# ND Outfitter Leased Acre Report



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Below is the ND Outfitter Leaseing report as of Feb 3-06. I was always curious if the outfitters that buy wild birds on a per bird basis have report that ground as leased?	
________________________________________________________

Outfitter Leased Acres By County 2005
County	Outfitter	Acres
Adams
01-01-00	600
06-01-00	3500
21-04-00	2880
45-03-00	500
Adams County Total 7480
Barnes
02-01-00	5000
02-04-00	1307
02-05-00	2479
Barnes County Total 8786
Benson
03-07-00	1400
36-02-00	4460
36-04-00	3300
36-08-00	3400
36-09-00	795
Benson County Total 13355
Billings
04-02-00	8380
21-04-00	1280
Billings County Total 9660
Bottineau
05-02-00	3240
05-03-00	170
05-04-00	400
05-09-00	5400
Bottineau County Total 9210
Bowman
01-01-00	300
06-01-00	12140
06-03-00	9100
Bowman County Total 21540
Burleigh
08-04-00	4540
08-08-00	2480
22-01-00	960
Burleigh County Total 7980
Cavalier
10-01-00	5715
Cavalier County Total 5715
Dickey
11-02-00	3840
11-03-00	1360
11-05-00	3000
11-07-00	2560
11-08-00	4800
11-09-00	2380
11-10-00	1460
23-01-00	3720
23-02-00	5220
23-03-00	1200
23-04-00	1440
Dickey County Total 30980
Divide
53-04-00	500
53-05-00	350
Divide County Total 850
Dunn
04-01-00	3840
27-08-00	8440
45-03-00	480
45-04-00	7000
45-08-00	4000
Dunn County Total 23760
Eddy	Outfitter	Acres
14-02-00	4260
14-03-00	900
14-05-00	3552
16-02-00	1000
20-02-00	1280
20-03-00	320
Eddy County Total 11312
Emmons
15-01-00	8280
15-04-00	2700
Emmons County Total 10980
Foster
16-02-00	2000
20-02-00	1000
20-03-00	2680
Foster County Total 5680
Golden Valley
04-02-00	9000
17-01-00	2000
17-02-00	13500
Golden Valley County Total 24500
Grant
09-02-00	2000
19-01-00	2980
19-02-00	4140
21-04-00	2240
Grant County Total 11360
Griggs
20-02-00	500
Griggs County Total 500
Hettinger
01-01-00	1120
09-07-00	1300
21-03-00 4400
21-04-00	22080
21-05-00	4840
21-06-00	510
21-07-00	5720
45-01-00	800
45-03-00	1248
45-05-00	1000
Hettinger County Total 43018
Kidder
22-01-00	2560
22-02-00	1560
Kidder County Total 4120
LaMoure
02-05-00	364
11-10-00	200
23-02-00	320
23-03-00	2880
23-04-00	640
LaMoure County Total 4404
Logan
22-02-00	1000
24-01-00	9440
Logan County Total 10440
McHenry
05-03-00	2760
25-02-00	1000
25-03-00	3500
28-01-00	2320
35-01-00	6610
51-02-00	480
McHenry County Total 16670
McIntosh
08-03-00	9600
McIntosh County Total 9600

County	Outfitter	Acres
McKenzie
04-01-00	3200
27-01-00	5500
27-02-00	2100
27-08-00	3040
27-10-00	3780
27-11-00	2800
45-04-00	7600
45-06-00	2760
53-01-00	1200
53-02-00	3060
McKenzie County Total 35040
McLean
08-10-00	960
28-01-00	7140
28-08-00	6880
36-15-00	7500
51-02-00	605
McLean County Total 23085
Mercer
29-05-00	320
29-08-00	9220
Mercer County Total 9540
Morton
01-01-00	1500
30-03-00	3300
45-01-00	900
Morton County Total 5700
Mountrail
31-01-00	2138
31-03-00	8417
31-06-00	4172
51-04-00	2020
53-04-00	1000
Mountrail County Total 17747

