# Non residents



## Original Goosebuster

Sometimes I am beginning to think that there are too many non-residents that come to North Dakota. I think that there should be a lower amount of them let in each fall. What does everybody else think?[/img]


----------



## goosebusters

They all ready limit it enough, I think that it is a vital part of our economy. Think about hotel owners in Lakota dude. They survive off out of state hunters cuz in state ones don't stay there.


----------



## Original Goosebuster

Im not saying get rid of them just cut down on them- 30,000 non residents compared to 10,000 residents: do the math


----------



## Old Hunter

Drop it your causing trouble.


----------



## goose nuker

Take a look at our fishing. We strive on out-of-state business. Our resorts, hotels/motels, even the casinos strive on that business. Not to mention the restaurant, bait shops, and dnr license sales. We enjoy alot of the people that come up and fish our lakes. There is the occasional NR that gets pinched for overlimits, but you have that every where. We would like to see more people come and fish and boost our economy. I like to spring snow hunt in Nodak and the people that we have made contact with are great people. The small dive of a motel that we stay at said " 60% of my business comes during the hunting seasons" what should we tell him? I don't think that limiting the number of hunters is going to help anyone. :2cents:


----------



## Ron Gilmore

*BAITING IS ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :******: *[/b]


----------



## jd mn/nd

Hey OBG, this topic has been stepped on so many times it's turning to coal, with that said why is it you live in Grand Forks, you are a border dweller. Is it so you can have the best of both worlds? And are you saying that you never leave the borders of ND for other recreational purposes? You are trying sell eveyone a bill of goods, the second you cross the border to MN or any other state for that matter, you are a NON-RESIDENT!!! No matter what the reason is you leave ND. Secondaly some of the folks on here have been coming up there longer than you probably have lived in ND, me personally for over thirty years!! Yes I do own a house in a small town in NC ND. The people there are very appreciative of NR's. Especially the ones that come to town and don't cause any problems while they are there. I buy all of the materials to do repairs in town, I pay someone to keep the yard so it looks nice and is not an eye sore to the community, I have the propane filled by the local co-op, I buy everything in that town or the surrounding communities, while I am up there not to mention the people that come with me. No I do not spend as much money there as a resident, however I spend a lot more than the regular NR. Some day I will retire there, I love it up there, for now I have other responsibilities that prohibit me from moving up there now, otherwise I would already be a resident. Please stop trying to cause problems, no one here residents or NR's really apperciate someone whom only likes to stir the pot.

Sincerely J.D.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Great reply JD.......this is an argument that people stir up every so often. I am sure we will see it again in a few weeks.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com

Original Goosebuster said:


> Im not saying get rid of them just cut down on them- 30,000 non residents compared to 10,000 residents: do the math


You may want to get your figures right. Your math isn't close.


----------



## arctic plainsman

This is a tough subject for a lot of states.
Here in Alaska, there can be conflicts between residents and tourists also. It's common to hear locals complain about tourists "playing with our food," meaning fishermen and hunters catching salmon and moose. 
Speaking for myself, I have really enjoyed my visits to ND. I think there is little there I didn't like. I have really enjoyed all the folks, (haven't met a bad one yet, don't think they exist inside the ND borders,) the hunting as you all know is wonderful, and the scenery is a great change from here. 
It bothers me when other tourists show up in a place that I enjoy visiting so much and goof things up for me. I know this can't be helped, but it's still a bummer. 
Thanks to all you residents that make the visitors feel welcome for the short time we are there.


----------



## Quackkills9

> BAITING IS ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :******:


I dont see anyone talking about baiting? :-?


----------



## deked

Is anyone else sick of hearing about non-resident versus resident issues?? ND vs. MN... MN vs. ND... uke: just my feelings... continue on.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com

Let's just drop it and move on, unless there's a solution that nobody has come up with yet.


----------



## ndwaterfowler

I agree with you Chris, come up with a rational solution and take it to the next Game and Fish meeting....otherwise use your energy and time for more productive things, like fishing and hunting. :idea:


----------



## Ranger_Compact

goosebusters said:


> They all ready limit it enough, I think that it is a vital part of our economy. Think about hotel owners in Lakota dude. They survive off out of state hunters cuz in state ones don't stay there.


Speaking of, is the Sunlac still open? I haven't seen a car there for weeks.


----------



## Eric Hustad

Has this been gone over before??? I must have missed it.....You either live in one state or another and for various reasons. I visit Minnesota to fish, but live in ND. Therefore I am a ND resident. If Minnesota proposes restrictions I abide by them because I am a non-resident regardless of the fact I have fished there for 25 years. Glad I could help with clarification. Speaking of, how is the ice fishing going in the lakes area??


----------



## goose nuker

walleye and jumbo perch hitting well on mille lacs lake. the walleye bite is on red lake, but we know how many you can keep there. winnie is starting to heat up and the rest of the 9,997 lakes are dead... :lol:


----------



## Field Hunter

Hey this is always fun to listen to.....Ban all Non-residents! :lol:

Sarcastically, though, lets bring this topic up every now and again to see if anyone new wants to get in on it.......NOT!


----------



## Original Goosebuster

Thanks for everyones input, it was very benificial- I did not intend on stirring the pot- just wanted to know some other peoples opinions- so thanks to everyone


----------



## Ranger_Compact

This is in response to the topic about non-residents getting gratis tags. I figured it might fit well in this forum too. (That way I don't have to type out a new response!!!)

"I think if these non-resident hunters are dedicated enough to buy a house or rent land here and take time off of work to come hunt, they definatly deserve a gratis tag. Many landowners let other people fill their gratis tags if they don't hunt, at least these out of state guys really want to hunt. And in my opinion, I love having hunters from out of state around, it brings new cultures together and it is a learning experience. Anything more that can be done to keep non-resident hunters coming here is a good deal to me. And ^Springer^ I know what you mean about not having a buck tag with your group, we got screwed out of two beautiful bucks last weekend."

My favorite out of state hunters that I've hunted with came from California, that was an experience, I'll tell ya! It was so much fun getting to know these guys, one of them especially I enjoyed having the company of. In his spare time between hunts with some of our farm neighbors he made lefse, learned how to score antlers, rode in a combine, and came with us to the Rainbow Lodge Annual Wild Game Feed. He had the time of his life, and he said he can't wait to come back and visit us North Dakotans!


----------



## Leo Porcello

Greg_4242 said:


> Lets all take a moment away form this topic for just a few minutes. I want to talk about Ron Gilmore. What the hell! Are you senile?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BAITING IS ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [/b]
> 
> 
> 
> How do you connect Baiting waterfowl with a bait shop. He's talking about a store that sells bait for fishing. You know, worms, minnows and such.
> 
> You need a life. You've posted so many damb times you now just hit a topic, key in on one word, and post. Do you even know what this forum is about. Let me simplify for you. This forum is for a$$holes that need a scape goat for a poor hunting trip.
> 
> I wonder if he *****es about bestialty on the taxidermy forum.
> Just too many people out there mounting geese! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...

I think what he is saying is the first post was baiting for an argument that happens a 100 times a year (about NRs) in addition to the jumping snows, roost busting, possesion limits, whats a roost, what is a transitions slough, do I need a boat, where are the birds, whens the best time, should I hire a guide and a few more.


----------



## Ron Gilmore

PorkChop you get the cold one for the day for your polite explaination! There are other battles to plan for!:beer:


----------



## djleye

Hey Greg, That Dale Carnegie course is really starting to pay off. Now I like to harass Ron the Con with the best of them but maybe you should get back on your meds!!!!


----------



## KEN W

One question Ranger_Compact....what will all your out of state buddies do when non-res. landowners use up the entire 1% allocated to non-res. in a unit????

The law needs to be changed to make non-res. landowner gratis licenses ....."antlerless only."This would allow ALL non-res. to be on the same footing when it comes to "antlered tags."


----------



## Ranger_Compact

I got a buck tag for my first year of deer hunting, and I was happy about that. But from now on, I could really care less about what I draw. Yeah, buck tags are nice, but my life doesn't revolve around the lottery...trust me, the earth will keep revolving! I'm not a scientist, but I think the does are the ones who are the producers of the overpopulation of deer. Just my opinion...who needs a buck when there are plenty of fine does out there! I know you have your opinion too, everyone does, but I'm far more interested in non-residents than bucks! If the non-residents are paying the money to live in these houses, take weeks off of work to come to North Dakota, and party with the rest of us, I think they deserve antler tags, let me ask you this-how many of us NoDaks work that hard and pay that much just for a few weeks of hunting a year? I think we should all just be grateful that we were all given the ability and resources to hunt in this beautiful state of North Dakota.


----------



## cbass

Ranger,

Think about what you are saying! Ask your father what he thinks of the situation.

Ken W. puts it all on the line you have got to be ****ting me when you say all should be the same. Buck or not? Maybe you do not care but thousands of others do. And with non-residents raising the price of land, i am guessing that you do not make a living off of the land but thousands do and when () come in and jack up the price of land to get their little piece of heaven it is all good. Well we have to make a living off of that land and cannot afford to pay $1000/acre, but wait the water will last forever?

Come one come all we have the best waterfowl hunting in the world, not to mention deer hunting. And as soon as we hit a dry period it will all be gone. Waterfowl hunting in the dakotas is on it's way down and their is no stopping it. But hey keep putting your money into it because it will make someone happy, besides yourself.

Ranger,

This has been discussed numerous times it is not a right it is a priveleage?
See the bigger picture! Great now, give it a few years! It will hit the fan. If you do not own land you will not hunt, then a buck tag will mean nothing to you, wait i guess it doesn't now. Please give the rest of us who would like to shot a buck a chance too and apply for a doe next year.


----------



## duckchaser

I was born and raised in North Dakota to which I am forever greatful. I now live out of state and return every fall to hunt. I disdain the way this web site allows some people to blame poor hunting opportunities and the like on nonresidents. North Dakota has some of the finest waterfowl and upland game hunting available. The reason the state enjoys this hunting is not only the state's location and low population, but also the funding that comes from out of state to enhance habitat. The vast majority of funding for the federal refuges, waterfowl rest areas, ducks unlimited leases and the federal crop reduction program has and will continue to come from nonresidents.

Some of these nonresidents just might be a relative, an old high school buddy, the heart surgeon who saved your fathers life, or a soldier who walks the wall so your family can safely sleep at night.


----------



## Ranger_Compact

duckchaser said:


> I was born and raised in North Dakota to which I am forever greatful. I now live out of state and return every fall to hunt. I disdain the way this web site allows some people to blame poor hunting opportunities and the like on nonresidents. North Dakota has some of the finest waterfowl and upland game hunting available. The reason the state enjoys this hunting is not only the state's location and low population, but also the funding that comes from out of state to enhance habitat. The vast majority of funding for the federal refuges, waterfowl rest areas, ducks unlimited leases and the federal crop reduction program has and will continue to come from nonresidents.
> 
> Some of these nonresidents just might be a relative, an old high school buddy, the heart surgeon who saved your fathers life, or a soldier who walks the wall so your family can safely sleep at night.


Sweet, at least somebody on here agrees with me. I wouldn't mind never having to move out of North Dakota, I love it here. But if the situation ever comes up where I have to move out of state, I hope there will still be welcoming people here who will take me back and let me hunt. I support non-residents, I love them, they are fun to have around. I just hope someday the favor is returned to me if I ever need it.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com

I thought this never-ending debate would end here, but if it's going to continue it's going to the hot topics.


----------



## buckseye

Chris you know it will never end :lol:



> The vast majority of funding for the federal refuges, waterfowl rest areas, ducks unlimited leases and the federal crop reduction program has and will continue to come from nonresidents


but the land is mostly owned by residents and I consider that an even more recognizable amount of funding. I have to say I put residents first and when they are done the visitors can have what is left. 

side note have you ever seen how massive and elegant DU and Deltas offices are, the Delta in Bis looks like they could have bought alot of land for what that big fancy new building cost. Couldn't they buy an old building to save more coins for the birds?


----------



## Ima870man

I was not aware that Delta built a new office building in Bismarck. Did you mean the Ducks Unlimited office down on river road? Or is there a new Delta office? I would hate to have the two mixed up because there is a world of difference between them.

Delta Supporter and proud of it!

Ima870man


----------



## buckseye

Dang... now I'm not sure, if it's not Delta sorry for the mistake.


----------



## sierra03

the only thing that worries me, NR or Res, Is hunting turning into a "sport" for the wealthy. Which in the future, could happen. It will be like a top notch golf club.

But on a second note..theres tons to share!


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com

buckseye said:


> side note have you ever seen how massive and elegant DU and Deltas offices are, the Delta in Bis looks like they could have bought alot of land for what that big fancy new building cost. Couldn't they buy an old building to save more coins for the birds?


Yup, you got it backwards. The DU Regional office is a palace; the Delta office is an old apartment building converted into offices. If I got a nickel every time that came up in a conversation........ 8)


----------



## buckseye

I should have known, Deltaboy doesn't look like a crime boss 

Thanks Chris, sorry Deltaboy nothing personal. Chris you would have a dime from me then.


----------



## always_outdoors

Duckchaser: The problem that lies with your statements is that many of us, especially in professional roles, have chosen to stay in this state accepting a much lower wage so we have access to hunting.

By leaving the state and then wanting the same privileges as us, you are basically stating that "you want your cake and eat it too".

If we are going to allow NR's here with the same benefits as R's, then why should I stay in this state? we already have a huge out-migration. I would love to live somewhere where I could waterski year round, but have chosen to stay here because of the hunting opportunities.

I think if you lived here now, you wouldn't share the feelings you do now. You would want to protect it as well.


----------



## Ranger_Compact

live2hunt said:


> Duckchaser:I think if you lived here now, you wouldn't share the feelings you do now. You would want to protect it as well.


I live here, and I have the same feelings. C'mon people, lets share.

"This land is your land,this land is my land,from California,to the New York Islands,from the Redwood Forrests,to the Gulf Stream Waters,this land was made for you and me."

How would you feel if people down south got sick of us North Dakotans who travel south for a little winter vacation, I'm sure they hate "non-residents", but do they kick us out? I think not...How would you guys feel if the residents in Arizona kicked all of your parents back up north? There are much worse things in life than non-residents, trust me.


----------



## sotaman

Ha ha I got you all beat I get to hunt and fish in ND as a resident and guess what I am not one heheheehehe. Plus I get to go over to minnesota where I am a resident and hunt and fish for an even better price guess what that is FREE ahahahahahaha... Boy the benifits of defending your freedoms to B#$&% and moan..


----------



## SlipperySam

I think the question you have to ask is what do we get out of banning the NR's? Better Hunting? Maybe...More birds less hunters....I get it. What happens though is then Saskatchewan bans American hunters. Michigan and the rest of the Great lakes States bans you from the Great Lakes. Point is this our COUNTRY. ND does not belong to just ND.


----------



## Ranger_Compact

SlipperySam said:


> Point is this our COUNTRY. ND does not belong to just ND.


_Like I said_...this land is your land, this land is my land...


----------



## always_outdoors

Nobody, nor I said anything about banning NR's. Limitations based on biological data. That means that if we have large numbers of birds, then NR's licenses are set high. If we have low numbers of wildlife, NR licenses are set low.

What I am saying is make conservation minded decisions, not ones based on dollar signs. That way WE ALL can have this resource for years to come.

I didn't reference banning of NR's anywhere.


----------



## roostman

don't we already limit the N.R to a time limit and a bird limit, they don't get the same benefits we do as residents. I'm telling you there are alot of small towns that would be hurting if we limited the N.R's to a certain number. I can get a out of state license in Minnasota and I have the same rights as they do, no restrictions, no time tables. Pretty soon all you people that live on the border and love to fish Minnasota are going to end up paying 300.00 dollars for a fishing license because we are to greedy as Residents. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, you might not like the outcome.


----------



## sierra03

Ranger_Compact said:


> How would you feel if people down south got sick of us North Dakotans who travel south for a little winter vacation, I'm sure they hate "non-residents", but do they kick us out? I think not...How would you guys feel if the residents in Arizona kicked all of your parents back up north? There are much worse things in life than non-residents, trust me.


Im sure they have no problem with it. Most people move there to beat the cold, for health reasons. They arent shooting birds, or mining their gold. If any southern seniors have a problem with the heat, they are more than welcome here. Remember they are bringing their money with them...good for the economy.

I have no problem with NR hunters, but i know where people are coming from. Like I stated before. The only problem I have is G/O's buying up land strictly for their own selfish income. Theres an issue to rant on.


