. :eyeroll:

If you saw this...You should have called TIP


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

I will post this again This is a Part of the North Dakota Century Code.

It is against the law for an O/G operation to guide or hunt Plots or any public land!

20.1-03-39 Guides and outfitters restrictions-Administrative sanctions.

1. The license of a guide or outfitter may be denied, revoked, or suspended, or placed on probation by the director if:

a. The licensee, while carrying out the business of guiding or outfitting, engages in conduct detrimental to the image and professional integrity of the guiding and outfitting industry;

b. the licensee willfully and substantially misrepresented the person's facilities, prices, equipment, services, or hunting or fishing opportunities as a guide or outfitter;

c.the licensee has been convicted of a offense not listed in subsection 2 which is determined by the director to have direct bearing on the licensee's ability to serve the public as a guide or outfitter;

d. the licensee is addicted to the use of intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or stimulants to the extent the licensee's performance of professional duties is affected; or

e. The licensee has become not qualified, or has violated any rule for the licensing of a guide or outfitter by the director.

2. The license of a guide or outfitter may be revoked if:

a. The licensee is convicted of violating state or federal criminal law pertaining to hunting, fishing, or trapping.

*b. the licensee acted as a hunting guide or hunting outfitter on land owned or private land enrolled by the department for the purpose of hunting or on land for which the department pays in lieu of tax payments; or *c. The licensee provided guiding or outfitting services to a person that had not obtaineed the appropriate license for the species sought by that person.

3. For the purpose of administrative sanctions, an outfitter is liable if a guide intentionally violates a state or federal criminal law pertaining to hunting, fishing, or trapping if the outfitter knowingly aids in the violation or knows of the violation but fails to report the violation to the department within a reasonable time. a guide is liable if a client violates a state or federal criminal law pertaining to hunting, fishing, or trapping if the guide knowingly aids in the violation or knows of the violation and the guide or client fails to report the violation to the department within a reasonable time.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

I still hate how little the O/G are regulated. Their are many landowners that charge hunters and are not set up as an established business.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Remmi
That is called "Soft Outfitting" No regulations, no reporting.

Bob


----------



## Drew Willemsen (Sep 29, 2003)

WOW!! You guys are really goin at it!! :beer: :beer:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ken I don't read everypost thats put up here, I wish I wouldn't of posted my experience and wouldn't have except I was asked to. I knew what some would come up with. I'm tired of this fight, its a losing battle with the commercial crowd or at least they sure have won in the rest of the country. I don't go worrying about whos hunting where, it was just an observation of their obvious greed and yes I have seen it. I'm not reporting anyone I don't go hunting to cause a bunch of controversy and mind my own business unless someone really gets in my way. Its your state and your problem. Read their damn website, they advertise hunting on public land in the "unguided" section draw your own conclusions. The whole guiding industry thing stinks but I'm well aware that even a comment about the weather will bring on the NR bs on this site. 
IF you don't stop it you all be NRs somewhere else, ND politicians won't give a rip what I think.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

DJROOSTER I'll comeback whenever I please until your buddies in the comercialize hunting crowd finally sew up all the access. Then I'll go somewhere else, thats one of the only advantages of being a traveling NR I can go where the access and hunting is best. When your buddies have managed to post the whole state I'll probably see some of your fellow North Dakotans your buddy screwed out of place to hunt, looking for a hunting spot in some other state. 
North Dakota will be a wonderful place to live after all the land is posted and only weathy NRs are hunting your old hunting grounds won't it.


----------



## goosehtr4life (Dec 16, 2002)

G/O I have absolutely no problem with the way it sounds your operation is set up...In fact I applaud your effort....

The problem I have is when I knock on a farmers door and I hear one of two things..

This land was leased by so and so guide....

Or $50-100 per gun to hunt my land......

When you pay for hotel/ sheels/ gas and then you and your two boys are somehow to come up with an extra 150-300 to hunt...

Can't do it..won't do it.. Will offer to help around the farm(I've done that) or anything else..It's just a principle thing...even if I could afford it..

Like I said if every g/o operations was like yours we would be all fine..but that is not the reality of the situation...


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Bob...interesting point....What is considered guided and what not???

Can a person who stays at a lodge but hunts on his own hunt PLOTS?

Does the guide have to be with them???