County	Outfitter	Acres
Nelson
18-03-00	1500
20-02-00	1000
32-02-00	5900
32-04-00	100
Nelson County Total 8500
Oliver
29-05-00	2560
29-07-00	2000
30-03-00	500
Oliver County Total 5060
Pierce
05-03-00	120
36-09-00	600
48-01-00	2015
Pierce County Total 2735
Ramsey
10-01-00	2360
32-04-00	320
36-02-00	2440
36-04-00	800
36-08-00	4000
36-09-00	1960
36-18-00	460
50-01-00	1240
Ramsey County Total 13580
Rolette
48-01-00	1280
Rolette County Total 1280
Sheridan
42-01-00	15000
42-02-00	6800
42-03-00	9200
Sheridan County Total 31000

County	Outfitter	Acres
Sioux
19-01-00	4000
19-02-00	4880
Sioux County Total 8880
Slope
01-01-00	600
06-01-00	3600
06-03-00	1120
17-02-00	6450
21-03-00	4960
21-06-00	240
44-01-00	8700
45-08-00	160
Slope County Total 25830
Stark
45-01-00	800
45-03-00	9335
45-05-00	1480
45-07-00	1200
45-08-00	2920
Stark County Total 15735
Stutsman
09-01-00	6000
47-06-00	3400
47-07-00	5935
Stutsman County Total 15335
Towner
48-01-00	5240
Towner County Total 5240
Walsh
32-02-00	500
50-01-00	1840
Walsh County Total 2340

County	Outfitter	Acres
Ward
51-04-00	3260
Ward County Total 3260
Wells
42-02-00	1040
Wells County Total 1040
Williams
53-04-00	1000
Williams County Total 1000

*Grand Total 523827*
Friday, February 03, 2006


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Dick....I must be dumb....but what are the first 3 numbers in each line?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

The outfitters license #. It didn't paste & edit well. The report doesn't snag all the acres and of course doesn't list private leasing and outfitting on owned land either.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Once again in one county for sure the acres may reflect those leased though trackable contracts but it sure does not reflect the under the table acres!!!!!!

Thanks Dick for posting this up!


----------



## duckslayer (Oct 30, 2003)

Any way to find out the which outfitter belongs to which number?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Dick,

Thanks for the info....those numbers are astonishing. I never realized that much land is leased by outfitters. What is the percentage of land leased and land mass in ND?


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

In Kidder county, 4120 acres were reported as leased by outfitters. I also believe that all outfitters are honest uke:


----------



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

Anyone notice Hettinger county (Mott/Regent)? One outfitter has 22,000 acres alone! Any guess who that might be? It helps to be the first/most talked about outfitter huh Cannonball? Wow a real eye opener! Well ND Sportsmen there is your future! Is that the kind of economic expansion you want? It's only a matter of time before other counties get swallowed up.



> Chuck Smith Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:33 pm
> Dick,
> 
> Thanks for the info....those numbers are astonishing. I never realized that much land is leased by outfitters. What is the percentage of land leased and land mass in ND?


I think the better question to ask Chuck, is what is the percentage of land mass leased per county..... I don't care if how many acres they lease from Cass county, and I doubt many are. ND sportsmen better care about the heavily hunted counties in central ND. They are next on the G/O and/or NR purchase list... as other land further west gets more expensive....

Ryan


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

At the last advisory board meeting then NDGF director Hildebrand estimated private leasing was in the millions of acres. You also have to understand that someone outfitting on his own land is not required to be licensed---pretty slick---they were able to cut that requirement from the regs, so those additional acres are not listed.

Amazing that outfitters say there are plenty of places to hunt (yet) when they are forced to lease ground to do it. :wink: Very generous. Their own little HPC.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ben that was I was trying to get.....I want to know the amount of land (per count or whole state. then the total leased acres.) Is it 20% of ND land leased or what? Then break it down by county. I also know that if 20% is being leased of total ND acres....well you also have to figure Towns, Cities, Road, National Parks, State Parks, etc. So the figure could be tied up to what is. I would like to see that figure.