----------



## Triple B

One thing that I hear more often every year is people that move out of the state and complain that they grew up here and should be treated like residents. I understand that the ties are strong to "back home" but i think since they made the decision to leave the state, usually for a higher paying job, then they should have weighed out the consequences before they left. to me it seems they want to have there cake and eat it too. I have already made a vow to myself to stay in ND regardless of more money or jobs elsewhere, it is a sacrifice I may pay for, but but is worth it to me. another thing that bothers me is that many NR's are patting themselves on the back a little too hard about "supporting" small town economy, don't get me wrong I agree it can be a big boost in some places, but the few hundred an NR may drop on a weekend is mere pennies to what locals spend to "support" their economies.


----------



## roostman

What is the issue with NR's hunting in Nodak? Are they shooting your birds? Guess what they are not your birds. Are they buying your land, tell you what you get a bunch of your Nodak buddies together and buy your own land. Quit being so damn greety, the NR's have just as much right to hunt over here as we do as long as they o'bey the laws. This is still America and as far as I know it is not illegal to buy land in another state, we have hunting laws that allow NR's to hunt here. I bet we have one of the toughest NR's hunting laws already out there when it come to limits and how long they can hunt here. It just seems we have a lot of whiners out there that are to lazy to go out and find there honey hole, so they blame it on the NR's. I agree with Compact Ranger, she might be young but she's got more common sense the alot of you! :roll:


----------



## sierra03

My family invites nonresidents to our spare house out at the farm. Excellent hunting, alot of sloughs and guess what...not one acre is posted. We have people from minnesota, california, wisconsin. Some friends of family, some friends of friends of family. And during the hunting season is the only time the small town bar is packed. Then off season it is a ghost town. Although, being a resident you get the benefit of first picks of PLOTS. But its not all residents against all non residents. Dont forget that buddy.


----------



## roostman

wigglesworth said:


> My family invites nonresidents to our spare house out at the farm. Excellent hunting, alot of sloughs and guess what...not one acre is posted. We have people from minnesota, california, wisconsin. Some friends of family, some friends of friends of family. And during the hunting season is the only time the small town bar is packed. Then off season it is a ghost town. Although, being a resident you get the benefit of first picks of PLOTS. But its not all residents against all non residents. Dont forget that buddy.


 Hey I know that and it's people like you that make Hunting in Nortdakota great. I am a resident, it just seems like there are a lot of residents that have some issue with NR's. I hunt on a buddies farm in southcentral N.D. He post his land but allows anybody to hunt it if they ask, every year he has NR's from Michigan, and Iowa and Minnesota come up and hunt, they have a great relationship with the landowner and spend alot of money in the nearby towns. :beer:


----------



## duckchaser

live2hunt, I must respond to your remarks. Yes residents own most of the land in North Dakota. They also have the right to allow whomever they chose the right to trespass, be they resident or nonresident. Farming is a tough business in any state. Between the years of 1995 and 2003 $5,700,000,000.00 in federal crop subsidies were paid to North Dakota farmers (Washington Post April 4th, 2003) - mostly nonresident funds. Also, think of the huge amount of funds coming into the state through the Minot and Grand Forks Air force bases. Surely you can allow some nonresidents the right to hunt in North Dakota for a few weeks a year. Compared to other states, ND already places substantial restrictions on nonresidents. As I have grown older I have began to realize just how interconnected we all are. Fight the true enemies - antihunters and habitat loss. I wish you a safe and good hunting season next year.


----------



## flytier231

A friend and myself came to ND with our dogs to hunt pheasants for the first time this past season. We met very nice people, had our dogs get some great experience, never shot a limit of birds, and have been going through "ND withdrawal" since a week after our last trip. If we had traveled that far in Europe to hunt, we would have gone through at least three different COUNTRIES to do it. Think about that for a moment. We are so lucky to be here.

Thanks to all those friendly ND residents we met for making us feel welcome. The plan is for our dogs, us, and more sausage and CHEESE to be back again next year. If it wasn't for the upcoming turkey and fishing seasons, I'd go nuts waiting for next November!


----------



## Triple B

Yes I agree with the fact that these are not "our" birds, but I think the biggest issue that many of us "greedy" NDakotans have is the disrespect many of the NR's have for "OUR" land. now I am not saying all disrespect our land or us, but the few that do make a sour taste in our mouths. think of it this way, lets say you have a nice house, and inside that house are a bunch of donuts that are not yours, but everyone wants. and every fall regardless of how many signs you put up you always catch a few NR's taking a couple, now if they just took a couple and left, maybe we could get over it, but when they eat half and throw it on the floor (littering, carcasses, ruts in fields) well I guess the question is up to the NR's what would you say or do?


----------



## Triple B

Think about that for a moment. We are so lucky to be here.

Thanks to all those friendly ND residents we met for making us feel welcome. The plan is for our dogs, us, and more sausage and CHEESE to be back again next year. If it wasn't for the upcoming turkey and fishing seasons, I'd go nuts waiting for next November!

If only all NR's could be like this guy. All residents want is some respect and a thank you now and then. If you come into this state thinking its your god given right you won't be greeted with open arms, if you come feeling lucky and respectful more doors will open, along with friendships.


----------



## roostman

Triple B said:


> Yes I agree with the fact that these are not "our" birds, but I think the biggest issue that many of us "greedy" NDakotans have is the disrespect many of the NR's have for "OUR" land. now I am not saying all disrespect our land or us, but the few that do make a sour taste in our mouths. think of it this way, lets say you have a nice house, and inside that house are a bunch of donuts that are not yours, but everyone wants. and every fall regardless of how many signs you put up you always catch a few NR's taking a couple, now if they just took a couple and left, maybe we could get over it, but when they eat half and throw it on the floor (littering, carcasses, ruts in fields) well I guess the question is up to the NR's what would you say or do?


 I bet if you took a poll there would be more resident hunters doing what you are saying,I've hunted for many years and the locals are usually the one breaking the trespass laws, oh i know this guy he won't care if we hunt on his land, i lot of the crap gets blamed on the NR's when you should be looking at Hank and his buddies down at the local tavern, it goes both ways, yes there are some shady NR's but there are alot more residents that give hunting a bad name. Most NR's are not going to pay 100.00 for a non resident license and then do something stupid to get a big hefty fine besides, i think if your willing to pay that much to hunt for two weeks in the great state of NoDak you must be somewhat of sportsman and until you can be sure the NR's are doing what you say there is not much you can do, when you do find people breaking the law report them. :eyeroll:


----------



## Ranger_Compact

roostman said:


> I bet if you took a poll there would be more resident hunters doing what you are saying,


You stole the words right out of my mouth, that was just what I was going to say!


----------



## jimboy

man, this cow will not die. I will tell you what will happen if ND lifts retrictions on NR's. They will come in and buy every available inch for their own use. In Ohio you cant find anything for less than $5000 an acre. So you do the math. ND is a bargain. public land will get trampled like it is here. Guides and outfitters will flurish and compete for available land and the average joe will be out in the cold. outfitters will expand to increase profits and the small towns will see even less.

If you are going to use the small town as an excuse to lift restrictions you need to look ahead more than just a couple of years. the limits and zones are there to protect the resource not because residents are greedy. I get a kick out of people saying how the flyway has shifted. It shifted because nesting populations were decimated and/or habitat was destroyed due to human intervention. I do not think it's fair to call ND geedy because they have managed "their" resource in away that prevents decimation and habitat destruction.

And before someone chimes in and says there are more resident hunters than NR hunters, take in account that the vast majority of resident hunters hunt on the weekends. NR's hunt for 1-2 weeks straight and sometimes longer. Open up the state and you will see preasure all day, everyday which will decimate the nesting population and/or push the waterfowl out of the state. So I am sure SD with its 4000 NR limit would love to see ND drop its restrictions. with a little planning there is no reason why you can't hunt waterfoul in ND every year if you really want to. All I hear is how great ND is. Even here in Ohio, when people who hunt hear I am from ND they comment on how they have heard or have experienced for themselves how great the hunting is there. How do you think it got that way? or better yet, how do you think it stays that way? :eyeroll:


----------



## fishless

If the restrictions are lifted the only benefit will be to the comercialization of hunting. Its unfortunate that it has to come down to a res, nr thing but if thats what it takes to protect the wildlife so be it. As far as everyone complaining about who owns the birds, deer or whateverelse guess what they belong to the public. ND landowners are very friendly they allow the use of there land to res and nr alike try that anywhere else. Ive lived here in wi for a few yrs and family members wont even let there own family hunt there land ( its a my deer thing here). How many of you complaining from other states open up your land (if you own any) to public hunting, Ill bet that percentage is pretty low. And as far as former res feeling the need for special hunting privledges I have never felt that way I moved by own choice I can move back by own choice. Well thats all I have to say everyone can jump in start tearing this apart just remember we are all sportsman here and as long as we bicker amongst each other the antis are gaining strength.


----------



## always_outdoors

duckchaser: where did I say anthing about residents owning land???

Jimboy nailed the top on the coffin. He is correct on all accounts.


----------



## buckseye

Nobody is limiting NR's just the wildlife they take home with them. The entire flyway is managed to try to give ample opportunity to hunt from Canada to Mexico. If we shoot all the birds here there won't be many going south and hunting is a way bigger business there than it is here.

You have to learn to look at NoDak as the duck production area not so much the duck killing area.

Another thing about us going south, if we went south just to hunt we would find they have limits on NR licenses too.


----------



## KEN W

roostman said:


> don't we already limit the N.R to a time limit and a bird limit, they don't get the same benefits we do as residents. I'm telling you there are alot of small towns that would be hurting if we limited the N.R's to a certain number. I can get a out of state license in Minnasota and I have the same rights as they do, no restrictions, no time tables. Pretty soon all you people that live on the border and love to fish Minnasota are going to end up paying 300.00 dollars for a fishing license because we are to greedy as Residents. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, you might not like the outcome.


The only difference is that they have 14 days to hunt....their limits are the same as ours.


----------



## always_outdoors

roostman: Do you hunt in MN since they have no restrictions on you? If not, why? There are reasons why many MN's come to ND to hunt. One is because they cannot access land in MN. MN should be a premiere duck and pheasant factory. Read in the open forum how wetlands continue to be drained over there.

Also, you cannot compare hunting and fishing. They are not even close to being comparable. Lakes can be stocked according to the amount of pressure it has on it. You can't stock 10,000,000 pheasants in Mott because that is where everyone wants to go, but you can stock 10 million walleye in Mil Lacs if you saw a need because of fishing pressure.
If you want to compare MN to ND in fishing, you will see that we do not restrict NR's to fish here.

Funny, SD restricts NR's on pheasant hunting, but you hear nobody complain about that here do we?? Have you looked at the studies comparing land sales in SD where pheasant hunting is top notch. Have you seen where farmer's are being outbid by non-locals for land only to be turned into a wildlife sanctuary that only a few get to benefit from?

I guess some of us only see the big picture here. Restrictions on the amount of hunters whether R's or NR's needs to be in place not only in terms of wildlife conservation, but in protection of the very reason why people moved to this area....agricutlural production.

Opening the flood gates will cause land sales to escalate beyond farmer/rancher means and we will see more absentee landowners than ever before who will take land out of ag. production and turn them into their very own sanctuaries. Killing our small towns, our outfitters, and our hunting for BOTH R's and NR's. Only the rich will hunt...just like in South Carolina, Southern MN, Ohio, Texas, and all the other southern states.

Peace, Love, and Joy everyone.


----------



## roostman

Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 10:12 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

roostman: Do you hunt in MN since they have no restrictions on you? If not, why? There are reasons why many MN's come to ND to hunt. One is because they cannot access land in MN. MN should be a premiere duck and pheasant factory. Read in the open forum how wetlands continue to be drained over there. 
when grouse numbers are up I hunt MN. This whole forum topic came up by a resident that sounds like he just wanted to stir the pot, well the pot got stirred. The NR's as far as I know are not the ones complaining, the residents are. Right now we do not need any more restrictions on the NR's. I do believe that it is a year to year survey that needs to be looked at when dealing with bird numbers, but that also effects the residents also.
This subject will never die, I will stick to my guns and say quit whinning.


----------



## KEN W

roostman said:


> I do believe that it is a year to year survey that needs to be looked at when dealing with bird numbers, but that also effects the residents also.
> This subject will never die, I will stick to my guns and say quit whinning.


You are exactly right....which is why we need Hunter Pressure Concept passed by our legilature.The number of non-res. hunters based on water and bird numbers.


----------



## always_outdoors

roostman: are you and duckchaser related or something. seems like you two can't read my post or feel the need to put words in my mouth.

Where in any of my posts did I whine. Apparently you can "stick to your guns" offer an opinion, but I can't or it is whinning?

I have NOT in any shape or form whined about somebody else shooting my birds or "taking my birds" nor have I whined about land access or anyting like that.

I merely offered my opinion AND factual information pertaining to what other states have gone through.

I have not said ban in any post. NR's and R's have a place in this state, but once again I will try it one more time. License sales whether to R's or NR's needs to be based on wildlife numbers.

Example: If a deadly winter storm came into ND and basically took out every pheasant across this state, then that may even mean restrictions to residents hunters as well as NR hunters. Now the opposite, we have a mild winter and pheasant numbers are at their highest ever, then license sales WHETHER resident or NR's should reflect that.

If you feel someone else is whining call them on it. I am not. I have formulated an opinion based on my background in wildlife management AND collection of researched data from other states.

It is called doing your homework.


----------



## roostman

live2hunt said:


> roostman: are you and duckchaser related or something. seems like you two can't read my post or feel the need to put words in my mouth.
> 
> Where in any of my posts did I whine. Apparently you can "stick to your guns" offer an opinion, but I can't or it is whinning?
> 
> I have NOT in any shape or form whined about somebody else shooting my birds or "taking my birds" nor have I whined about land access or anyting like that.
> 
> I merely offered my opinion AND factual information pertaining to what other states have gone through.
> 
> I have not said ban in any post. NR's and R's have a place in this state, but once again I will try it one more time. License sales whether to R's or NR's needs to be based on wildlife numbers.
> 
> Example: If a deadly winter storm came into ND and basically took out every pheasant across this state, then that may even mean restrictions to residents hunters as well as NR hunters. Now the opposite, we have a mild winter and pheasant numbers are at their highest ever, then license sales WHETHER resident or NR's should reflect that.
> 
> If you feel someone else is whining call them on it. I am not. I have formulated an opinion based on my background in wildlife management AND collection of researched data from other states.
> 
> It is called doing your homework.


 I was not pertaining to you in perticular, just this whole topic in general, are you a women? you sure do need to get the last words in.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Lives2hunt:
you are talking about limiting number of hunters or harvest.....why don't you just say that....not just limiting NR hunters. You are mainly talking about a tag system...ie: X number of birds = X harvest numbers. Then you give a percentage to R and NR. But your statements are skewed because you are a R. So you want the numbers to favor you (human nature).

OHIO:

yes land prices are going up all around this country...why because the stock market was poor for a few years and investors found out that you can make a good/consistant return on farm land. Reasons why...farmers get subsidies. Guaranteed payments. The investor gets his money if the crop is good or bad. So now you take the middle class of people that want to invest in something and they see the return that people are making on land. Also the middle class of people are you majority of hunters (majority of popultation). So that is where land is getting tied up. People want there investment and then they also have there hunting/rec land.

Final note: 
The reason why so many NR go to ND is because of the ample access to land. If other states would have a PLOTS program you would not have to leave your own state to have success. ND has had great numbers of birds. People want to have success and not pay to hunt on someones land. So they go the where the numbers are and the land access. Also don't blame all the poaching, carcass dumping, littering, etc. on all NR's. In every state that I visit and hunt on someones land I make sure clean up after myself. I pick up empty hulls, garabage, I ask where can I dump a carcass if I clean the birds out in the field, etc. I also pick up trash I see left by others. I also give the land owners some sort of thank you...ie gift card, gift basket, venison sauage, or share the birds that I have harvested. There are a lot more people out there like me than people who just use with out thanks. I have a question...how many R hunters do things like that? Do instate people take that for granted? Just food for thought that is all.


----------



## celebrationmm

My thoughts on this issue...

First off, I feel blessed to have grown up in the great state of ND. Growing up, I was always cursing the non-residents me and my father encountered on gravel roads. Always cursing at the ones looking at our decoy spread, cursing the ones dumping their boats in a slough off the highways, and basically cursing every other one we saw. I didn't take the time to think objectively, or reasonably.

Guides and outfitters, well I still curse them, and probably always will, but that's another story...

Now after 22 years living in ND, I have made a move to MN and I am now a NR. (Curse me!) After moving, I felt I was being slighted by having to pay more for licence fees. I felt it was unfair that I had a limited number of days to hunt and I have to pick a zone. The bottom line is I made the decision to make this move. ND didn't make me leave. I probably could have found a similar job, but for whatever reason, I DECIDED to move.