Dan...Ron...anyone else know?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

I had asked Bobm to post his recent hunting trip experiance to good old ND, and thank you Bobm for doing so. Looking over that outfitter web site, PLOTS is advertised. More than once. Caged hunts too.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken

I classify this as soft outfitting, it is a gray area, I can not find anything in the C Code, The question is if they are staying with an O/G operation and they tell clients to hunt public land then I believe it is Guiding and is therefore a breach of the laws that govern O/G's

???????
Bob


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ken I haven't got any idea but I would like to point out that reporting some guy using plots thats staying at a guide outfit isn't going to change things one bit. All its going to do is screw up the vacation of someone that may have saved all year for the hunt of his dreams and I'm not going to do it, even now that I know it might not be allowed. If I was'nt aware its illegal ( if it is) he probably isn't either, so why screw up some poor guys hunt. The guide operation has an obvious incentive to preserve the bird population on their land as long as possible though. 
I repeat I don't have any interest in fighting with someone while I'm on vacation, my life is stressfull enough I go to ND to relieve it not add to it. 

The big picture is the one that matters the commercial guys are taking your state away from you and the time will come when your kids cannot hunt, infact at the rate its going away it may be you and not your kids. If you can't afford to travel the country to hunt like I do and don't own a bunch of land I would recommend you get your kids into fishing or move to a state with a lot of public land.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Maybe the laws needs to be cleaned up.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

Myself and 3 others just got back from over a weeks worth of hunting/riding/restaurants/motels etc in your beautiful state. This is the first year I have ever been turned down when asking permission to hunt... There is more posted land than ever before and I, like you do not like it. It is a long way from my little state to yours, and although I sincerely love the friendly people of North Dakota, I can do as well in many other places.

I also would like to see your state as it was years ago... There seems to be a good deal of money changing hands - that is where the problem lies. I would like to come back... I just don't know if it is worth the hassel anymore.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Ken,
I talked to two groups of hunters that were with a guide in the morning hunting land next to PLOTS last year....both said they were with the outfitter in the morning and on their own in the afternoon......HUNTING the PLOTS! Ya Right!!!! I didn't turn call the warden but I will in the future....this is a blatant disregard for the rules by the outfitter. By the way it was an outfitter out of the Ellendale area.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

I just did a random google search and their are many many many g/o operations advertising PLOTS land. I am not sure on the regulation of what exactly is considered a g/o operation. These sights offered guided and unguided hunts on private land and the PLOTS program. Just do a google search and you may( or may not) be suprised.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Finally got down to the Oakes/Ellendale area yesterday and here is my email to the Oakes tourism promoters:

Dear Sir or Madam,

My family and I have hunted in the Oakes/Ellendale area for the past 15 years but this year was our last. We used to hunt deer, pheasants, and ducks in the area but stopped deer hunting 5 years ago and finally got down this week to pheasant hunt. Compared to 15 years ago, the amount of posted land has greatly increased and formerly open areas are now posted and land owners refusing permission to hunt. As a freelance hunter who refuses to pay fees to hunt on land and little time in our busy world to establish relationships with land owners, I can only say I am sorry that we will no longer be visiting your area and would like to point out that your area is not alone. Once access to huntable land is reduced, everyone except the land owner and the person with the money to pay for access is an eventual loser.

Sincerely,

North Dakota Rural resident hunter


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

Unfortunately it sounds like that is a loop hole that the guiding outfits can get around. The people pay them to hunt the G/O land in the morning and then the G/O can simply say that the people are on their own to hunt wherever they want to in the afternoon. Then it is unfortunately no different than a hotel owner suggesting to them that there is some public hunting areas just down the road, they might want to try there. I dont know how they would keep them from hunting these areas. Just because someone pays for access to some land, it does not exclude them from hunting areas that are open to public hunting. They are still part of the public, even though they are paying to stay at a guiding outfit, just like anyone else staying at a local hotel.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

So I guess the way the law is written it's worthless.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken 
I would have to somewhat agree. Gray, very gray!! IMO The law as written only prohibits O/G's from physical presents on public land. :-? Any Legal Minds out there care to put in their two cents?

Bob


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Bob and Ken, I asked this directly of the G&F at the Spring meeting in 03 after the law was passed. Unless the G/O is with them they are OK.

Really the only way to eliminate this is to have a separate license cat for those using G/O.

I have some thoughts on this but do not have time right now to lay it out. Lots of pros and cons about doing this.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

I would like to see a new license structure. We need to have a license that is issued to only hunters that use O/G's. Resident and Nonresident alike. If they are stopped on public land and have this license in their possession it should be a violation. Problem Sloved!

My two cents.
Bob


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

If some G/O's are advertising hunting on plots ect.which is illegal, why not turn them in???? I think it sucks that g/o's are making money exploiting land that is made to be used for the public and then post up and lease land and tie that up also. :eyeroll: Time to get tough on em I'd say! (Might I add SOME g/o's not all)


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Problem is Curty, As the law is written I don't think it is illegal for a guide to tell them to hunt public land as long as the guide is not with them.

The law needs to be updated.

