# NR Season License Proposal



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

I've listened to a lot of the debate on this issue and it seems that the majority (not all) of the opposition concern is that NR's will lock up private lands via a lease, or by getting permission ahead of ND residents.
My suggestion is that a NR purchase under the existing license rules or be offered an option to purchase a seasonal license with the restriction "Hunting beyond the 14 day period is permitted only on public lands".
That would negate any incentive to lease private lands for an entire season. Only residents would be allowed to hunt private lands for an entire season.

I recognize that there may be some residents that just want to eliminate all hunting competition......but that's not good for the resource nor the passing of the sport to the next generation.

What say ye?
Moderator: Please move this to any forum you feel is more appropriate.


----------



## driggy (Apr 26, 2005)

Wouldn't help me much. My relatives are farmers and have plenty of land to hunt. So why would they want to be limited to hunting public with me when they have much better areas. By the way, I'm older now and appreciate the good times together. Not much into hunting alone anymore, except deer of course.


----------



## diver_sniper (Sep 6, 2004)

Seems like that would be a lot of weight on the shoulders of law enforcement. It just seems like it would be inviting a ton of law breaking. If the public land is getting pounded all year long, it's never going to hold much for birds. In the meantime the regular migration is going to continue to happen, which means there will be plenty of places holding birds, it just won't be the places open to NR's that have used their weeks. It would be mighty tempting for any NR's that have just dealt with a few days of getting skunked to move their set up to a place where they may actually have a chance. Especially if they've used up their 2 weeks and know what it's like on "the other side of the fence".

Another thing, and I know this will get laughed at, but there isn't much for fields that are considered public land. North Dakotans always encourage people to hunt the fields and leave the water be. This would basically be telling people, "Ok, you can hunt, but only water. Yep, the same water we always piss and moan about you hunting on and encourage you to stay away from."

How about this. Instead of limiting them to public land, how about we say that after they have used up their days they can still hunt, but it can't be over water anymore. I say that mostly as a joke, and I personally don't really want to see the rules change, but it's an interesting thought.


----------



## AdamFisk (Jan 30, 2005)

diver_sniper said:


> Another thing, and I know this will get laughed at, but there isn't much for fields that are considered public land. North Dakotans always encourage people to hunt the fields and leave the water be. This would basically be telling people, "Ok, you can hunt, but only water. Yep, the same water we always piss and moan about you hunting on and encourage you to stay away from."


Actually, that is a great point.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

How bout we just keep it the way it is. 14 days is plenty.


----------