Why did I curse the NR's when I was younger? Because I wanted more access. Because I wanted to believe I was more ethical(in hindsight, I had to learn ethical hunting. I made a sneak on a decoy spread once. I busted a roost.) The biggest reason was probably because I saw all NR's as rich city boys taking away my opportunities, which for the majority freelance NR's, wasn't true. Now I've seen both sides of the fence. If I'm going to go hunting in ND, I'll have to save a little extra for the license. I'll have to plan in advance when I'm going. If someday their is stricter limits on numbers of lic. to NRs, I'll have to get it early. If I want to be treated like Resident, I'll have to become a Resident. In the meantime I'm a guest, and I feel privileged to be a guest.

Land Access... I've never had any problems finding land to hunt on as R or NR. Most landowners are very kind saying yes or no. Personally, I hope NR do not start buying up land in ND. It is much harder getting ahold of them to ask for access.

Thanks to ND for allowing so much access to NR, and for managing the land and habitat. Without the proper management, none of us would have the opportunities to enjoy the hunting, fishing, and outdoors of ND. I look forward to moving back as soon as I can convince my fiance it's a the greatest place in the world!


----------



## always_outdoors

> he reason why so many NR go to ND is because of the ample access to land. If other states would have a PLOTS program you would not have to leave your own state to have success. ND has had great numbers of birds. People want to have success and not pay to hunt on someones land. So they go the where the numbers are and the land access.


Chuck: If the situation was reversed and 30,000 plus NR's wanted to come to Ohio, what would be your thoughts on this? Open up the flood gates or have restrictions based on wildlife numbers?

If you saw your land access in Ohio becoming smaller and smaller because of the amount of hunting pressure, NR's buying good land up, and commercialization what would do??

Sometimes we can read more into our posts than normal. Please, I am not wanting this to be sarcastic or come off arogant. I am just curious what your thoughts would be to the question above. Thank you.


----------



## Bob Kellam

*roostman wrote*



> yes there are some shady NR's but there are a lot more residents that give hunting a bad name.


Therein lies the problem, one slob hunter can and usually does ruin it for everyone that tries to access that land after the incident. It usually matters not weather the perpetrator was a resident or a nonresident.

The only way this resident versus nonresident thing is ever going to go away is when you all realize that we need to work together for the betterment of the wildlife resources which will in turn take care of our needs, and quit putting our wants first. It does not matter if you are a resident or nonresident. If you are one of the guest hunters, that feel put upon by our rules and regulations there is nothing I can say. IMO you need to look at the bigger picture. Or better yet move here.

It tires me that some of the posters that come to this site always want to label resident hunters as whiners or that we take our state for granted. Those of us that live here know we have something in ND that is very special. Should we be downcast by some because we want to try to conserve some of this for future generations? Conservation of the resource has been thrown aside as of late because of the almighty dollar. Nonresident hunters are encouraged to come here from every facet of the hunting sector.

I would submit that North Dakota encourages over harvest by nonresident hunters through the current waterfowl gifting policy and license length. Think about it for a minute, you come here to hunt as a nonresident for a week or two weeks or a split two-week period. The liberal framework from AHM allows 6 ducks per day. Which means if you hunt and limit for all 7 days you are allowed to shoot 42 ducks, however, you are allowed to only take home 12. You have to eat or give away 30 ducks in the coarse of that week&#8230;&#8230;..??? How many are thrown away? You have booked your rooms and statistics show you do not shoot you 12 ducks in two days and go home.

The vast majority of ND hunters always have and still hunt weekends only.
We typically do not use our vacation time to hunt in state.

It was not that many years ago that waterfowl hunting was associated with the fall migration. That is outdated due to the semantics of the migration itself. Mother Nature has designated ND as perhaps the dominant breeding grounds for ducks. When you hunt here, you hunt breeding stock for the flyway. The first three weeks of the season the ducks are pounded and are "hunted out" in some of the so called prime areas. Still hunters come and further pound what is left. Then the complaining starts because there are few ducks. The gap between the harvest of the local ducks and the migration is widening every year. The migration from the northern breeding grounds in the last number of years has been a quickie! It has taken place during deer season in November and has been a 3 to 4 day event.

Waterfowl does belong to everyone. That has been the biggest argument to date by NR hunters, however, AHM and by rule allows states to regulate and manage the waterfowl hunting in their states as they see fit. As long as the state regulations do not exceed, the maximum limits set by the Federal standards. The state of ND could set the daily limit to two or three birds if they wanted to. Currently there is no restriction on the number of hunters allowed to wing shoot in ND and anyone over the age of 20 that has paid attention can see that the duck numbers are declining. To date the mallard population is down from the late 90's level of 9.9 million and is at about 5.9 million up only a slight amount from the historic low in the 80's of 5.3 million. the resource is renewable, if given the chance.

I will always welcome NR hunters to ND, I feel that everyone that hunts should be able to see what ND hunting is like at least once in their life. I will, however, also stick to my beleife that NR hunter numbers need to be managed as a benefit to the resource.

So I ask you what should ND do? what should ND residents do? what should nonresidents do? When does the blame game stop and the resolution to the issue start to be shouldered by all of the participants that benefit from ND's natural resources?

Bob


----------



## KEN W

:thumb:


----------



## roostman

say Bob why do NR's come to Nodak, A because they can, also there is alot of public land, but the biggest reason is alot of birds. I hunt MN. ruffed grouse when the birds are on the up cycle, I don't pay for a out of state license when I know the birds are not there. Doesn't that swing with people coming here to hunt, isn't it a win win situation, when the birds are up everybody benefits but when the birds are not here do NR's come by the thousands to spend lots of money for not many birds? Maybe I'm not on the right track here, but does'nt this make since. When birds are up don't we raise the limit or even add seasons such as a spring goose season, but when the birds are low we lower the limit and possibly shorten the seasons, I don't understand what the issue is. :-?


----------



## KEN W

roostman....most of the non-res. would still come here because at it's worst we are still better than where they live.Ask most of them if they would still come if the limit was cut back to 3 and 6 and I bet most would say yes.

Same with pheasants....most would still come if the limit were cut back to 2 and 4.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Bob:
Great reply. We need to manage the population of birds. Managing the harvest numbers of R and NR alike....It needs to be a team effort.

Lv2hunt:

I am not from ohio...I live in mn...I see tons of people flock to hunt in my area. I see tons of NR hunters every spring for turkeys on state land. I see a lot of hunting pressure. I see all of this. My point is that this happens everywhere.

Here are some reasons why people are going to ND:
- Bird numbers are great
- if land is not posted you can hunt it
- Plots lands (PUBLIC LAND OPEN TO SPORTSMEN) 
*everyones lisc. pays for this

I agree that you need to manage the resource. But you want to shift everything on the NR.

Also if you read my previous post about why people are buying land in ND for the investment.....and the rec use is a bonus.

Also farmers that are not making money off of farming are turning to the sportsman. They are doing the pay to hunt method or guides that tie up the land. This happens....it happens everywhere. In my area you can not find a good goose feild because all the guides have tied it up. You can find a feild that will produce maybe twice a year and then it is done. Deer hunting anywhere....WI, KS, ND, IA, etc....this just happens.

My main thing about all of these R vs NR post is that people want to shift all of the blame for bad things on the NR. But what need to be done (like what bob stated) we, R and NR, need to get together and find a way to manage the resource.

Sorry to answer your question on what I would do and am doing:
1. Build a strong bond with your land owners
- help them during harvest if you can
- Help the mend fences
- help with chores
- give the x-mas cards and share your harvest
- get to know them
- Talk to them about your concerns
*most farmers will listen to your concerns and will tell g/o there is an exception to the rule...ie you. I had this happen in canada. I call and let the farmer know the week I plan on being there....it is off limits to the guide. It is funny how a day with the farmer helping with chores can do that. All it took was one day and that was 5 years ago. Plus I follow up with x-mas cards, (b-day cards), and then a thank you card when I get back from my trip with some pictures of our harvest.

**my local deer hunting spot I help the farmer every spring mend fences one weekend. I have first shot at all the land he runs to deer hunt. Then I do the same follow up with cards and pictures.

***my old turkey spot in MO. The land owner used to take a trip to Mille Lac walleye fishing. The next spring and every spring that followed I brought him some walleye that I have caught. But that land got sold when he died and now I have to find some new land. (G/O tied it up) Process starts over. Build a new relationship.

2. Buy land yourself
- form a partnership with other friends that hunt and buy land

3. Find a new spot. It just happens.

I know of people who have bought land in ND and put it into PLOTS. So again don't blame all NR for tying up land. I also know of some NR land owners (not in ND) that let others hunt thier land if they look after it....Tresspassing issues, downed fences, etc. Then all they ask in return is not to hunt it the week before they show up and that week. Sometimes I have been with when these care takers have hunted with the owners the week he is out there.

Maybe get the name of the NR land owners and tell them you will look after it if they let you hunt. Just an idea.


----------



## always_outdoors

> 1. Build a strong bond with your land owners
> - help them during harvest if you can
> - Help the mend fences
> - help with chores
> - give the x-mas cards and share your harvest
> - get to know them
> - Talk to them about your concerns


Many of us already do that. You are preaching to the choir on this site. I carry a fencing plyers in my vehicle at all times.



> 2. Buy land yourself
> - form a partnership with other friends that hunt and buy land


Just what a landowner wants to here. :eyeroll: Especially when he is 24 and trying to make a living with his family and he needs to add acreage because his return on investment is not making him enough money. Outbid a current famer and take land out of production. That is not what this state was created on. Sorry, but I am pro farming.

it is nice to see you offer other ways, #2 takes land away from the farmers here in ND. We are already seeing that.

#3 is what many of us are currently trying to do, but what happens when you run out of spots? I remember a time driving 20 miles across backroads and not seeing any posters. Now that same area does not hold any piece of property that is not posted. On top of that, we have legislators trying to pass laws creating the same environment you see in SD.



> My point is that this happens everywhere.


We aren't everywhere. Just because everyone is jumping off the cliff, doesn't mean we all have to do it.


----------



## roostman

KEN W said:


> roostman....most of the non-res. would still come here because at it's worst we are still better than where they live.Ask most of them if they would still come if the limit was cut back to 3 and 6 and I bet most would say yes.
> 
> Same with pheasants....most would still come if the limit were cut back to 2 and 4.


 well Ken whatever it is we are doing must be working, we have'nt seen this many Pheasants in a long time and as far as I know ducks and geese along with the deer poulation seem to be doing alright also, if it isn't broke why change it for now and go year to year on bird numbers. I could see people being upset if the birds were'nt there, but thats not the case. Some people just have issues with NR's.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Lvsthunt:

Buying land is not taking it out of production.....you can rent it back to a farmer! You can put it into programs like CRP, CREP, etc. that will help raise the price of crops. I am pro farmer as well. You can rent the land back to the 24 year old farm trying to make a living.....rent it to him cheaper.

Buying land does not hurt the farmers. Land prices rising does not directly hurt the farmers, it only hurts them if they want to buy more land or if they are just starting out and want to buy land. If you are a farmer and are starting out all you need is a place to store you equipment (crop farmers) and you can rent the rest of the land. Buy your 10 acre homestad and get going. You have less upfront cost and you can get rolling. If you have cattle (depends if it is dairy or beef).....rent pasture and have a barn on your homestead. Beef all you need is pasture land. Dairy cow...if you want to make money...never really see the daylight anyway. They just keep getting rotated in. They just need feedlot/feeding yard. All that can be on your homested.

Farmers can rent the land back for a better return on there bottom dollar, no up front cost/mortgage. Most of the land in my area is rented by farmers. Other people own it. They rent it. They rent if from old retired farmers that keep the land but don't work it, investors, relatives, hunters, outdoors people, people who just wanted to live in the country, etc. I see 24 year old farmers with new trucks, new snowmobiles, buying more cattle and live stock, expanding there whole operation, gettting new equipment. Buying land and renting it back does not hurt the farmers....so that arguement is very false.

Also what land owner does not want to here that the price of there acreage just went up in value? So you are telling me that a farmer that bought some land a couple of years ago will be mad that his piece of ground went up in value.. Now that 24 year old farmer can go get an equity loan on this piece of land and expand his operation, buy more land, cattle/livestock, new equipment, etc.

The same thing with posted signs are in my neck of the woods. Still just ask the land owner for permission....A yellow sign does not mean a definate NO HUNTING. Sometimes the land owner will just like to know who is on the property.

You asked what I would do....I told you. And your buying the land arguement holds no merrit with me. Now if the land does not get used then that is different case. But who spends lets say $100,000 and not get any return on it.....CRP, CREP, Wetlands areas....All of these things help farmers. That is why they are there. They take out some production land to help get better crop prices. That is why they are there!


----------



## Dick Monson

Chuck, I have a question for you. Why don't MN hunters have a PLOTS program in their own state? All that come here seem to like PLOTS in ND, yet they don't try to get it set up in MN. I asked the same question from your DNR and they replied there has been no request for it. And they didn't think farmers would tolerate it. Seems odd. Is it that MN sportsmen are no better organized than in ND?


----------



## Chuck Smith

Dick I have brought it up to our local DNR managers. The reply I get is that there is alot of State Land you can hunt. Well there is but it is mostly woods. Not too good for pheasants and ducks. But yes the DNR in our state is very unorganized. They do not listen to the common person. You should see what they did with some trout regs in my area. They are limiting what you can use for lures, bait, etc. I agreed with a slot size, catch and release, and other restrictions on the harvest. But when you limit what people can use to catch them is a different story. They are catering to the fly fisherman. It was sad to go to the meetings. The fly fisherman forced there ideas onto the dnr and they followed. The DNR followed the lobby money. Many of the members of these organizations disagreed with some of the restrictions but they were not the "money behind the machine". People requests and concerns fell on deaf ears. They do every year at our local dnr meetings. It is sad. That is why you have many non-res going to ND. In MN all the DNR seems to care about is the walleye population. Sad, we could have great oppurtunities here for others but they don't listen.

In my area though the goverment has issued some good farm plans that help the farmer. They are paying the farmers to not cut hay til june, no fence line to fence line farming, row crop, etc. A hand full of farmers signed up for this. Hopefully it works and more take to it. (all of this helps with nesting of birds, all types of birds)


----------



## always_outdoors

Chuck: You make farming sound so easy.

1. First off, you have to enroll and be accepted into the CRP program. So let's say you and I bought 2 quarters of land over some farmers in central ND. If we get it into CRP, our CRP payment only helps us and not that 24 year old farmer. We didn't raise the price of wheat because we put 2 quarters of CRP in.

2. Increased land values = increased rents. If you haven't noticed fertlizer, fuel, and chemicals didn't go down this year. I suggest you check out the ND ag statistics site and do a little homework. If you and I bought land over and above a farmer's bid, our rental rate would need to reflect a return on investment. Before a farmer can get a loan for fertlizer, rent, seed, and fuel he would need to show his return on investment. Banks don't lend farmers money if they can't show how they can make money on the land.



> They take out some production land to help get better crop prices. That is why they are there!


Really? Are you an Ag Econ major?


----------



## hydro870

I have the solution.

Sell Non Residents a season long license. In exchange, we completely ban outfitters. We turn this state into a freelance hunting only zone, where we all get along and there is no money involved.

Hydro870 - who sees this bickering among hunters as the death of our sport. I do not consider guides as hunters, so direct your bickering toward those filthy pimps.


----------



## griffman

roostman said:


> I hunt on a buddies farm in southcentral N.D. He post his land but allows anybody to hunt it if they ask,


Hey roostman.....I'll take a PM with this guy's name and address please! :rollin:


----------



## buckseye

> roostman wrote:
> I hunt on a buddies farm in southcentral N.D. He post his land but allows anybody to hunt it if they ask,


I would like his name too please :lol:


----------



## Chuck Smith

Lv2hunt:

I know you have to enroll and qualify in the programs....but there are so many programs for farmers out there....no-til, crp, crep, wma, crepII, etc. All of these programs are based on taking marginal production land out so crop prices stablize or rise. That is why they are there. And yes own a couple of acres and putting it in these programs help....might not be much but it helps.

Also on the opperating loan....if you rent. You save money.

Note: I am using numbers for my area...I don't know what rent is in ND or 
average land price per acre in your or many ND areas...These are also simple figures.

Example: If a farmer owns 100 acres with 90 acres tillable ($200,000 loan on just the land) he will have a yearly payment of approx.....$14,400. Now if he rents that land....Average rent is $110 per acre.......He pays in $9,900 per year to run that land. Did the farmer not just save $4,500?

I know that fuel costs, machinary costs, help costs, seed cost, fertilizer cost, etc need to be figured in but your main bulk of expenses is rent or mortgage payments on land.