Bob


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

Hey bob thats a great idea...It will also help keep the g/o's on there own land ,leased or owned. I also bet it would narrow down the amount of g/o's. tightening the belt so to speak.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

WOW Bob...talk about a huge loophole in the law.....Letting some guy pound the plots and basically getting paid for it. As far as I'm concerned its guiding weather he told them to go there alone or he is with them. :eyeroll:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Problem is how to word it...someone could hunt with a guide for a couple days and then on his own.

Plus what about B&B's where you have exclusive rights to hunt the owners land?


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

I guess you right...gray areas all around. I guess thats what makes this forum so great.putting lots of heads together. Lets all get together and be a 50 man team for govenor :lol:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken

Your point is very valid. "Soft Outfitting" is going to be a tough nut to crack, How would you be able to tell a B&B, Hotel-Motel Owner or Someone with a rural house to rent, that he could not tell his guests that there is hunting down the road on some public land. IMO it would be impossible to enforce.???????????????

The O/G permit would at least slow some of it down.

In SD last weekend I picked up a copy of their regulations, they have 
a " Shooting Preserve License" that is basically the same as an O/G license would be.
Cost for 2004 is $35.00 2005 is $85.00 yikes!! I Think they want to make some extra money? Non resident Small Game is going up $10.00 to $110.00 for 2005 good for 10 days. A non resident small game license is also good for shooting preserves.

Bob


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> Guys don't even go there look at all money the cities recieve in subsidies everyone gets benifits so that isn't even an issue.


Thats comparing Apples and oranges, I haven't seen any posted signs in cities, all residents are allowed equal access to tax dollars spent to improve librairies ect..


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Check out the letter to the editor in this Sundays (10/31) Fargo Forum
http://www.in-forum.com/opinion/. As I have posted the last four years on this site, their experience with posting and land owners is part of what is driving the reduction in non resident hunters to North Dakota including my own out of state friends who no longer come here. Unless and until the local communities understand the problem, their attempts at "economic development" and "tourism" utilizing wildlife will come to naught regardless of the status of the wildlife populations.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Here is the letter from the Fargo forum today where a MN hunter says the same thing I am saying...

Howard Cooksey letter: Nothing friendly about North Dakota 
The Forum 
Published Sunday, October 31, 2004

My 18-year-old son, 19-year-old nephew and I recently, as nonresidents, hunted pheasants south of New England, N.D. We were given permission to hunt posted land, all of which in that area is posted for fee hunting or just permission only hunting.

Before we had hunted two hours, we were told we must get off the land by the father of the man who gave us permission with no reason given. After walking back to our truck, a farmer yelled at us for parking on his field approach just off the road. He claimed it was his land.

Everyone we asked after that to hunt would not allow us to hunt or simply wouldn't answer their doors. We, after investing over $400, were forced to leave and return home for lack of land to hunt legally.

We have, in the last two years, found the state of North Dakota has made hunting for nonresidents very expensive and unfair, but this is nothing compared to the lack of hospitality shown us by the rural landowners. I was truly surprised at how badly I was treated this year while simply trying to enjoy a weekend with my family from people claiming to be so hospitable. I have told my boys I refuse to go through with another year like this trying to hunt.

I must add that this area has had an explosion of fee hunting, all of which grow CRP for pheasant production. Under the law, the farmers are not allowed to make any extra money from the government than what is paid for growing CRP. Yet these fee hunting companies charge $100 to $200 a day to hunt in their CRP fields. They are breaking the law, and there is no government oversight, or for that matter, concern shown about it. 

Howard Cooksey

Moorhead


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o

Keep trying to PM me I have not received it. I would venture to guess that my side did not go along with the 3 day unlimited thing was because of the furor over HPCII. If HPC had been adopted last session things today would look quite different. Right?

Your right subsidies are everywhere, difference is law enforcement doesn't charge access fees to give you a ride to the big house in their car, Librarys dont have anyone at the door to collect fees for you to use the computers or read the newspapers, school lunch subsidies are part of the farm program.. I could go on and on.

My bottom line here is landowners want control of their land, fine, great, wonderful! but why does cash have to change hands for them to have control of the access, seems to me that the ultimate control would be to post the land and if access was not asked for prior to entering and they entered, the landowner should see to it that the tresspassers get a subsidised ride to the big house, but then again how many of those landowners will look the other way for a couple of bucks? I noticed that Compounding is against the law in SD. ND should have the same law.

Later

Bob


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

g/o...please convince me that a private land license would be benificial for us?Wouldn't you keep all the money?So none of that would go to the GNF?
Who could sell them for how much?Would they be good only on that landowners land?


----------



## tumblebuck (Feb 17, 2004)

I'm a little late chiming in on this one. Just spent 3 weeks working in Wishek and then another week in ND hunting the Oakes/Ellendale area. As previously posted, access is much tighter this year...almost to the point of not having places to hunt at all. I also witnessed the incessant pounding of PLOTS and WPA's.