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

Total land area of ND, 43,000,000 acres of which approx. 93percent is privately held. Around 40 million acres. So 528000 is 1.3 % of the area of the state.

Which BTW is completely meaningless because that is absolutley no measure of the quality habitat that is out there.

Notice that Dickey County number. Problems are not just in the SW.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Dick, these are the number of acres under outfitters control. Many of the acres on here like mine are owned by the outfitter. You are correct we do not need an outfitters license on our own land. If we lease other land or want to particapate in the deer lottery we have to be a licensed outfitter. Now Dean was a politician, like all good politicians he told his audience what they wanted to hear. When he was at advisory meetings he was anti guide, when I started he praised me and told me how I was needed in my area. The million acres he talked about was the goal they have for PLOTS. If you will notice the PLOTS alone is at 803,000 acres,now that does not include all the other WPA,school and other public land open to public hunting.Like Ben Elli said this is not in Cass County it where the hunting takes place. PLOTS was originally set up for the southern counties of ND for pheasant hunting. If outfitters only control 528,000 and PLOTS alone is 803,000 and that is less than 3% there is a bunch of land out there to hunt by knocking on some doors.


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

And some of that PLOTS land is damn good pheasant and waterfowl habitat - like the following examples for instance:

[siteimg]1710[/siteimg]

[siteimg]1711[/siteimg]

Pardon my sarcasm, but PLOTS is not all that it is made out to be.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

G/O I can attest to the fact that in my home county those acres reported do not reflect the true leased acres. It may with the smoke and mirrors played in reporting. It is why a law is needed that states clearly that a G/O cannot hunt with paying customers on land he does not have posted stating the fact it is under lease!!!!!!!!!!

The loophole needs to be closed also on non licensed operations. Leasing of a small portion of hay land is giving them access to a whole section and it does not need to be reported, nor does the operator need to be licensed. Legally run operations are not the issue, but your profession like others should be licensed even on your own property to avoid the cheaters in the industry. It may penalize the honest people but it would give some teeth to weed out the bad operators that can work under the umbrella the current law provides!!!!!

Back in the days of wheat allotments 99% of the farmers where honest, but rules and regulations had to be put in place to allow the Gov to catch the 1% that cheat!!!!!!!

The issue is not about a landowners right to charge it is about those that are cheating the system. It is to bad that honest operations will have extra paperwork and such to comply so those can be caught and removed!


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

jhegg, If you would have gone to the advisory board I was at this was explained. Yes in some instances they lease a whole section or farm. They may get 200 acres of black ground but also obtained 400 of prime habitat. Not all of my property is prime hunting land some is black farmland.

Ron, Here we go again with your conspiracy theory. The law is in effect if you( as you state) know of outfitters hunting on land they do not have land listed call the Game and Fish. By the number of violations outfitters have been racking up, I think the Game and Fish is doing a good job of weeding out the bad ones. Do what I do when I find out some one is operating illegally turn them in. Is that so hard? The laws are in place Ron,don't like them change them. You really lost me on your comment that you don't mind farmers charging to hunt,but operations like mine need to be licensed. What do you think the majority of outfitters are in this state? We are farmers,ranchers,landowners very few can make a living out of just outfitting. I know it's troubling for you that all we control are these few acres, but thats reality Ron.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

g/o, I understood Dean very well. He said, "private leasing amounts to millions of acres". Private individuals who lease hunting ground.That quote he made at the advisory meeting was not about the PLOTS program.

Comparing the total acreage of ND to the acres leased is not a ture picture of habitat available for hunting. There are vast spaces that hold no birds or big game. And more that is fringe. Controling the best land controls the most game. That is why Cannonball put their people on the County Commision. By closeing public section lines they were able to control access to land and regulate where hunters were able to travel. It is market control.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Dick, Not going to get into a peeing match over who heard what. I understood him to say there private land leasing was to be 1 million acres by this year. Needless to say if Dean did say that then where are the missing 470,000 acres? Floating around the Game and Fish building? Some one better find them. If Hettinger County closed section lines it must have been alright with the people out there or it would not have gotten done. I know this is hard on you also Dick please find those acres


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

G/O it is not conspiracy it is reality and yes I will be pushing for change. Like a lot things knowing that something is taking place and being able to have cooperation to prove it becomes tough at times!