I know if land prices go up so does rents for people to get returns....But rents stablize. If they get too high who will rent the land? No one. Also you personally don't have to raise the rent.

And no I am not an ag econ major.....I live in a farming community. I worked on farms when I was in HS (still help some farmers out in the fall...see above post) I own an insurance and real estate agency. I sell federal crop insurance to farmers and talk with farmers on almost a weekly basis. I have friends that are 24-28 years old and are expanding farming operations....doubling and tripling there size. They have need roll money back into the farm so they don't get killed by taxes. I sell farmland to people. I know how to get a return on land....I know what investors are thinking. I work with financing insitutions.....I am well aware of the happenings of farmers, (not 100 %, but aware).....I not saying farming is easy in anyway. I have the most respect for farmers. They are the back bone of our society. But your arguement about people buying land is not going to hold merit with me. Sorry. Quit trying to put all the blame the NR.....I have only hunted in ND once and who knows if I will go back.....but all this blame I see on NR bugs me.

BoB:

I see your point on the numbers thing.....7 days, 6 birds a day = 42 total birds harvested.....but isn't the possession limit 12.....you can only have 12 birds. So they are breaking the law anyway....these people are just slobs. Now your R who only hunts on weekends. He could harvest 132 birds....now I hope he is using them all. That is 12 birds a weekend....I hope he eats those 12 during the week sometime every week.

Final Note: The resource needs to be managed so everyone can have good sucess and the birds will be around for years and years to come. But this R vs NR bs needs to stop. I just don't like to see one group of people getting blamed for all problems when it is a joint venture. We are all in together on this.


----------



## Plainsman

I think I'll throw my two cents in here. I rarely pick up a shotgun, not for waterfowl or pheasant. It has been ten years since I shot a pheasant. So those of you that think the following is whining about someone shooting my birds think again.

I am concerned about the resource, and the small towns. The people that think we should not limit non residents are like children who want to eat all their candy now, and not save any for tomorrow. If we do not use hunter pressure concept the little towns will die. They get a large influx now for a short time, but then it will end abruptly. With a smaller steady income from resident and non resident hunters most small towns will last a lot longer than if we abuse the resource now.

Small towns are going to die period. If their residents go somewhere else to do all their shopping a few hunters in the fall will not save them. If we are going to value non residents over residents the same will happen faster. This excuse is simply smoke and mirrors by those who have a buck to make off the resource.

The whole argument is between those who value the resource, and those who care only about the dollars they can make from it. It has very little to do with resident vs. non resident. We have to limit someone when animal numbers are down. Does it make more sense to limit residents. I think not. I am sure if you asked an outfitter they would limit everyone who doesn't pay them. The same can be said of some landowners.

I love to hunt, but spent 80 percent of my hunting time in Montana last fall. I think they prefer non residents also. I'll be spending more time there while the resources of North Dakota go to the highest bidder. When that happens many will be moving to states with more public land. We want to do something to keep North Dakota people here, but this is one of the fastest ways to get them to move.

North Dakota is going down hill. My grandfather was on the first railroad crew in North Dakota and homesteaded here in the 1880's. Now in recent years members of the family have moved to Arizona for better jobs and more public land, to Colorado for the same, to Montana for the same. Shortly parents as they grow older will follow to be close to their grandchildren. Folks, keep following this path and kiss the children of North Dakota good by.


----------



## roostman

Plainsman said:


> I think I'll throw my two cents in here. I rarely pick up a shotgun, not for waterfowl or pheasant. It has been ten years since I shot a pheasant. So those of you that think the following is whining about someone shooting my birds think again.
> 
> I am concerned about the resource, and the small towns. The people that think we should not limit non residents are like children who want to eat all their candy now, and not save any for tomorrow. If we do not use hunter pressure concept the little towns will die. They get a large influx now for a short time, but then it will end abruptly. With a smaller steady income from resident and non resident hunters most small towns will last a lot longer than if we abuse the resource now.
> 
> Small towns are going to die period. If their residents go somewhere else to do all their shopping a few hunters in the fall will not save them. If we are going to value non residents over residents the same will happen faster. This excuse is simply smoke and mirrors by those who have a buck to make off the resource.
> 
> The whole argument is between those who value the resource, and those who care only about the dollars they can make from it. It has very little to do with resident vs. non resident. We have to limit someone when animal numbers are down. Does it make more sense to limit residents. I think not. I am sure if you asked an outfitter they would limit everyone who doesn't pay them. The same can be said of some landowners.
> 
> I love to hunt, but spent 80 percent of my hunting time in Montana last fall. I think they prefer non residents also. I'll be spending more time there while the resources of North Dakota go to the highest bidder. When that happens many will be moving to states with more public land. We want to do something to keep North Dakota people here, but this is one of the fastest ways to get them to move.
> 
> North Dakota is going down hill. My grandfather was on the first railroad crew in North Dakota and homesteaded here in the 1880's. Now in recent years members of the family have moved to Arizona for better jobs and more public land, to Colorado for the same, to Montana for the same. Shortly parents as they grow older will follow to be close to their grandchildren. Folks, keep following this path and kiss the children of North Dakota good by.


very well put plainsman.


----------



## Bert

It is obvious how the resident folks who post on this site seem to feel about non resident hunters. 
I still think that it would be really interesting to know what the average landowner/small town person in outstate NoDak thinks. (not just the handful who post here)

The restrictions have worked. At least on me. I havent been back in a long time. I still wonder though, of all the people in NoDak what percentage of the population is really for keeping guys like me out.
I know that the people who asked me to come out there and hunt their land are not behind it and I would have to think that they are representative of a lot of landowners out there.

That being said, I guess it is either a statewide feeling or it is driven by a few who are looking out for their own interests under the guise of doing what is best for all residents including those who own the private land.
Methinks it is the latter.


----------



## djleye

> keeping guys like me out.


You see Bert, It isn't about you!! HPC was brought about by the game and fish dept, not by the I hate Bert dept.!!!


----------



## Bert

I know you dont hate me...how could you? You have never met me.
The fact of the matter is that my situation is a nasty by product of the restrictions and although there are plenty of people who still go to NoDak to hunt, I am not alone in saying screw it.
My point is that whomever inacted the restrictions were driven by somebody. The ongoing sentiment around here seems to be for more restrictions. Some even suggest and all out ban (even if it is tongue in cheek).
I am simply wondering what the majority of the populus over there thinks about this issue not just 30 guys who spend most of their time yakking about it on the internet.
I know for a fact that their are 7 farmers out there who are completely at odds with what you guys have done and are attempting to do.
They do not agree with the mindset that just because you live a quarter mile into the state of NoDak doesnt make you any different to them than a NR. The little bit of tax money you contribute is basically a road thing and hey, we all pay taxes. Any of you ever driven a state HWY in Mn?
I am resigned. It is not about me. I have my reasons. I guess I would just like to know what the majority of residents think. Left only to what goes on here about the subject, folks are led to believe that this mindset is universal and I dont believe that it is.


----------



## buckseye

I guess we figure at least 75% don't care what happens to the wildlife, that leaves the rest of us to make up for it. I honestly don't think even one person on here is against NR's, we just have to control the numbers so the ones who do come get a good hunt in.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Buckeyes....

The thing that gets me is that everyone here is talking about saving the resource....I am 100% on board. So would all hunters NR and R alike. But the thing that gets me is most of the people are talking about limiting NR's is the way to help the resource.....HOW is just limiting NR the help....YOu don't limit R Liscense sales. Yes I agree if you take 10,000 lisc. away less birds will be shot....but how do you know that 10,000 lisc. won't be bought by more R? then the same amount of birds can be shot. Also it seems alot of people don't like guides/outfitters....well if you limit the number of NR's it plays into their hands....they are a business they can got to commerce and get a handfull of these NR's lisc given to them so they can sell them to there clients. YOu will be lining there pockets. What you will be doing is hurting the freelance hunter.

Now if I could see a good plan that has limiting NR lisc. as a part of the whole. I would not have a problem....but all it seems is that people want to limit NR and that will be the fix all.....I don't think so.


----------



## Bert

Thanks Buckseye,

You answered my question by stating that you guys "figure" that 75% dont care.


----------



## buckseye

Chuck,
Maybe the feds should cut the limit to one bird per person no matter where you are from. Would anybody come out here if they could only shoot one bird? Of course that too sways in the residents favor cause we live here and it would cost us less to get our bird. 

OK here's is what I'll do for all the NR's, I have a twenty acre duck pond you can ALL hunt but it is only open to hunting for one week. Do you suppose there would be any ducks there at the end of the week? Gosh some poor guy drove forever to get to the duck pond and it was empty, I guess to much pressure must have chased the ducks away.


----------



## buckseye

your welcome Bert,

nj and i were just visiting about this the other day on here except it had to do with the % of people who cared enough to get involved and at least write their rep's and sen's. I think the numbers is actually less than that, sure there are tons of people who care for a day but very few that keep on going all year long. You have met some of the EverReady bunnies of hunting in ND, we will never tire just pass away some day.


----------



## Bert

Bucksyeye

Perhaps you didnt pick up on the sarcasm.

You guys "figure" (quotation marks) that 75% dont care. There is no hard and fast data. You never took a poll, you just figure, guess, estimate that of all the people in North Dakota, only 25% give a sh!t about the welbeing of wildlife populations.
I know a few landowners who would argue that.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Buckseye...

How about a pond/feild that is full of ducks...and a bunch of res. hit it for a week.....are the ducks still going to be there... It is the same thing....hunting pressure no matter by who it will move birds. The limit thing is an option. That is what I like to hear. Things like that.

Here are some ideas:

1. Raise the NR lisc. by $20 and all that surplus money goes into purchasing land for public use or directly to PLOTS

-more land for hunting for all, also creates good nesting cover, helps farmers with payments if land is in plots, takes some good ground out of production to help raise prices. and a $20 raise would make a few less NR come but the majority would pay it if it went to habitat.

2. limit daily limits to 4 birds and still have the 12 possession 
- Less birds killed in a day....less pressure. You could be done in 1/2 hr. Bobs example of 42 birds shot in a week would be less....28 birds.

3. Say you can't hunt ducks on a certain day or two a week. Canada used to have you were not able to hunt on sundays.

- Less pressure on the birds again. Yes you would have more hunting pressure on the other days but those are mainly weekends anyway. SO pressure is high regaurdless (most R hunt on weekends that has been stated over and over by R).

4. Split the season.

- R birds will have a break if they have not flow south or been pushed out. Birds could stage in the area longer. Then the northern flight has a chance to move it. more sucess for hunters of all.

There are 4 ideas that don't say get rid on NR. These four ideas are good for all and the resource. I just don't like it when people put the blame on others.


----------



## buckseye

Bert,
I did pick up on the sarcasm and went forward anyway. I'm basing my guess on the number of resident hunting/fishing licenses we sell, I figure if they don't buy licenses either they don't care or are against it. 

Chuck,
I think you should move to ND you could be a res. too. All the stuff you list is looked at every year. You should look farther down the flyway if you want to see liberal limits and season lengths, IMO the flyway is managed with the well established southern waterfowlers in mind as the principle duck hunting area of the US. It is not our fault the land is not accessible down there. You need only to look at the duck hunting plantations and TV shows to see where the big money is at.


----------



## Bert

Buckseye,

So you are saying that if you dont buy a license you dont care about wildlife?

Some of the folks out there who farm have a lot more invested in what is good for wildlife than the cost of a hunting license.


----------



## jhegg

Bert and Chuck,

in the last 10-15 years, the number of resident waterfowl hunters has stayed the same or dropped slightly. In that same time frame, the number of non-resident waterfowl hunters has risen by 300-500%. Now, where do you think restrictions should be enacted to maintain quality hunting in ND?


----------



## Chuck Smith

jhegg:

read earlier post. I know the influx on NR hunters has risen....but that happens when ever a place has success. Look at Red Lake in MN. The crappie bite was great for years...word got out and then it was a zoo. It will be the same with the reopening of walleyes on the lake. But they did put a slot and a lessor limit on the lake. They did not say a certain type of people can not come to the lake or we are going to limit the number of boats on the lake. I know it is hard to compare fish to waterfowl but it is just an example of ways to manage the resource.

Buckseye: agree with you 100% on the south and how the US game and fish manage the resource.

To let you know last week at a waterfowl round table the state dicussed a split season, draw down of a couple more pools on the mississppi to help with habitat, more wma projects. I was not able to go to the meeting but did send a signed letter with my ideas with a friend so he had not just his voice (he is a state game warden). But the one that gets me is they talked about having an early Aug goose hunt for resident geese....some geese can't fly in early part of aug. Also the complaint of res geese is by people who live in the city and have goose crap on there lawn. That time of year farmers crops are tall enough that they wont do that much damage. the only ones is with swathed grain. Sorry off topic a little but just heard the news from my friend and kinda bugs me.


----------



## DJRooster

jhegg nice comback! Most NR have no idea as to what goes on in North Dakota but again if 30,000 Nodak's went to another state to hunt would it not affect the hunting opportunities in other states? It is not rocket science but for some reason some of them just don't get it.


----------



## jhegg

Chuck,

It is hard to compare fish to waterfowl. Fish generally won't or can't leave the lake due to heavy fishing pressure. Ducks and geese can and do leave a wetland complex due to heavy hunting pressure. That is the whole issue.

Then, when you see where the increased hunting pressure is coming from, it is not too hard to understand why we would like to see some restrictions on nr hunters. You also have to realize that less pressure benefits both the resident and nr hunter.

I and many others choose to live in ND because of its excellent hunting. We could all make more money elsewhere, but we choose to stay here. Why sould we stand by and let commercial and out-of-state interests destroy what we have? If you want it that bad, move here and enjoy your resident status.


----------



## buckseye

Bert, 
I thought we were talking about wildlife laws and legislation and yes if they don't buy licenses it is a good chance they could care less or don't take time to care.

I own land and am one of the very few with enough extra time to enjoy it. Most of the landowners out here are pretty hard at work trying to make a living they don't have much time to think about wildlife much less get involved.


----------



## DJRooster

Chuck, I think you forgot to pay the land taxes on your 100 acre purchase. Just curious as to what the interest rate was on your loan to purchase and if you included any down payment?


----------



## Chuck Smith

Jhegg and Djrooster:

I know you can't compare fish to waterfowl...I stated that. But my main reason for that was the fishing was hott for years...then the word got out. People came from all over. That is what happened to ND's waterfowling.

I ask this question for everyone......If hunting was not good in ND and you wanted to go to another state where it was excellent. How would you feel if that state and its R wanted to limit you? Put yourself in the NR shoe's.

I just don't want states to get into pissing matches like what happened with MN and ND. (By the way I did not vote for our current gov. I also sent many letters/emails/phone calls asking him not to take ND to court. I was against it.) Pretty soon it will be like 50 individual countries on hunting and fishing priveliges.


----------



## djleye

> How about a pond/feild that is full of ducks...and a bunch of res. hit it for a week.....are the ducks still going to be there... It is the same thing....hunting pressure no matter by who it will move birds. The limit thing is an option. That is what I like to hear. Things like that.


Chuck, No, if it is a field hunt, the pressure will not kick the birds out. They will go back to the water and then find another field to feed in the next day but they will, for the most part, remain in the state. A pond, depending upon what kind of pond it is, might not have the same effect!!!


----------



## Chuck Smith

djleye:
Here was from an earilier post:
"OK here's is what I'll do for all the NR's, I have a twenty acre duck pond you can ALL hunt but it is only open to hunting for one week. Do you suppose there would be any ducks there at the end of the week? Gosh some poor guy drove forever to get to the duck pond and it was empty, I guess to much pressure must have chased the ducks away."

Then I stated pressure is pressure not matter who gives it R or NR. Then I stated ideas to keep birds around. Read the other posts please.


----------



## djleye

> ask this question for everyone......If hunting was not good in ND and you wanted to go to another state where it was excellent. How would you feel if that state and its R wanted to limit you? Put yourself in the NR shoe's


I would abide by that state's rules (as I do when I hunt in MN), and not ***** about it. If I wanted to be treated the same as a resident, I would then move to that state and become a resident. Very simple, don't you think!!!!!


----------



## Chuck Smith

I do abid by the rules. But what bothers me is when they put all the blame on the NR. People think or are taking it is a us vs them when it is not. because we all need to work together. I never said I wanted to have the benefits like a R. I have never stated that once. You are putting words in my mouth.


----------



## jhegg

Chuck,

Reading between the lines, what I am hearing is that you don't want to be treated like a resident - you just don't want any restyrictions put on you because you are a non-resident. I am not able to distinguish between those two ideas.

It is a fact that the increased waterfowl hunting pressure in ND is coming from non-residents. So, why do you have a problem with restrictions on non-residents to maintain the quality of hunting we have here in ND? Please explain this to me.