Many places I hunted are now off-limits...and that includes posted land I previously had permission to hunt and previously un-posted land that is now posted and could not get permission to hunt. In a couple years you won't be able to hunt this area at all.

I have a friend/landowner who lives in Ellendale. He was approached this year by the outfitter from Minneapolis to lease his land. Thankfully, he likes to hunt as much as the rest of us and didn't bite at the deal, but said that it was very tempting. It's only going to get worse. He's hoping for a hard winter to kill the birds and hopefully stop all this BS. And, no, I don't have permission to hunt his land at will.

It's really disheartening when 3 trucks pull up to the motel...each with one driver and pulling a 12-dog trailer and then witnessing said drivers greeting different groups of hunters in the lobby. Some serious cash is changing hands somewhere.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

The only thing that will stop it is more restrictions on G/O.

Limit the number of licenses available...just like liqour licenses...so many per unit.

Limit the amount of land leased by any one outfit.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

G/O I like the idea of P.L.L. with a cap on total amount being allowed at 1% of the previous year sales. Now this would mean that a genaral licence can be bought and used for both private and public land as we do today, but the only way a person can use a Guide or Outfitter is to have a P.L.L.

Now this would not prevent landowners that want to from charging to hunt the land, hence the old arguement that we are trying to tell landowners what they can do with the land!

This will work for both upland and waterfowl. It is reasonalbe and sound is a win win for both hunters and businesses in the rural area's. It will return hunters to area's now locked up by G/O and also reduce the pressure on public lands by eliminating the point and hunt outfitters! It protects the Bed and Breakfast operators and puts things back on a level playing field.

When passing and implementing the law the only way the % could increase would be with a super majority of both the house and senate and no provisions for a Gov to overide this.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o

interesting idea, but wouldn't that give your industry more incentive to lease up more habitat land? You are basically describing the SD hunting preserve license. Have you put a pencil to the numbers that you posted? limit upland to 12,000 licenses? last year I think the number of upland licenses was 54,000, that would put 32,000 minimum upland licenses in your arena. That sounds like a ramp-up for your industry. I don't know if I could support a proposal like that without it being attached to HPC. HPC would at least put some common sence back into the management of harvest and safeguard against over harvest of the resource. Doesn't SD mandate their shooting preserves to have a certain number of verifiable wildlife on property, and if they do not comply they have to purchase wildlife to comply? the old guy at the gas station was hard to understand as he was explaining it to me.

I think that your idea has merit but it could also cause those in you industry to become cutthroat. To many cons at face value.

Bob

ps. still have not received a PM from you. I have received quite a few today so mine is working fine


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

12


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o
I never said your proposal did not have merit, it just needs a little adjusting. I am sorry if I come off as a butthead it is not my intent at all, my motive is simple, *conservation of the resource for future generations*

Later
Bob


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

Bob Kellam said:


> *conservation of the resource for future generations*


YES


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I can tell you one thing. If I was paying for a G/Os services and he pointed me toward Public Land and said "have at it" he wouldn't get paid. It may not be illegal but it is unethical and downright poor business practice. Any G/O who does this on a regular basis better hope for a very good source of new clients because his return customers are likely to be very few. There is room and the demand for G/O services in ND but things can get out of hand as they have in other states. Limiting the number of G/Os is going to make the business more profitable for the ones that exist and help to insure quality service. Limiting the amount of land they can secure will benefit the public interest. I know hunters already pay for a habitat stamp which helps fund habitat development land access, how about adding a "Habitat Fee" for G/Os. Establish a per acre fee for leased land that goes directly to habitat acquisition for public use. Since those leased lands are being removed from or at least limiting public access this could be used to replace that loss. To aide in enforcement of G/O regulations require that the G/Os name and license # be posted on all lands they lease or operate on. I know G/Os probably wouldn't like this but it would be a way of "giving back" to the community.


----------



## SEAHUNTER (Mar 16, 2005)

HEY I JUST HAPPENED ACCROSS THIS SITE AND READ ALL YOUR POSTS ON THIS SUBJECT AND AS AN AVID HUNTER AND FISHERMAN I CAN ASSURE YOU IT IS HAPPENING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. I LIVE IN FL AND HUNT ALOT IN MN I AM MOVING THERE NEXT YEAR JUST FOR THIS REASON ITS A SHAME I GREW UP IN IL AND USED TO PHEASANT HUNT ON FARMERS LAND ALL OVER THE COUNTY BUT YOU CANT FIND THAT ANYMORE. I DONT KNOW THE ANSWER BUT I HOPE SOMONE DOES GOOD LUCK IN ND


----------