I witnessed a violation by a G/O shooting his clients limit. I called it in, but my word vs 3 clients and the Guide made it fruitless to issue a citation that the States Attorney could not get a conviction on. It did not mean that a violation had not taken place!!!!!!

I am not jabbing at you or your operation. You are doing what you do on your land and within the law as it is currently written. I am referring to the activity that is on going and hard to prove without one of the violators testifying against another one. I realize we do not like in a perfect world, but it does not mean we need to roll over and not voice our concern for these activities.

If a G/O was restricted to only his leased property and it is posted in a manner that the public knew it was leased. In Lamoure County those acres would be more in the 10,000 acre range! I am sure that other counties would have the same reflective increase as well.

It would eliminate the under the table deals! It would also inform the public as to the real acres leased! A lot less sympathy would result for deer predidation issues also in our communities. Those good old boys would not be able to sit at the coffee table up town and complain about the deer, when they have leased away the access control for ditch chickens and waterfowl!

That is not conspiracy it it a hard fact. I realize some do not think it would make a difference, but it will. One we would have true leased acres reported and compensation getting fairly taxed!

I really think any acre leased should be reported, so income can be tracked. Cash payments are income. I have to report my cash sales,my wife reports her tips, farmers need to report cash from access! Time to call a spade a spade on these issues. It is nothing more than making changes to bring those from the dark side back to the light side. Like most things in life the honest people become encompassed in the paperwork designed to catch the thief!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

g/o the voters in Hettinger Co had a recall election and took care of it.  So there is always hope at the local level. 

Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly, wouldn't be the first time. There are no missing acres. Dean was not including outfitter acres leased when he said millions more are *privately* leased.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

jhegg said:


> And some of that PLOTS land is damn good pheasant and waterfowl habitat - like the following examples for instance:
> 
> Pardon my sarcasm, but PLOTS is not all that it is made out to be.


 I was listening to KFGO News and Views last Friday when an official was on who represented the plots or spoke for them.

The reason some plots land is worth less is some of it is free acres thrown into the plots program. EX. the farmer was paid for 200 prime plots acres but put 500 in the program. And you never know right over the hill of that black plowed field may be a huge honey hole waiting to be found. :wink:


----------



## decoyspread (Nov 27, 2005)

How much do we pay as taxpaying sportsman to Plots per acre? does some Plots land get more than others based on quality of habitat?

Why are we paying for bare land?

Is there any rules as to having to leave some type of cover?

I was in a pretty good mood until I started reading this post, Now I think I should just go sell all my stuff and join a country club.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Here we go again Ron, why don't you take some time and research the current laws in place. You will first notice that all land has to be registered. Then you will find out that there is such a thing as a day lease. This also has to be reported. So Ron if that g/o that you despise so much is hunting on something you feel he hasn't leased. Check it out give the game and fish the land description and the day he was out there. Its as easy as that. Again I hear all these horror stories from LaMoure county and all there is leased by outfitters is 4400 acres. Go south one county to Dickey and there you find 30,000 acres. Yet at the advisory board meeting I was at nothing was said about Dickey. As far as reporting income thats up to IRS to regulate. I report all of my income also and the majority of it is in cash. Go ahead Ron start going around and accusing farmers of pocketing money,that will help the access problem a lot.

Dick, I'll excuse you but will not agree with you or Dean. Millions of acres? well show me the money. This is nothing but here say and is music to people such as yourself. Dean was shooting off his mouth at a rah rah advisory board meeting is all. Show me the proof and I'll support you but you will not find any proof.