Jim


----------



## Triple B

I have just come to the conclusion that this argument is nothing more than a heavyweight boxing match that could go 15 rounds and still end in a draw. both sides have their opinions and points, and both sides have the pro's and con's of these points, the validity of many of these points are nothing more than opinion, this could on forever, or in my opinion until all of ND is commercialized for hunting. instead of bickering over the RES/NR issue, we should really join forces and attack the true enemy, which is the commercializing the states resources. Whether anyone likes it or not thats where it is heading, and myself being a resident would rather hunt side by side with NR's than pay out of my AS$ to hunt on commercialized land.


----------



## Bert

Buckseye

My original post had to do with a wondering about how MOST people in NoDak feel about NRs. 
Point being that otherwise, you get the views of the handful who, like you say, have enough time on their hands to get into the politics of it.
Laws and legislation are driven by those few. 
I would simply like to know how the people who own the land, pay the taxes on the land, provide the hunting opportunities feel about the situation weather or not they buy a license. And by the way, buying a license has no bearing at all in regards to how they feel about having good populations of wildlife around to enjoy, hence the food plots etc...
Which on a per person basis probably do more good than buying a license.

The problem is that nobody asks them the question probably because you wouldnt like to hear what they have to say.


----------



## Chuck Smith

jhegg:

But what I am saying is you have tightened the restrictions (number of lisc, two weeks period, price)....how far is too far? Once you have tightened so far on the NR then what?.....On this site you see people attacking guides....I agree with some of the things I have read. But then after the NR...you go after the guides?.....then what?

It sounds to me, outside looking in, that some people are just being greedy and want it all to themselves. what really got me going was some of the excuses or things others have blamed on the NR. (read earlier posts) Pressure is pressure no matter who puts it on.

My thing is the us vs them. To let you know I have never hunted waterfowl in ND. I have only hunted pheasants....and that was once.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Triple B:

I agree with you 100% :thumb:


----------



## mallard

Bert said:


> Buckseye
> 
> My original post had to do with a wondering about how MOST people in NoDak feel about NRs.
> Point being that otherwise, you get the views of the handful who, like you say, have enough time on their hands to get into the politics of it.
> Laws and legislation are driven by those few.
> I would simply like to know how the people who own the land, pay the taxes on the land, provide the hunting opportunities feel about the situation weather or not they buy a license. And by the way, buying a license has no bearing at all in regards to how they feel about having good populations of wildlife around to enjoy, hence the food plots etc...
> Which on a per person basis probably do more good than buying a license.
> 
> The problem is that nobody asks them the question probably because you wouldnt like to hear what they have to say.


Take this for what it is worth,small town talk in the local cafe.The farmers I know,and have met either could care less,or have had bad experiences with the increased pressure from visiting hunters.Fields that have been driven on maybe 2-3 times at most in the fall are driven on a dozen times or more in that time frame(field or slough hunting).A friend of mine that owns land had a visiting hunter chew out his son(he was setting decoys) in he field owned.The signs went up the next day.Family and friends can only hunt there now.I also think (landowner opinions)vary on who you talk to,and where they are located in the state.If you go to one of the more heavily marketed areas,where commercialised hunting is rampant,sure they are going too be mad about the restrictions.The farmer might be leasing his land to guides or out of state hunters.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Mallard:

One thing I think that will help....this will hurt NR and R hunters....Is to pass a law that states you need permission to hunt on land. Not what it is now....if it is not posted you can hunt.

1. Hunter can ask the farmer: can I drive in the feild.
2. Hunter will know if anyone else will be hunting on the property
3. Farmer/landowner will you know who the hunter is (build a relationship) 
4. Farmer can weed out bad seeds or know who mad ruts, broke fences, scared cattle, etc.

I know alot of people will say they get permission....I make sure I always do. But there are slobs out there that will take advantage of this. This could weed out slob hunters. This is just an idea.


----------



## mallard

That is how I got to know this guy,I asked to hunt even though it was not posted.He never liked posting his property to hunting in the past because he thought everyone needs a place to hunt.After that episode with his son,and the Wisconsin boy's chasing coyotes with trucks and snowmobiles,he changed his mind.I will say that most landowners I have met only care about pheasants and deer,as far as wildlife go.Most of the ones that are interested in waterfowl,are looking at making money off of it.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Mallard:

Slobs ruin it for all of us....R and NR alike. That is all those WI boys were.... Slobs.


----------



## buckseye

Chuck,
No problem, the restriction will not affect you if you just get here and hunt before the restriction takes affect.

Bert,
The answer is most are not aware there is a problem.


----------



## djleye

Chuck, I have read every post here very carefully. You never said it was the same pond/field. My response was a way to show that there are ways to keep the birds around in spite of pressure.



> Quote:
> ask this question for everyone......If hunting was not good in ND and you wanted to go to another state where it was excellent. How would you feel if that state and its R wanted to limit you? Put yourself in the NR shoe's
> 
> I would abide by that state's rules (as I do when I hunt in MN), and not b#tch about it. If I wanted to be treated the same as a resident, I would then move to that state and become a resident. Very simple, don't you think!!!!!


Question asked, question answered. I never said you were or were not doing anything, I merely answered the question you asked!! :lost:

If you don't wanna hear the answer, don't ask the question.


----------



## djleye

Chuck, the other thing you have to consider is that there are a few absentee landowners in ND. Not always easy to find them. I too always ask permission whenever humanly possible.


----------



## roostman

DJRooster said:


> jhegg nice comback! Most NR have no idea as to what goes on in North Dakota but again if 30,000 Nodak's went to another state to hunt would it not affect the hunting opportunities in other states? It is not rocket science but for some reason some of them just don't get it.


 What opportunities are you talking about? did you not get to hunt your favorite pothole this year? Was there a lack of birds in your area this year? Have we not had records numbers of Geese and Pheasants along with a record number of NR's. You guys have ripped on Chuck like he was some kind of illegal alian, chuck and Bert has the right to come hunt here, thats the law. They do not have the same hunting rights as per we as residents have. Chuck said why don't we raise the license fees up twenty dollars for the NR's, I say why just the NR's. Why can't we as residents fork out a little more money for license. if the money went back into getting more land why not? If most of the NR's hunt during the week and most of the residents hunt on the weekends then your favorite pothole should be open on the weekend. Is there anybody in this fourm that works for the ND hunting & fishing Dept. I would really like there take on this whole thing. This has been one of the more exciting issues to watch and read, you just don't know who or what is going to be said next. :beer:


----------



## jhegg

roostman,
It's pretty obvious that you don't hunt ducks. Let me tell you, if your favorite pothole has been pounded all week, there will not be any ducks on it over the weekend. That is exactly one of the situations that we are talking about here.


----------



## roostman

jhegg said:


> roostman,
> It's pretty obvious that you don't hunt ducks. Let me tell you, if your favorite pothole has been pounded all week, there will not be any ducks on it over the weekend. That is exactly one of the situations that we are talking about here.


 I am not a duck hunter, but most duck hunters I have talked to have had no problem filling out this year, most were done fairly early in the day. I guess when I talk to people and they say yea we shot 100 ducks this year, theres lots of them. I really start to wonder why someone needs to shoot 100 ducks or 7 deer or 75 pheasants in one year. When is enough enough? then complain, yes I said complain because we have too many NR's over here? Is the NR's the problem? I don't think soo, we are the problem, until The game & fish dept decides to put a limit on NR's, and I do think they will eventually, lets just try to all get along.


----------



## Plainsman

Bert



> It is obvious how the resident folks who post on this site seem to feel about non resident hunters.


You stated that people on here are against non residence. That came two posts after I said this isn't a resident vs. non resident, this is people concerned about the resource vs. those who value it only for the buck they can make off it.

Chuck



> HOW is just limiting NR the help....YOu don't limit R Liscense sales.


You stated that you don't think it is fair to restrict non residence if they don't restrict residence also. Any state I elk hunt restricts non residence, but I am grateful they let me come once in a while. Am I to understand that you think North Dakota should be the playground of everyone who wants to come here. That those of us who live here and pay taxes to this state shouldn't be given some consideration? Would you want us to make the same mistake as Minnesota did when the fishing was so good that everyone converged on the site?

What is wrong with biology and feeding ecology, migratory energetic, etc driving these decisions. These decisions need to be made by professionals not politicians, guides, or non residence who think we owe them something. I enjoy hunting bow hunting with non residence, but don't appreciate any that think I owe them. What ever happened to appreciation? I find the you owe me attitude offensive.

Like I said I don't duck hunt, but the idea we owe non residence is beginning to get as tiring for some of us as the non resident issue is for you. Restrictions when reproduction is down and populations are low benefits residence and non residence alike. However, even though I don't duck hunt I advocate restricting non residence before residence. Anything else is absurd.

When I bow hunt deer in the fall around Woodworth, North Dakota I see more Minnesota license plates on the road than North Dakota. What's it take to keep you guys happy?

Like I said I don't duck hunt, but I am getting tired of the you owe me attitude I read on here.


----------



## ND decoy

I'll probably get hammered on this but I think that license fees are too low for resident and way to low for non-residents.

If you break down to a cost of what it cost per day hunting cheaper to do than almost any thing else there is. We just raised our rates a couple of years ago after a long period of holding the same. I keep hearing that hunting is changing and time to understand that. Well than the cost of a license should follow in line just like every thing else. It also a tough decision because I don't want to hurt the guy who wants to bring his kids here for a first time hunt. But is cash strapped. His kids should have very chance that we all did to be introduced in to our sport.

For those that don't like that they have to pay more or have differn't regulations because they are from out of state. I am sorry but membership has it's perks. The residents should get to hunt there state a week early. The non-residents can still come here on the pheasant opener they just have to talk to a few land owners and hunt on private land or unposted land. People that get upset because there are differn't rules for residents and non-residents should just get over themsevles and understand that there be some benifits to those who live here.

Speaking as a land owner making all land posted is bad idea. Any farmer that tells you that it is hardship is full of it. If we make the land posted all you will do is take away access from people. I honestly believe if this was to happen the number of hunters coming here would drop. With no signs to see whos land it is and with land owners spread out every where it will be harder to get permision. I live 30 miles from my farm. If you looked in a local phone book you wouldn't find my name. But if you look at my posted sign you will see my name and phone number.

I keep hearing that hunting has become a money sport. Well lets make some money and take it and buy more land for public access. But it is time to stop giving it away for nothing.


----------



## g/o

Bert, You wanted to know how small towns feel about non residents. WE LOVE THEM . I will tell you why and that is becuase you spend lots of money here and are respectful. The facts are plain and simple we passed some stupid laws a few years back. The guys on this site will preach freelance this and freelance that but the only freelance hunters they care about are the residents. A couple of good examples are the week early waterfowl hunting for residents only. Let not forget the cute one the week of pheasant openor closed to non residents on PLOTS when you have MEA. Sometime go and look and how our State Reps vote on bills such as HPC. Everyone along the interstate highways vote for and in the country where the hunting is they vote no. I could go on and on but I'm not going to waste anymore time on this. Yes Bert we want you to come back and your welcome to hunt my land anytime of course free of charge.


----------



## Field Hunter

Thanks Jim....My observations over the years have given me the distinct impression that most residets that only hunt one weekend a year and most farmers aren't up on the issues affecting the resources and frankly don't really care to be. Case in point...the gentleman above that states he from pheasant country...he says he doesn't hunt ducks and he obviosly doesn't understand what pressure does to the resource.


----------



## roostman

Field Hunter said:


> Thanks Jim....My observations over the years have given me the distinct impression that most residets that only hunt one weekend a year and most farmers aren't up on the issues affecting the resources and frankly don't really care to be. Case in point...the gentleman above that states he from pheasant country...he says he doesn't hunt ducks and he obviosly doesn't understand what pressure does to the resource.


 Field hunter I hunt alot more then a couple of weekends every year, And even as a pheasant hunter I seen alot of NR's this year and in recent years, I scout alot before the season and have more then one spot to hunt along with some private stuff I hunt. There were plenty of pheasants this year even with th NR's. I respect that these are not my pheasants and don't get angry when i've planned on hunting a certain area and someones already there. It just seems that if you are not local your considered a NR .pressures pressure no matter if you are a NR or a resident.


----------



## NDTracer

I have somewhat of a fair comparison for the people who want to compare fishing to the hunting. I have lived in ND almost my entire life(move to MN for 2 years). I wish I could get a job farther west as I live on the border. Now I hear the NR complaining about the regulations. However I don't hear the ND resident who has a lake cabin in MN paying for NR fishing liscense while paying taxes on his lake cabin and being REQUIRED to tag his boat with MN tags. His residence is ND so why require the MN tag on his boat. Why can't he have ND like the car he used to get there? I don't hear the complaining about that. That is putting money into MN rather than ND for G&F.

Now as for the hunting I am one of those who used to hunt waterfowl. I grew up in the main flyway and hunted them every weekend (usually not on Sundays due to church). I hunted them once since I started college back in 91 so I went from a weekend outing, including during deer rifle season to one time in 15 years. Why well it is tough find the perfect spot and when you do you have to fight to keep it. I found a great spot and got out there early to setup. After setting up parked and walked back. As I am back at the setup I hear a noise. I look and here is a guy driving through the fields straight to us. This ****** me off as it season had opened plus he drove for a mile through fields when there was a prairie trail 1/8 mile south that I used (I drove a total of 200 feet in the field). Well he gets up to us and starts asking if we know who's land it is and if we have permission. I said yea I talked to ** last night to verify I could hunt. He then spun the tires out of there to a hillside about 1/8 mile away and set up. Then any time a flock would set their wings to come into us he would start either shooting to scare them or calling to compete with our small spread (we were 3 high school kids). Now this was a "Professional" Guide doing this. I have no idea if he was guiding R or NR but it really has left a bitter taste in my mouth about guides.

I see the best solution as changing the bag limits.

As for small towns and their attitude I can see a direct benefit. My dad sells gas along with farm machinery so I can see both sides and yes he does benefit from the NR buying fuel. However it isn't much compared to the R who buy it year round. He is located though where the fishing is year round and hunting is great (geese mostly) so NR are usually around.

Now when your talking NR you need to take into account where they are from, not just out of state either. The people from local cities don't usually buy as they will buy in their town and won't need to buy locally for gas or groceries or even eating out as they will pack that for the weekend. This is placing people like us border dwellers (as someone said) more along the lines of NR than R except we get the R prices and seasons.

I think it is every hunters responsibility to clean up the land they use. My thoughts are simple. The only way the landowner should see that I was on his land is by my foot prints or from a cleaner land than it was before. Never do I leave a mess for him. In fact I verify with the landowner about leaving gut piles while bowhunting too. I will pack it out if they don't want it left and it is even easier with birds.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Plainsmans:

I am sorry if I come off like "you owe me". It was never my intent.

I also agree that you should limit NR before R. But my point is how far is too far. The state of ND already limits NR. NR pay a higher fee, limited to two weeks, can't hunt the early season (resident opener), have to buy a pheasant and a waterfowl lisc. (not just a small game), can't hunt plots on the opening weekend (even thought the NR lisc pays for some of it just like the res.) and on 30,000 waterfowl lisc sales. I just want to know how much farther you can go.

I agree with most of the stuff above that has been done (only one is the plots for the first week***). Because other states do it to manage the resource and make hunting better for the R. But how much further can the state of ND go.

***The plots thing only gets me is that everyones lisc pays for a portion of that. It is like saying we will take your money now for the football ticket....but you can only watch the last 3 quarters the game. Plots stands for PUBLIC LAND OPEN TO SPORTSMAN. So if it is "public", then the "public" should all be restricted, not just a portion of the "Public". I know that will upset some but that is my opinion. I know pressure will increas and all that has been stated....but pressure is pressure by R or NR.

My whole thing is how far is too far. And I think ND is edgeing towards that line. I think that other alternatives are needed to be looked at more seriously that just limiting NR or kicking out NR because that is the way it is heading.


----------



## Bert

Tracer,

The ND resident needs to have a tag on his boat in Mn because many of those boats stay in Mn year round. Why should you be able to buy it here, use it here and leave it here with a NoDak license on it? 
That makes sense doesnt it?

This isnt all but the norm.


----------



## buckseye

Kinda curious do MN duck hunters that bring boats along have to license them in ND?


----------



## NDTracer

Bert said:


> Tracer,
> 
> The ND resident needs to have a tag on his boat in Mn because many of those boats stay in Mn year round. Why should you be able to buy it here, use it here and leave it here with a NoDak license on it?
> That makes sense doesnt it?
> 
> This isnt all but the norm.


I understand why but then why do they have to buy an out of state liscense? They pay the taxes on the cabin, the boat is tagged as MN so why is their fishing liscense NR when nothing else is?

That is what I am getting at and as stated above MN bringing in the duck boat doesn't have to change tags. Point is I follow what they require agree or disagree and allow them to it is their state and their resources they can do as they wish. However I don't own a boat or cabin so it doesn't affect me but my FIL had to have his boat tagged MN. He kept it parked on a friends property (out of water) at a lake. It would hit the water for maybe a week total (7 days) and he had to have an in state tag but forced to buy out of state to fish with the boat. Just pointing out that each state has its "catches" for the NR. MN is a win-win they get the resident boat fees as well as NR liscenses. ND gets the NR fees and the R time to hunt. I don't see much difference.

I also would like to know how SD does their hunting for NR. I think it is similar to ND but I don't hear the *****ing there and don't know why other than theirs was maybe in place for a longer time frame so the hunters found another place to hunt. That being ND and now they are having the same thing happen and they know that they will have to deal with it since they are NR and so they want to put up a fight as they have nothing to loose. I could be all wet on this one too. I don't follow the politics of it all like most of you probably do. I live in ND for a reason and not MN. One of the hunting and the other is the taxes. I will be honest if the taxes were the same I would probably live in MN as the houses are cheaper and I have wouldn't have any problems paying the NR fees to hunt ND I KNOW there is plenty of land you can find to hunt Unlike MN.


----------



## lvmylabs

MN duck hunters that bring their own boats must follow the rules set forth by the state of MN as far as having a boat lincensed/registered. I don't know off hand if MN required a hunting boat to be registered or not. As far as registering a boat it is supposed to be licnesed in the state that is going to be used the most. It doesn't matter where you buy it or where you live. That is why you see so many ND residents with cabins in MN that have their boats licensed in MN.


----------



## Bert

The difference is that when you buy a Mn fishing license, it is good for all year. You dont have to sit out the opener so the residents can have fun. You dont have to choose which 2 weeks in June you want to fish etc...
If you want to have a resident license in Mn because you have a lake cabin here and spend all summer here, Im all for it. But first fix it so that it pays for me to own property in NoDak for hunting and then I will get a resident license there.
I would pay a lot of money to hunt in North Dakota if I could hunt there all season.
You talk about NRs tying up land in NoDak. and then bi+ch when you have to pay a little extra and you OWN property in Mn?
If I owned land in NoDak I would sure expect to pay taxes on it.


----------



## Chuck Smith

ND Tracer:

NR hunters get limited time, only two weeks, limitations on land they can hunt (pheasants), can't hunt the openers (resident openers)...NR hunters don't get the same benefits as R hunters.

My point all along is: How far is too far with the restricions? i agree you need restrictions. They are in place. But some R want more restricions.....how far is too far? I have stated that over and over.

Also people are using the what is good for the resource as thier flag for this debate/discussion/arguement.....but there are other ways that better suit the resource than just limiting NR. If they want to use pressure as there flag...again other ways that are better than limiting the NR. It is just easier to point the finger and pass the blame on others than to look with in.....Many people on this site and that have responded to this thread have agreed with my statements about lower limits, split seasons, days off, etc.

My point I have been trying to make is don't just blame the NR...when it is some law/season changes can happen to benefit all. If these other changes happen maybe there does not need to be a limitation on NR...who knows.


----------



## Ripline

I think ND can go alot farther in the restrictions on NR. The pressure NRs put on birds is alot greater than the Res. ND needs to keep actively looking at their regs and do whatever is necessary to maintain or increase the quality of the hunting experience. SD is much more restrictive and you never hear anybody complianing about them.
Closing plots is no big deal. PLAN your trip around it. Two weeks is no big deal, most nr are there for a much shorter period. PLAN your trip around it. Closed for the opening week, no big deal. PLAN your trip around it.
:beer:


----------



## Dick Monson

> Plots stands for PUBLIC LAND OPEN TO SPORTSMAN


Actually it's* Private* Land Open To Sportsmen. And as one of those landowners I do like to see the locals get the first crack on PLOTS. It is not much to ask. Remember that season opens earlier now by about 2 weeks than a few years ago so people aren't really losing hunting time anyway.

If some communities that are commercialized want PLOTS open equally, let them put their money where their mouth is. HB1189 is that conduit.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ripline: I agree with the two weeks, the seperate openers i'm fine with....the use of PLOTS, I disagree with, because it is PUBLIC LAND! that is my complaint is that it is public land and you are limiting the public.....

Again Hunting pressure is hunting pressure you limit NR to 30,000 lisc for waterfowl. They can only hunt for two weeks out of the season. Who applies more pressure....the R or NR.

Example: Like an earlier thread...... A NR can only (legally possess) 12 birds for a week of hunting. That is 24 birds a year. Now a R (only hunting on weekends) can shoot 132 total year allowance (that is if they are using the 12 per week that is possession). Who is putting more pressure on birds.

Yes the NR is hunting for a week and the R is only hunting weekends...So that week there is more pressure. But as you stated the NR typically is not in ND for a complete week...

But how about weeks where school is out, MEA, kids back from college, holidays, people taking days off work, etc. It is all pressure. Ways to stop that I have mentioned over and over and over and over again. Now quick putting all the blame on the NR....


----------



## Field Hunter

Didn't you MN guys try gettng the ND guys restricted for the fishing? I think I remember hearing it failed miserably.

If you want to continue the fishing vs hunting senerios then let's do this....if you own land in ND for recreation then let's tax the hell out of this land...like we pay higher taxes for land owned in MN.

Oh yah, let the ND kids hunt the youth opener....restricted to resident only, let the ND fishermen spear fish....restricted to MN only (by the way, talk about an assinign way to ruin a resource...and ND fits here also)...let ND fishermen have permanent ice houses...restricted to MN residents.....need I go on?

You have your restrictions just like ND and every other state. I'm sorry that you MN guys feel that if you miss the opener that there won't be any birds left for you.....It's just different over here in ND. We have birds the whole season not just until the first yahoo goes shooting across the lake on opener scaring every duck away for miles.

I can't remember the last time I heard a ND resident that owns lakeshore property in MN complain about the higher taxes and/or the restrictions n NR fishermen. We know you have to have restrictions to protect your resources just like we do....live with it.


----------



## NDTracer

Chuck I don't think you and I are that far off from each other. I agree in lowering the bag limit and have no problems with that. I also am game for closing it on certain days. I think the best days would be either Tuesdays & Wednesday or Wed and Thurs. This would be mid week and R and NR both would be working most likely. I would guess most hunting is done on weekends and the day or 2 days prior to it. Now as for your split season I am not sure what your referring to there.

While in college I hunted with a MN in ND and I thought there was an option with the liscense that they could hunt anywhere in the state for a set period or they could specify an area for a shorter period or something like that.

Bert I am not sure if you were aiming the tax comment at me or not. If so I don't own any property. I was just stating that I don't hear the complaints from ND about buying the NR stamp and boat tag for fishing in a MN lake (with Stocked fish). Your right you should expect to pay the taxes if there was a way around that I would love to know and I would also own alot more land than I do now (meaning something besides my house that I share with the bank  )


----------



## Chuck Smith

ND tracer:

What I mean by a split season is have a break in the middle of the season....a week or two off. No hunting R and NR. They do this in the south. (That way the south can hit the migration....both of them....the north's resident birds and the south's local birds.... and then the fall flight from canada.)


----------



## NDTracer

I guess that would be fine with me. I kinda have that split season by choice with my bow. I take off the time from rifle season til a week later or so. I just don't want to wear blaze orange with a bow and you must to hunt legally.

The other I would like to change is the timing of our deer rifle season. I wish it was done at another time so the rut would be closed to rifle hunting. I think we could have some huge racks if this was done. The bad part is then it would get commercialized and that isn't what I want either.


----------



## roostman

I don't think people are really understanding what Chuck is saying here. Let's say once a week you go down to the pizza parlar and order a 12" pizza for ten dollars, you do this once a week for a year, then one day you go in and your 12" pizza is a 8" pizza but it is still ten dollars, you say o'kay thats fine and this goes on for another year, well guess whats happens the next year? Any guesses? Your 8" pizza now becomes a 4" pizza for ten dollars, and by this time you have to ask? When is enough enough, and the only answer they come up with is quit your complaining and like it, this is North Dakota and this whole issue came up by a resident hunter, not a NR. All Chuck is saying is when is enough enough?


----------



## swift

Hydro hit the nail on the head. NR's are not limiting your access to land, LEASING is. Keep the guys with the deep pockets from buying the right to walk on land and eventually the landowners will come around to the thinking from yesteryear. Money is what is the problem with hunting right now. It is so bad in other states that Hunting Lease magazine can have a show on OLN and nobody calls for a boycott of the channel.


----------



## djleye

The problem with a split season here is that you never know how long the season is going to be. There are times when we are all done in October. The weather is too fickle to even try a split season here.


----------



## Chuck Smith

I know that is what the big problem with the split season is in the Northern states... but it can be done...If it ends up freezing early or the birds have moved through....oh well that is hunting. Next year you could hit the mother load during the split.

Thank u swift, hydro, roostman and all others who talk about the commercilization of hunting is the main issue not R vs NR. You all hit the nail on the head. :beer: :thumb:


----------



## Bob Kellam

When is enough, enough? When Nonresidents and Residents hunters can have a quality hunting experience while hunting in ND, anything more than that is fluff.

*Just for the sake of this discussion, lets consider a quality hunting experience to mean that you were able to find birds, obtain access, enjoy time with friends, and harvest some game.*

_(Forget about the restrictions, forget about all the issues that are being discussed on this thread, no BS about getting down-winded, no BS about Boat or Field Hunting)_

*QUESTION? 
As a Resident or Nonresidents did you have what you considered a quality hunting experience when you hunted in ND? lets get to the bottom line, DID YOU HAVE A QUALITY HUNTING EXPERIENCE WHEN YOU HUNTED IN NORTH DAKOTA????*

*If you did or did not please post the reason why. *


----------



## Goldy's Pal

> NR's are not limiting your access to land, LEASING is.


Yeah you're right, sure last year was a prime example where that scenario hit home, the only property that I couldn't get permission on was owned by a guide. Ask yourself though, who does he guide or lease to? Yeah there is a chance a group of ND residents with money and zero time to scout could pay him, but more than likely a resident doesn't need help. Out of state? More likely to be the "we drove far enough lets do some shooting" type, and pay to do it.

They can have it, I'll find my own.


----------



## Bert

I am not aiming my comments at any one person. There are plenty who gripe about paying non homestead taxes on lake property in Mn. The bottom line is that no matter how you cut it, for what you have to pay you have a hell of a lot better deal being a NR fishing in Mn than a NR hunting in Nodak.
Say what you want about spearing. I dont spear. I think it should be outlawed for res and non res alike. 
Thing is that for 36 bucks you can come and fish all year long. You can bring your pets without a $90.00 doctor bill, bring your jerk skis and your boats and live like a resident. 
It costs me over $200.00 to hunt for two weeks in NoDak, cant hunt opener, ridiculed for bringing a boat and consequently, it doesnt pay to own property out there.
Somebody brought up the "high" taxes that the poor NR lake property owners have to pay. It wasnt me, I just threw in my two cents.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Everytime I am in the feild (any state or country) is quality.

I am with friends, family, outside in gods great creation, enjoying alone time and not working!


----------



## roostman

Bob I had a great time Pheasant and deer hunting this year, along with having Two boys old enough to hunt with me I have a two year lab that was catching on at the end of last year but had a great season this year. By far my best year ever, lots of birds, I got out alot and The weather was fantastic what more can a person ask for. :beer:


----------



## NDTracer

Bob to answer your question I would have to say some of both. I saw birds when I was out so I was happy. I didn't have a good time with friends though, I usually hunt alone. This will be changing though as I plan on getting a dog in the future and my oldest son (5 next month) has an interest for now in hunting so I may have a partner in the near future.


----------



## Canuck

As a NR who lives where there are no pheasants I was really happy with the quality of my hunt. My week in ND probably cost $100/day. The half dozen pheasants I got cost about $75 each. I had such a good time that even my wife didn't question the cost/bird!!! I guess hunting the "fringes" of your pheasant habitat might explain why we never bumped into a resident hunter in the field (last week of October).

Thanks to all residents of North Dakota for granting me the priveledge to hunt upland game in your state.


----------



## Plainsman

> Plainsmans:
> 
> I am sorry if I come off like "you owe me". It was never my intent.


Thanks Chuck. It's not like we want to punish you, just cut back on the pressure waterfowl face now. Like someone else said no one gets upset with South Dakota that allows 4,000 non resident waterfowl hunters, but they sure were upset when we wanted to cut it to 22,000. That is what I don't understand. 
Correct me if I am wrong, but are there not about the same number of non resident waterfowl hunters as resident. Name one other state that is that generous with their non resident quota.

There is a different pattern to the hunting with residents. They are lucky enough to be here and hunt week-ends without taking off work. Two days hunting five days of rest. Many non residents are here for a week or more and hunt every day. With the same number of nonresident hunters this means they are putting far more pressure on the waterfowl than resident hunters.

This isn't a personal thing like many nonresidents think it is. I will admit it may be for some, but personal opinion doesn't enter into logical decisions.

Canuck


> Thanks to all residents of North Dakota for granting me the priveledge to hunt upland game in your state.


I think half the guys on this site would be happy to take you along hunting. If you were after waterfowl and a good friend they might want you here three out of five years. I'm glad you had a good time, and hope you have many more.


----------



## g/o

Come on Dick we are going to open pheasant season this year on the 14th. Then the Mn boys are not allowed until the 21st and there deer season opens 2 weeks after that. If pheasant gate would have come about like it should have we would be opening this year on the 7th. HB1189 is the biggest joke to ever come out of the legislature,even the game and fish can't even fiqure out what to do with it. I believe it expired now anyway what a piece of crap. Did you find them missing acres yet. :lol:


----------



## jhegg

For what it's worth:

I will take any nr (or resident for that matter) hunting with me - just ask!. The issue presented here is not about "you, the nr" personally, it is about the cumulative effect of nr hunting pressure and what it does to the waterfowl population in ND. Obviously, I do not present my case effectively. Sorry about that!

Jim


----------



## Bert

Jhegg,

That is good of you to offer. I understand that many of you do not harbor personal ill feelings towards non residents. But, in pushing for shortened NR hunting time and increased license fees from NRs, you fix it so that it is not worth it to come any more. I dont need a hunting buddy. I have plenty. I do not need someone to "take" me hunting in NDak. I have done it myself for years and years. I do not need a "place" to go as I have a standing invite to hunt over 4000 private acres of land and water.
What I "need" is the ability to not have to schedule my life around two weekends and hope to God the weather cooperates. I "need" to be able to travel the 150 miles it takes to get where I go with my kid without having to pay more for our license than both our shotguns cost.
By the same token, and I have said this before, I dont hate you guys. I dont hate the people who come to the lakes from NoDak all summer every summer. Folks are folks. I understand that you guys love to hunt and that you feel that you are helping to protect the resource by restricting NRs. 
My points here are not intended to stir the pot. I just think that sometimes you guys get so caught up in your cause that you lose sight of the fact that you are not neccesarily representing the feelings of Greater NoDak. 
You have all stated yourselves that the restrictions have done little to curb the onslaught of NRs as license sales have not decreased. So what does that tell you about who you are keeping out? 
If you had a choice about who you wanted as NR guests hunting in NoDak, would you rather see a working man introducing his kids to great hunting and getting them hooked or a bunch of executives from Mpls or Chicago or whereever to whom money is not an issue...can afford the G/Os you all hate so much...probably cannot relate to the landowners like a landowner themselves?
Your freelance hunters are going to be largely the regular guys.
So Dak? Yeah, I have a big problem with their limits on waterfowlers. Why dont you see the complaints here? Because this site is NoDak Outdoors not Dakota Outdoors.
If I didnt live so close to North Dakota and come in contact so often with North Dakota folks who come to my home (literally) I probably wouldnt give this a lot of thought. 
That is why I give input. If this site and the legislation it drives was supported and pushed by the NoDak people who are in my shoes, I would have a completely different take on the whole thing. 
Some of you own some land out there but you probably dont live on that land. Most of you dont own land and you dont live where you hunt. I own land and lakeshore in Mn so I figure that I have a little better handle on what is good for the resource than someone from Mpls who owns a lake cabin here.
Anyway...round and round it goes. I try to keep an open mind. Endeavor to do the same.


----------



## buckseye

My Momma always told me don't be afraid to ask, even if you know the answer will be no. Bert we could use people like you out here that are willing to put energy into our conservation needs.

Have you ever been denied hunting in ND? Has anyone ever been denied hunting in ND, I don't know.