Curty, this is exactly the way it was explained at the advisory meeting, Thanks


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

Hey Jhegg,

I sure hope you did not hunt that CRP slough in the top photo a 1/4 mile east. I know exactly where that piece of ground is,( I signed it up before I left NDGF). Funny, while doing a brood survey in 2004, I saw 3 broods one morning within 200 yards on the PLOT within 1/4 mile of that photo you took.

I guess it would have been better to have kept the signs off that piece of worked gorund. ( BTW we are only paying for the acres of CRP to the east. ) Then when folks drove by the piece of ground on Highway 32 they would never know there is 200 acres of CRp just to the east open to public hunting.

This is a really good thread. I think if you will go back and do some research, you will find me saying a hundred times that PLOTS will never be the answer to this problem. Since I am no longer working for the State of ND, I will say that while it is one hell of a program, and likely in the top three such programs in the country, it is and always will be a stopgap measure. As long as folks are allowed to sell what is not theres to sell, the problem will get worse. If you want to charge me a trespass fee to access your property fine, but when the third parties become involved the entire equation is corrupted. And you can't partially corrupt anything. Not the Bowman story where the kindly gentleman was killing eagles to protect "his" pheasants. One of the maxims that will stick with me forever came when I heard Dr. Geist talk about what happens when free roaming wildlife comes into conflict with animals that are considered owned and integral to the farmers livelihood. Guess what folks, the wild ones always lose.

G/O, I respect you for your willingness to enter the lions den and fight the good fight honestly. I really do. And as someone who is in your business, you undoubtedly do more for wildlife on your land than 98% of the folks on here do.

Unfortunately, all that good is fundamentally undone when you attach the idea that there is a profit to be made by doing this. Unless it is done in the name of Stewardship of the Resource, there is little redeeming value in doing it.

IMHO.

Tom


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Tom
if you have not heard a Thank You for all that you did for the PLOTS program. THANK YOU!!
.........................................................................................................

Leased acerage has so many variables it is and will be near impossible to track it. Think about it for a moment. the outfitter, his brother, his wife, his daughter, his son, his uncle etc. etc. etc. can all have the leased acreage in their name and have it available for the outfitter to use.

Here are the reporting requirements for reporting of land by outfitters from the ND Century Code:

*20.1-03-36.1. Fee for guide or outfitter license.*

3. The annual fee for a resident to receive a hunting outfitter license is two hundred fifty dollars for under ten thousand acres [4046.86 hectares] and five hundred dollars for ten thousand acres [4046.86 hectares] and over on which the outfitter provides services. The annual fee for a nonresident to receive a hunting outfitter license is two thousand dollars. _*The acreage must be presented by the county with a list of lessors by county in every application for outfitter licensure. The annual permit fee for day leasing is two hundred dollars. The acreage day leased by county for the preceding year must be provided to receive a day leasing permit.*_

Every outfitter in ND is not like Sheldon or the idiot from Bowman or some of the others that have made a name for themself in the media.

Do I agree with the current system in place that governs leasing? No I do not, at least not 100%. I do not like the overall trend in ND of so much land going into pay hunting either. There are some changes that need to be looked at and discussed IMO. Time will tell if those issues will be discussed. As you can see from the above NDCC regs there are a few holes in the lease reporting.

Now lets compare numbers from last year and this year.

Look at the figures below both numbers are on threads on this site.

*Reported acres leased in ND, 2004, by outfitters is 561,590.

Reported acres leased in ND, 2005, by outfitters is 523,827*

Seems like there is *37,763 less *leased acreage in 2005.?

Are there acres that are not being reported? probably. The only way to change it is to get more enforcement to catch the violators or reach compromise and change the current laws.

Bob


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

G/O land lost to under the table leasing would in most cases not be available to the average Joe anyway. Bad attitude by the owner or greed prevails anyway.

The point remains that a lot of this goes on and from my experience in dealing with farmers, most are honest people and do not look kindly upon those that try and skirt the rules. So if we have to look the other way on law breaking, then it should not matter what the infraction is! I guess we should all disregard bag limits, shooting hours, litter laws, driving restrictions etc..