----------



## Bert

Have you ever been denied hunting in ND? Has anyone ever been denied hunting in ND, I don't know.[/quote]

Verbally? Legally? No. From a money/time standpoint. Yes indeed.


----------



## buckseye

:lol: thats pretty funny Bert, I'll call your boss and ask for a raise for you and will notify you when October gets here. Lets see that's at least 7 months away I wonder what I'll be doing in October. Oh that's right I will be hunting I better get busy and start planning that. :lol:


----------



## KEN W

roostman said:


> I don't think people are really understanding what Chuck is saying here. Let's say once a week you go down to the pizza parlar and order a 12" pizza for ten dollars, you do this once a week for a year, then one day you go in and your 12" pizza is a 8" pizza but it is still ten dollars, you say o'kay thats fine and this goes on for another year, well guess whats happens the next year? Any guesses? Your 8" pizza now becomes a 4" pizza for ten dollars, and by this time you have to ask? When is enough enough, and the only answer they come up with is quit your complaining and like it, this is North Dakota and this whole issue came up by a resident hunter, not a NR. All Chuck is saying is when is enough enough?


I can use this analogy but put a different twist on it....

Once a week 10 people...5 live in ND the other 5 don't.... buy a 12 inch pizza for $10.Enough for all to have a nice piece.The next year the same 10 people now get an 8 inch pizza.Now less pizza,not everyone gets almost a full sized piece,but they are still satisfied.The next year the same 10 people get a 4 inch pizza.Not even half a piece each.

So what do we do.....We can't make the pizza guy make a larger pizza.In fact it will continue to get smaller.The ND guys are unhappy....after all they live here year round and not only support the pizza place,but all businesses in ND.Easiest solution is cut back on the out of state guys....let them come to have pizza say every other year.

As more land is being leased....mostly by those out of state guys,so they can have a pizza all to themselves....the only solution is to limit the number of out of state guys so we get quality pizza at a reasonable price and cut back on the out of state guys who are eating a whole pizza.


----------



## Plainsman

Bert

I like to big game hunt and if you miss opening week-end you miss the best part of the season in most cases. If you miss the first two or three days elk will have moved back many miles from easy access. I have to plan, in March when applicatons are due, for a two or three day window in October. My elk license cost me $638 last year. Step back and try get a more realistic perspective on the limitations you are facing. It looks pretty good to me.

Oh, and weather???? It can be warm and sunny or snow up to you eyeballs.


----------



## DJRooster

The present system is a result of many seasons of perceived problems on the part of various special interest groups and we have struck a compromise that is for the benefit of the resource and those who want to use the resource as a whole. I think our present system is an excellent system that has addressed all the issues that are being talked about in this thread. When I look at what South Dakota has for regulations and compare it with North Dakota I see us as being less restrictive for waterfowl and very comparable for upland game. I think it is a very viable system in it's present form and see no reason why we need to apologize for what we have to offer that being world class hunting for a very reasonable price. If it wasn't so reasonable everyone would not want a piece of the action like our liscense sales reflect. This system is a compromise and those who don't like it are in it for their own selfish reasons even though they won't admit it! One man's opinion!


----------



## jd mn/nd

In response to all of you folks that keep saying that the almighty dollars are what is making the ND experience less and less enjoyable, have any of you thought about the double negative here. You all keep saying the guys form MN with the big dollars are coming out there and buying up the land and limiting the access to the land and those are the guys you don't want there, right? Well here's the double negative I mentioned earlier, if you want to make the land accessable to all and not have it limited to the rich, than why would you raise the license fees up to the point that only the wealthy could afford to hunt there? Now don't get me wrong I am not complaining about the lics. fees as I am more thatn happy to pay them for the privledge of hunting there and have been doing so since the fees were only $65.00 to upland and waterfowl on one lisc., with that said, and as Chuck keeps asking when will it be enough money to satisfy the needs and want of the folks in ND, when only the truely rich can afford to hunt there and they own huge chunks of your land that you can no longer hunt on, or will it be to keep it so that the average joe can hunt there and help you to fight to limit the purchase of those lands as he would now have a vested interest in keeping that land open to hunt on as well?

You see there is no great solution to the problem, except that we all work together to have a great outdoor experience, and when fueds like this one get going all that happens is everyones tempers get flaired up and they get defensive about what they believe is thier's.

As far as MN is concerened I have not heard anyone complaining about the NR's coming here fishing or the money that they spend here, while they are enjoying their litlle piece of heaven(the lake property). However they should compair something similar MN does not limit out of state hunters on deer, we sell a lisc to any legal hunter that wants one. Same for small game, and waterfowl however questionable our quality of waterfowl hunting is. We do not make anyone start later for any hunting season, no matter what it is. We also do not limit you to only so many days afield compared to a res. having full access to the entire season, you see if you lived here and were going there you would understand why all of the NR's are questioning what is going on and when will it be enough, soon people will figure out ways to establish their residency there and will purchase a res lisc, and the state will still have just as many hunters with less dollars and a lesser quality experience as now they will be able to hunt the entire season.

Stop complaining and find something more constructive to do with your time people, go make some decoys or something, as spring season is just around the corner go spend time with your children, in the outdoors or whatever it is they enjoy doing. All I am saying is do something positive and QUIT being so dang negative all of the time this site is not as enjoyable as it was before this whole res vs nonres issue started over a year ago. Try to make it fun again!!


----------



## Chuck Smith

I have never stated I have a problem with the way the system is now.....except the plots thing, just because it is land open to sportsman and it is being restricted. The sportsman is not being allowed to use it, just a portion of them (which is wrong if everyone pays for it). To use the pizza example: I chip in on the cost of the pizza, but can't eat it until the next day. It is still good but not fresh. I paid for fresh pizza just like everyone else. IMO

But if you start to dwindle the number of lisc down like SD you will push the NR hunter into using a G/O or leasing land. Now for some/most of the responses that I have read the leasing of land is one of there major gripes. Becuase if you allow the lisc. to drop to 4,000 like SD the majority of these lisc will go to the G/O. Because all they have to do is go to commerce and show that there book of business is X% of NR hunters and they need X amount of NR lisc. So inturn they will lease more land for there opperations. Or if a NR gets drawn they will want to make sure they have a good place to hunt....ie lease or buy land. That is why I keep saying how far is too far. I think if you want to drop the sales to 22,000 or around there that would be fine. But if you keep lowering and lowering the lisc. The above situation will take place.

Plainsman: Look at elk and mule deer tags in many states. A certain amount of NR tags that are available are given to guides to use in there opperations.

also like as stated before...if a guy is hunting all week he is only allowed 12 birds possession. He could be done in two days. so that is why i say pressure is pressure. The NR is not shooting more birds than the R in that time period....they can't by law. If he is breaking the law....he shoud be punished.

People state the NR can give birds away...doen't matter. Because if he gives the birds away...they still count on your possession limit. You need to tag every bird with your name and lisc number on it if you gift it. If they are wasting birds...they are breaking the law and should be punished. That is why I say the pressure is the same.


----------



## KEN W

Not sure I understand how lowering the number of licenses increases the number of people who use a G/O.It should lower the number of people who use a G/O,not increase it.G/O aren't guaranteed licenses.Where did you get the idea that G/O go to Commerce whoever that is to get licenses????

Non-res. who don't live close by and come from a distance don't just go home after 2 days if they have a possession limit.They eat them or give them away to keep hunting the rest of the week....so the pressure you describe is not the same.Residents go back to work on Mondays....non-res. keep hunting and putting pressure on.Big difference.And once they are given away or eaten....they don't count on your possession limit.


----------



## woodpecker

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## Eric Hustad

I can't believe people compare ND hunting to MN fishing in all of this. It is also entertaining to get told how things should be run in a state people dont live in. Oh well it makes for some entertainment I guess, and membership to Nodak only costs $10.00 resident or non :wink:


----------



## sotaman

Woodpecker

Take walleyes I know different game but you will understand I hope. Ken is saying if you come from Minnesota to Devils lake for a long weekend or something of fishing, and you do very well and get your limit everyday, then in theory you should only be able to keep fish for two days the possision limit is ten so two days of limits. Now if you eat them everyday or give them to some one they don't count against the fish you posses so you can keep fish the next couple of day as long as you don't go over your daily limit and possision limit. So if you don't posses them then they don't count kind of thing..

I hope that helps


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ken:
If they keep hunting and not eat any birds.....THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW! I know if people are driving all that way won't stop after two days....but if they are law abiding they take a couple of days to rest, scout for a day, etc. Legally they should not be putting more pressure on the birds it they hit it hard for two days and limit out. That is what I am getting at.

Commerce is the ND Department of Commerce. They control business and business practices in side state lines and then coopperate with other statesand country. (the whole stupid law suit thing was about inta-state commerce.) Yes it will push the NR to the G/O. Because if you limit the numbers the g/o will go to the state and say I need the NR dollar to make my operation work or I am out of a job. The state wants to keep jobs so they will listen. So then guide opens his book of business and shows the state that I need X amount of NR lisc to fill these NR spots. So inturn the state can grant them these lisc. So then what will stop the g/o the next year go to the state again and say. I am looking to expand my operations and last year I turned down X number on NR. So I need a couple more lisc. So the NR if he want to get a lisc gaurenteed he will use a guide and book in advance. Just like some big game hunters out west. It has not happened yet because there are enough lisc...but if you start to lower them down like SD you will be pushing the NR right into the G/O hands.

That is why I say how far is too far. If you want to limit G/O you can't put too strict of limits on the NR.....numbers wise.


----------



## woodpecker

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## KEN W

Chuck.....Obviously if you don't eat them and keep hunting,you are breaking the law.That's not what I said....I said they ARE eating them or giving them away to keep hunting.They are not going home after 2 days.And are staying legal by doing the above.Legs tags are the only way to stop this.

Our Commerce dept does NOT do this now and to just say they would is not necessarily true.G/O tried for more guaranteed deer buck tags last session and it was shot down by a wide margin.They will probably try again next session....hopefully it will go down again.So to just say it will happen is not true.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Woodpecker:

The legal way to gift game is to put your lisc. number and name on it, so game and fish can track where it came from. That way it counts towards your possession limit. I know it hardly gets done....but that is the legal why to do it R or NR.

Eric:

I never have stated I know how things should be run or this is what should be done. I have given suggestions on ways to help the situation. Just like others have. I just want to know how far is too far when you start to restrict peoples oppurtuntiy.


----------



## KEN W

Here is some info on giving game away directly from the GNF....giving them away ends possession.so you can hunt somemore,but you cannot take more than 1 daily limit on any given day.

North Dakota law requires all waterfowl and upland game to have species identification on those birds till it reaches the final place of storage. That final place of storage for most of us means our personal abode. If the birds are to be consumed at a place prior to the personal abode then of course it can be cleaned and eaten. Consuming the bird ends possession. Lawfully gifting of birds terminates possession but does not decrease the daily limit. Making your birds into sausage does not terminate possession. Making sausage prior to the birds getting to the final place of storage makes a transportation problem from a species identification point of view.

Shipping birds to an out of state location by a non resident is authorized---
20.1-03-25. Transportation of game or fish by nonresidents having a hunting, fur-bearer, or fishing license. Any nonresident having a nonresident hunting, fur-bearer, or fishing license, and lawfully in possession of any big game, small game, fur-bearer, or fish may:

2. Ship by common carrier, upon providing identification by displaying the person's nonresident license, such game or fish, if the shipment is carried openly for content inspection and is plainly marked with a suitable tag bearing the person's name, address, and the number of the person's nonresident hunting, fishing, or fur-bearer license, and has attached to it a special shipping tag provided with the nonresident license form. The total number of such game or fish shipped in any one season shall not exceed the number the person may lawfully possess.

While we don't provide special tags any more we do have a free shipping declaration that you can get from the Enforcement Office in Bismarck (phone 701-328-6604) and we will send out as many as you need. You attach it to the shipment.

Non residents may ship only one possession limit during a season.

North Dakota residents need a special permit to send game out of state. This is one area where the non resident has more latitude than a resident.

Most examples of making birds into sausage that we have come across are people that either don't think about species accountability rules or are trying to disguise the number of birds they have taken during the hunt.

Hope this explains the current law.


----------



## Plainsman

There is this nagging question in the back of my head. Many keep saying this is the way we do it in our state. This isn't Minnesota, or Wisconsin, or Colorado etc. it is North Dakota.

I remember bow hunting antelope out west on a ranch where I had permission to hunt. A fellow from Colorado came running across an alfalfa field wanting to see my written permission to hunt. He said "if you don't have written permission I am calling the game warden". I said ok here is his number.

The stumbling block many of you nonresidence are running into is judging North Dakota by your standards, or by the standards of another state that you like. We keep comparing our waterfowl license to South Dakota with only 4000 available. Why are you not bothered by that? Please answer that for me, I am curious, why the discrepancy?

You want us to stop whining? I don't hunt ducks and am getting sick of the nonresident whine. I see the complaining as pushy, self serving, and arrogant. Why are you coming here? Is hunting here better? Did the habitat get screwed up in your state? And still you want us to be like you? Give out all the deer license, fishing license, upland, waterfowl, that you want it's your state, but don't say we should be like you. If yours wasn't messed up you wouldn't be coming here. Just live with it like I do the regulations of the states I go to, while there is still some respect. How many North Dakota people have you heard on here complain about the hunting regulations of Montana, South Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, etc. I have heard none. We don't expect them to be our unlimited playground.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ken,

Sorry I did not know that. Other states it is different. I was taking the consevation mode on it. Where it still counts towards your possession. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## KEN W

Chuck....no problem...glad it was cleared up for you.

Plainsman is correct.Hunters and fisherman need to do what is best for them in their state.We can sit and complain....but we go by what the law is in that state.If there is enough of the resource to share with out of staters.....great.But residents come first.

An interesting thing brought up somewhere is ....why doesn't Minn. have a program similar to PLOTS????There are 100,000's of hunters there.Just think if they required a $15 habitat stamp like ours .....millions of acres open to hunters.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ken:

I agree 100%. I have tried and tried with little luck to drill that into our state officials heads. This state all it cares about is the Walleye.

At least they are starting to work on the Mississippi. The Corp of Eng. and the State finally got there head out of thier A$$e$ and figured something needed to be done.

They are draining down a couple of pools a year to help with habitat. That is a start. There is also a couple of ag bills that they will pay the farmer to not cut his hay until some time in june....this is good for nesting habitat of all game/non game animals. This is a good bill but hardly any farmers knew about it. But all is a step in the right direction. Hopefully they will get a PLOTS type program going someday.


----------



## woodpecker

Thank you, Ken


----------



## Bert

Eric Hustad said:


> I can't believe people compare ND hunting to MN fishing in all of this. It is also entertaining to get told how things should be run in a state people dont live in. Oh well it makes for some entertainment I guess, and membership to Nodak only costs $10.00 resident or non :wink:


Why is it so hard to understand the comparison of Mn fishing to Nodak hunting?

Why do most nrs go to NoDak? To hunt of course. 
Why do most NRs come to Minnesota? To fish of course.

Game birds and fish are both natural resources. Of course hunting season is shorter but look at it this way:

Of a 60 day duck season, a 14 day (2-7 day gigs consecutivly) NR license (which excludes the opener, must be in different zones and you have to pick your dates ahead of time) is only .23, less than a quarter of the season.

Of a 330 day fishing season, 23% is 75.9 days.

In May June July and August, there are a total of 16 weekends or 32 days (not counting long holidays) just weekends and just in the summer.

Then there is ice fishing...

Now here is the catch. For your 330 day license of which you could easily spend 100 days enjoying without missing any work including the opener. You have to pay a whopping $36.00. Hell, it would pay to own a lake cabin in Mn with that kind of a gig. Lakes stocked with fish paid for by license fees as well as Mn orginizations and they stay in that lake until they are caught or die. The weather is crappy this week? Ah, we'll just go when it is nice.

To hunt that 23% of the Nodak waterfowl season (Waterfowl, which migrate... and ...thrive by federal tax dollars and duck stamp dollars and CRP from all of us) would mean missing work as the days have to be consecutive which realistically means 5 or 6 days...not 14. (or 10%) of the season. What is an NR duck license now? (been awhile) Over a hundred bucks is it not?

Big game is a different story as are pheasants to a certian extent but regarding waterfowl in ND and Fish in Mn there are a lot of reasons why the two can be compared and when you do, who is getting hosed?

Eric, I am not telling anybody in North Dakota how to run their state. I have no control over that. I also have no control over what the Mn State government does about NRs because our economy is so married to the almighty tourist dollar. Quite simply, I am just pointing out that if the shoe was on the other foot, a lot of people may look at things differently.