If you feel so strongly about protecting under the table leases, why not introduce a bill that eliminates taxes on the money generated from leasing! Then have Conrad,Dorgan and Pooperboy introduce the same legislation in Washington so the IRS does not have to collect any taxes on it.! .

I never accused you of doing this, nor are all farmers and ranchers doing this, but enough are that it is worth getting out in the open! It may not increase access but it sure is not going to reduce access! Fear of access loss has allowed your group to prosper because you have used the line of telling a farmer what he can do with his land!!!!!!!!

I am not telling any farmer he cannot lease, but just like selling soybeans, or cattle if it is income it needs to be reported! That is the current law, but the loopholes that our current G/O laws have allow for the under the table activity!!!!!!!


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Tsodak, Thank you, I think? I do this to keep you guys honest and its a hard task. Same reasons I go to advisory board meetings, I notice at those you are dignitary and I am hid in the corner. Usually I'm out numbered 20 to 1. I will say when reading the wildlife society bs that Dick posted I was impressed. I was glad they metioned fishing and hunting derbys,big buck contest alike as uses of wildife for money. I know you and others feel what I do is wrong because of public trust. Which I might add does not fly in the legislature. Aside from that a guide to me is someone who helps some one find birds etc. I have no problem with this. If that guide is shooting the birds for clients then I do.

Where do we draw the line? Wouldn't the bait shop owner who draws you a map or gives you GPS locations be in violation of public trust also? How about the motel owner (sorry Curty ) who gives directions or knows of landowners whom have places to hunt. People will return to these places because of there info and indirectly there buisness will flourish. How about the TV and radio hosts that do shows. How about buckmasters and even Hustad selling videos of killing game. As little Nickey says who are the ones whoring out wildlife? Are we all not guilty somewhat?

My definition of an Outfitter would be that of some who provides accomdations. That being land (private) lodging etc.
A guide would be someone who is employed by an oufitter. I don't expect you to agree with me or will any other public trusters. I can not understand how you feel that my client is any less entitled to that game than you are? If the public owns he wildlife isn't my client as much of public as you are? Just because he lives out of state and has only so much time to hunt shouldn't he be allowed to also. So he hires me to guide him, I use my dogs and spend 6 hours babysitting him. Shouldn't I be compensated for my time? You don't work for free why should I have to. I hope I haven't got your blood boiling to much.

Bob, If you took the land out of there that is owned or in our FSA units. We would see a larger reduction. I do not think there needs to be a new law. Maybe a little tweeking, for one when we put are signs up make sure they have both my name and the person I'm leasing from on it. A quick trip to the FSA office will tell you the exempt land on my unit. If its not in there FSA unit then the 10 acres of hay for the whole quarter will not fly.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

g/o said:


> How about the motel owner (sorry Curty ) who gives directions or knows of landowners whom have places to hunt.


 :justanangel: Guilty as charged :justanangel:

No offence taken :beer:


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Sorry Ron I was posting while you were. As I told Bob all we need is to make sure the lesse and lessor's names are on the signs simple as that . If not it's a violation, and have outfitters whom are farmers and ranchers such as myself provide copies of land which is in there FSA units when submitting there outfitters license. Then you can drive around and check signs if you want. There always has and always will be cheating. There is in the outfitting buisness as well as other types of buisness money going under the table. Just look to the latest scandal in Washington, it's everywhere. I have to disagree with you, I feel the vast majority of oufitters are above board in there operations. Like all buisness we have some bad ones and they are getting weeded out.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

This is where ND will be in a few years thanks to the commercial crowd

http://www.gon.com/buyland.html

freelance hunting for the average guy is almost over in states without massive public lands


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Bobm, I read the article and I had to laugh. It never ceases to amaze me how you can claim to be a consevative. They mention a couple of things that caught my interest. First it mentions how the 1031 property exchange tax has driven this land rush. The 1031 is a good plan which has helped jump start a sluggish economy. Can you tell me who was responsible for this? Maybe next time you can put an excemption in there that they can't buy hunting land. The other part is where they mention that Georgia is now pushing 9 million people and will hit 15 in the near future. Lets compare apples to apples Bobm North Dakota is at 634,000 people on 68,976 square miles. Georgia has 8.8 million people on 57,906 square miles. Ever heard of urban sprawl? supply and demand? It never ceases to amaze me how you consider yourself a consevative yet want to deny me my property rights. When it comes to hunting you become a socialist like all other groups that want everything for nothing.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

I'm about to do a 1031 exchange myself and am in favor of them. I don't have anything against a 1031 (or anything else that keep the govt out of our pocket) and neither did the author of the article. The article wasn't anti hunting land purchase,the author was just pointing out one of the possible strategies available for investing in hunting land.

As for property rights we have beat that into the ground haven't we. The land is yours do what you want with it, the game on it isn't.....

As for your comment about urban sprawl guess where all those guys nationwide that want to buy hunting land are going to go? My bet is the places with the lowest cost land combined with the best hunting oportunity I doubt you would argue that ND is at the top of that list.

You misread my intent.
The articles were not arguing against purchase of hunting land and neither was I, it is without a doubt the future of hunting. A future undeniably driven by that supply and demand you commented on, the supply of freelance hunting oppotunity that leasing is rapidly depleteing in ND as it did here. Do what you want with your land. I sincerely hope you have a profitable operation and a long healthy life :beer: .


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

g/o there is a 180 degree differance between outfitting and what Curty does as a motel owner. If he gives someone a tip on directions the other hunters still have equal opportunity for access. They can just go ask the farmer. On the other hand outfitters that lease are exclusionary. The opposite of Curty's action. I don't mind outfitting on the lake, (unless the outfitter tries to set limits) because all fishermen have access to the cursed public trust. Remember that the public trust became popular after passenger pigeons became extinct. And game was decimated nationwide. Wonder why? :wink:


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

I know you think I am beating on you, but you should realize by now that I am railing more against the disease of which you are a symptom than the actual cancer.

Somewhere along the line we all got the idea that we have to shoot more birds or bigger bucks or the hunt was not a success. I have got a mild case of this, I am dang pround to have found the time and had the resources to harvest over 70 roosters this fall. But I draw the lineat ever paying someone to line the birds up for me. Just liek I would never pay a guide to turkey hunt. If I can't do it, then I will enjoy and be frustrated and say to heck with it. Just like our landowners take care of land based on the idea of stewardship, the experiance is the operative portion of the hunt.

I truly wish that you would have introduced yourself to me in Edgley, I would have loved to have had a face to put with the name.

This entire issue is filled with contradictions and catch 22's. Who is more likely to manage there land for wildlife than you??? Yet, the slope is inexorable and very slippery leading to a European type of system. I simply cannot reconcile to that.

I appreciate all the kind words regarding PLOTS. I do not mention it often just because of that. When I chime in on the subject now it as someone who is very interested in accuracy of information.

Time to watch the game.

Tom


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

g/o



> Dick, I'll excuse you but will not agree with you or Dean. Millions of acres? well show me the money. This is nothing but here say and is music to people such as yourself. Dean was shooting off his mouth at a rah rah advisory board meeting is all. Show me the proof and I'll support you but you will not find any proof.


When I spoke with people at the advisory meeting they said the same thing to me. they were talking about all of the landowner acreage that does not need to be reported for the unlicensed outfitter sector.

How much land is leased after the licensing report requirement used for a short period, (Deer and Waterfowl) and then released? I would venture to say a good number of acres. maybe it doesn't happen, but I feel it does. How much land is leased by unlicensed landowners? the law says it has to be used for bona fide AG purposes. what does that mean? can the landowner go out and hay a 5 acre chunk of a quarter and still be legal. He can the way the current law reads.

I agree with the slippery slope analogy. Some of the current laws the way they are written are doing a good job of adding ice to the slope.

Landowner rights and Public Trust is a "catch 22" that IMO is possibly never going to change unless and until the policy changes to include eveyone that profits from the practice.

Just my two cents.

Bob


----------