By the way, plenty of people here from NoDak make comparisons to Minnesotas fishing laws. And to make the equation come full circle, even though there are people who would be happy with a 75.9 day a year non res fishing license in Mn, I know a lot who wouldnt be. And you would all be griping if that license cost $531.30. Which would be proportionate.
And oh, by the way...no opener for you.


----------



## KEN W

Chuck,

Your'e right about the walleye....but I would also include deer especially since almost all Minn. public land is in the northern forest areas.

Just think if Minn. had a PLOTS program and used the money in the southern half of the state for upland and waterfowl hunting,plus increasing the deer in those areas.People could hunt close to home.Or not have to sit in treestands within sight of each other in northern Minn.


----------



## Bert

Plainsman,

Yes the SD restrictions bother me too but like I said this is a NORTH DAKTOA site. 
The habitat loss in Mn had nothing to do with numbers of hunters or the cost of a license it had everything to do with the government subsidising farmers to drain swamps and feed an army or two.


----------



## KEN W

Whoa Burt.....I have lived in ND for over 30 years and the feds may give us a 60 day season.....but 30-40 is more like it.So your numbers are off a little.

You are also forgetting that close to all of the fishing in Minn is on Public waters open to EVERYONE.Whereas close to all the hunting land in ND is private and is or can be closed to most of us.Huge difference when comparing fishing to hunting.Which is why you should compare fishing to fishing.


----------



## Ripline

Chuck, Its PRIVATE land open to sportsman!!
I'm not a resident.
ND has to regulate the NR hunting in order to maintain the quality of the hunt and to ALLOW the average hunter to be able to continue to hunt. The quality of the ND experience is worth saving and the residents know what is best for their State. 
Selfishness and $$$ is the driving factor of disputing the ND rules and Regs. :eyeroll: 
We should be THANKING ND for trying to save THEIR resources and allowing places for NR to hunt.


----------



## Plainsman

> I am not telling anybody in North Dakota how to run their state.


Sure you are Bert, that is exactly what you are doing. You know our grocery stores can not buy milk out of state. This is to protect our farmers. Do you think only farmers should have protection. If we don't limit license it will take little time before there are many more nonresident hunters than resident. We sit on that very threshold now.



> this is a NORTH DAKTOA site


It may be hosted in North Dakota, but members are from all over the United States.



> and membership to Nodak only costs $10.00 resident or non


Yup, Eric, perhaps the only entertainment cheaper than a hunting license. For many it would be less than a penny and hour.


----------



## Dick Monson

ie: MN PLOTS

ND's PLOTS program was jump started during Pheasantgate due to rampant commercialization leasing and citizen outrage over it. SW MN has a good pheasant harvest but a lack of access.

So many of you MN boys are thoughtfull, articualte spokemen. You have the hunter numbers, money, habitat, and birds, but you lack the orgainized effort to get your PLOTS going. Get a MN ETREE reved up and twist some tails! You can do it. Combining your voices is the only way to affect policy in your state.


----------



## KEN W

Why doesn't someone contact Peterson's Outdoor News about a PLOTS program.Printed every week with lots of readers.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ripline:

I know it is private land open to sportsman....but everyone who buys a lisc pays for it. That is my point on that the R pays just as much as the NR but gets no limitations....If they would lower the NR fee for plots $0.01. Then I would have no problem...but when a NR pays to access this land the same amount as a R, they should have the same access. That is my point.

Dick:

Totally agree with you....Sportsman in MN need to get together and try to push something like PLOTS through to make sure a future of hunting is available for all who enjoy the outdoors. ND has a good thing going and other states should jump in and follow thier lead.

Ken:

You gave me an idea...I never thought of sending letters to the editor in our hunting publications. I just have been sending them to state reps. I will get on it. Thanks for the idea.

Here is the main thing I have been trying to state:

1. People on this site complain about Commercializtion of Hunting. 
- If you limit the NR lisc., you are pushing to more commercialization.
* you can't limit number of NR with out helping Commercialization.

2. The betterment of the resource.
- I have been talking about things that will help the resource alot better than just limiting the NR numbers.
* Split seasons, bag limits, days off during the week, increase NR lisc if that money went to walk in programs or plots (no restrictions....see above).
**All of the above will lessen the pressure on birds and make it a Quality Hunt for ALL. It will also help the resource in the long run

3. One response blamed the NR for the state of the Farm economy (the 24 year old farmer can't make it).
- The Nation's farm Economy is down...You need to be a big farmer to make it. It is hard, very hard for the farmer with 160 acres to make it. Don't Blame the NR for this it is like this Nation wide.

That is why my thing all along has been How far is too far? when you limit the numbers down too much you will get commercialization. Then if you cut numbers down too far you won't get the dollars from the lisc sales for your walk in programs. The NR pressure will be less on birds but habitat will start to disappear. That is right now I think you are at a good point in number of NR lisc sales, but need to look at other things to lessen pressure.

SIDE NOTE: One fact I would like to see is how many acres of PLOTS is owned by NR land owners? I would then like to see the amount of land, not in PLOTS, owned by NR land owners. The figure could be scary.....


----------



## KEN W

Chuck,

1. People on this site complain about Commercializtion of Hunting. 
- If you limit the NR lisc., you are pushing to more commercialization. 
* you can't limit number of NR with out helping Commercialization.

There is no basis in this statement.Lower numbers would be LESS hunters for G/O.Everytime the bill was in our legislature to put ANY kind of cap on non-res.......G/O were there in force to testify against it.I was there to hear the testimony.If lower numbers of non-res. would increase the number of non-res. going to G/O they would support the cap bigtime.Your statement really doesn't make any sense.

2....They wouldn't bother me but....most residents would not support all those restrictions you mention unless they are for non-res. only.Is this being selfish?Maybe....but the average ND hunter doesn't want those restrictions on res. hunters just so more non-res. can come here....that's just the way it is.

As for how much is to much.....for the average res. hunter....there is not enough restricts until less come here.Again....we don't all feel that way,but that's just the way it is.

SD has guaranteed excellent waterfowl hunting for it's residents.How?????
By limiting non-res to 4,000 per year.That obviously is what it took....not all of those suggestions you make.They seem to like it and as far as I've heard are not in any hurry to change it to allow more to come.

Look at the difference in SD between upland restrictions and waterfowl restrictions.Residents have a paradise for waterfowl hunting....pheasant hunting is the most commercialized in the country.Don't you think SD residenst would really like a 4,000 cap on non-res. pheasant hunters?Wow....would Minn hunters scream then....yet no screaming about the 4,000 waterfowl hunters allowed.Why?Because they can all come to ND.


----------



## Drakekiller

Bert
Like Ken said you can't compare hunting with fishing. Lets compare fishing with ND and MN.
MN 10,000 lakes ND 300. Stats are from 2002.

ND- Total NRs fishing 40,177. from MN 10,850

MN-Total Nr fishing 267,193. From Iowa 50,435. from Wisconsin 45,092. From Illinois 37,958. from ND 26,600.

ND fishing license good for 365 days, MN license good for 330? NRs do not have to buy a fish house license in ND and can have as many houses as they want for as long as they want for no extra cost. Nrs in MN. have to buy an additional license for $34? For a shelter that cannot be left unattended. MN no NR spear fishing


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ken:

First of all is bird hunting in SD commercialized.......YES! So why do you want to be like them?

I am curious of these two things: How many of those 4,000 NR lisc sales in SD use a g/o? I want to know how many of those 4,000 the g/o gets or has first shot at?

If you limit the number down so far it will be like Big game out west.....g/o gets a % of the NR tags or lisc. The numbers are not there yet.

So if the state gets the limit or number of NR down to a certain level the g/o will go to commerce and say fine limit the number but I need x amount of lisc to make my operation survive. Commerce will grant them something so their livelyhood won't die. Keep jobs in state.

Or what commerce will pass is if a g/o has x number of acres leased they get x number of NR lisc....so to get thier quota of NR lisc up, they will lease more land. It is happening out west (some states) for big game.

Both examples have not happened yet...but could if the number of NR lisc reach a certain point. What that point is I dont know.

and the other stuff: limit others for the good of the resource but not me.

I have never stated that I have a problem with the limitation that are set now. (except Plots and public land on opening weekend....and that is because everyone is paying the same amount for use of that land....lower it $0.01 and I would have no problem). But if you keep cutting the numbers I see these other problems surfacing.


----------



## buckseye

I'm sorry I skipped way ahead in these posts but I figured out how to solve the problem. I was just thinking of how it used to be when there were waterfowlers all over the place around here. The NR's would come for a week and get so drunk chasing our women that they only hunted waterfowl about two days in the whole week. Seen it many times, it was a hoot the NR's would be out scouting visiting and gifting landowners all through cocktail hour or evening scout whichever you prefer. They were then and still are welcome on every farm and in every bar. We gotta get back to more of the good times with this hunting stuff.


----------



## KEN W

One thing useing your example....$.01....then you couldn't hunt it at all the entire season since you aren't paying for it.Now it is only 1 week....7 days out a a 40-60 day waterfowl season and 7 days out of a 119 day upland season.Which would you rather have???By the way,I don't see this changing,since residents like it and G/O aren't opposed to it.

I didn't say I wanted to be like SD.Personally I think their waterfowl restrictions are to severe,but I also think they need a cap on pheasant hunters because they have to many.

If G/O don't have enough clients....they go out of business,not necessarily get a guaranteed number of licenses.

Some day the local businesses will wake up and realize that all that pay to hunt stuff will cost them in the end.Hunters,both res and non-res will stay home.It is already happening in the SW.


----------



## woodpecker

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## Chuck Smith

Big g/o will get lisc granted to them or at least first shot....look at the west. and the $.01....the NR's are still paying for the use of it. Not full price, so you don't get full access.

If a football game you wanted and had to buy the tickets off the street. If the game has already started and it was the start of the second quarter....would you pay full price for a ticket? I know I wouldn't. I missed some of the game.


----------



## buckseye

They don't sell quarter or half licenses Chuck, I mean tickets. 

Good stuff guys, informative and entertaining


----------



## Ripline

If you don't want to buy the ticket for full price, then you should have stayed home and watched the game.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Buckseye:

YOu are right, but do you get my point....both parties are paying the same amount...why not the same benefits? That is all. If you make one pay less, there benefits should be less.

Car insurance: If you want high liability limits you pay for them, if you want lower limits you pay for them. The lower limit guy can't all of a sudden want high limits if he is paying the low limit price.

Lets say you come to MN to watch a football game....everyone paid the same for the ticket....but since you don't live in the state you can only watch 3 quarters of football not the full game.

Am I making my point....if you pay the same you should be able to play the same!

That is my only gripe about the current NR laws in ND.


----------



## KEN W

Cchuck....I understand but I don't think it will change.Not a lot of gripeing the past year.But this year that 1 week is during the time when the most non-res. are here....Minn. Teachers Conv.I bet most of them don't realize it yet.


----------



## buckseye

:lol: I know what you mean and can't help laughing. I guess that's a fringe benefit of living here. How many birds do you think would be on the ground or water in ND if we used your idea of equal everything R or NR. Just think of how many people would rush to ND, man there would be 100 dollar bills laying on the roadsides and we would all be rich. :lol:


----------



## Chuck Smith

I never stated the R and NR should be 100% equal.....

All I stated what I want equal is the use of Plots...because both the R and NR pay the same amount for that use ($15).

I agreed with higher NR lisc fees, I agreed with limiting there time (two - 1 week periods), I agreed with the purchasing of both a waterfowl lisc and a upland lisc separatley, I agreed with 30,000 limit the number of NR lisc (but as I have stated you need to be careful with how far is too far.), and I agreed with the specail R opener for waterfowl.

My main reasons for these posts are to get people thinking of better ways to help the resource that just limiting the NR. But my one gripe was the plots thing....sorry that just came out

I bet if you would just have a R pheasant opener (basicly the same thing) and not mention anything about restricting plots....you could add another $5 to the NR habitat fee (plots fee) and have that go directly to plots or walk in programs. Most NR would not care. Think of the revenue it would generate and the good for all.


----------



## buckseye

Plots.. now that's pheasant talk I believe. I'll have to bow out I'm in waterfowl country.


----------



## apeterson

I would also like to add that the $$ that is collected from NR is used to pay for programs to support wild life and pay for enforcement of the laws. would a person be better off if you could not afford those programs, would the wildlife be better off or worse... My vote is worse...


----------



## apeterson

guess I need to read more than the first page of posts.... sorry guys/girls!


----------



## Goldy's Pal

> By the way, plenty of people here from NoDak make comparisons to Minnesotas fishing laws. And to make the equation come full circle, even though there are people who would be happy with a 75.9 day a year non res fishing license in Mn, I know a lot who wouldnt be. And you would all be griping if that license cost $531.30. Which would be proportionate.
> And oh, by the way...no opener for you.


Well the state of North Dakota isn't that stupid. It's not like they are trying to sell a surfer a pair of shorts here. They know they have something and they are selling it. Fishing is good in both states so the license fees reflect it. Not the case with waterfowl. I can't shoot an Elk out my window so I have to go to Wyoming and pay the price. It's the way it is, I learned to deal with supply and demand when I purchased my ticket to the Gophers/Maine championship in "02" outside the Excel. That's life.
:beer:


----------



## Dick Monson

Gentlemen remember, ND did* not *have a need for PLOTS prior to commercialization (early 90s). The commercialization machine is fueled by a masive influx of NR sportsmen who have a guarenteed license every year. The outfitter Cannonball Co it the prime example in SW ND. 90% of their clients are NRs, mostly corporate clients.

Adding POLTS acres does nothing to solve the problem of crowded access when more hunters and more hunter days are added on top. Bigger horse, fatter rider.

No MN PLOTS = loss of commerce in MN.


----------



## Bob Kellam

Chuck

while I admire your passion for the issue, there are a few things that you need to understand.

Guides and Outfitters are not guaranteed any licenses for wing shooting in ND. The only license they are allotted is white tail deer

Here is the NDCC Section.

_20.1-03-11.2. Hunting outfitters - White-tailed deer licenses - Fees. The governor shall make one-half of the antlered white-tailed deer licenses and permits allocated to nonresidents under subsection 4 of section 20.1-03-11, up to a maximum of one hundred licenses, available to hunting outfitters licensed in this state. A hunting outfitter may not purchase or obtain more than five white-tailed deer licenses under this section in any one year. A hunting outfitter shall pay the fee required for a white-tailed deer license sold to outfitters and provided by them to nonresidents for each license purchased under this section. A hunting outfitter may provide to nonresidents, for compensation, big game guiding and outfitting services and one white-tailed deer license per nonresident as provided in this section to hunt white-tailed deer in the manner, at the places, and during the times the governor prescribes by proclamation._

Other than that the outfitters of ND generally want to increase the number of hunters that come to ND. The more that come the better it is for some of them.

ND currently has no restriction on the number of hunters allowed to wingshoot. It is unlimited to NR, that is a fact. The legislature last session (2005) made some changes to both waterfowl and upland licenses. Upland went from a 10 day license to 14 days. waterfowl was set at two one week periods or one two week period that you have to pick the days you want to hunt as well as the zone issue. There was also a new license created that allows you to hunt with out being required to hunt in any zone. _(Bert and anyone else that is hung up on this) you can change the dates that you want to hunt waterfowl by making a phone call prior to the start of your hunting trip_ the dates you pick are and can be a general time frame that can be adjusted.

Now lets take a look at land and PLOTS

North Dakota currently has near 800,000 acres in the plots program Here is the breakdown of the acreage involved

2005 PLOTS Acres
CRP Cost-Share... 262,961 Forest Plots...13,726 Misc.. Plots...25,543
CoverLocks...13,180 Working Lands...346,762

It is all explained at this link: http://gf.nd.gov/info/plots-maps/news-changes.pdf

Now consider the total land mass of ND at about 43 million acres and of that total 3.4 million acres are in CRP.

The first week of the upland season that leaves you with 42,200,000 acres of land to hunt. or if it is just CRP you want there is 2,600,000 acres of that available for you to hunt, all you need to do is ask for permission.

Being angry about not being able to hunt PLOTS the first week of the season is an issue you need to look at in this light. Many resident hunters who just happen to be landowners hunt the opener and that is it for many of them, they also happen to be the ones that put their land into PLOTS for all of us to enjoy, That PLOTS payment doesn't even come close to even paying a fraction of the taxes on that land. Doesn't matter if you helped pay for it or not giving some of these guys first shot at the birds is the right thing to do.

The first week of upland season is a perk for residents of ND. many don't like it but I feel it shows that ND cares about its residents. I can not speak for anyone else but I do not hunt plots much. I have spent a lifetime developing relationships with friends and my family and I own a fair size chunk of land, much of it is not posted. Some is because we just want to know who is out there.

Now lets get to waterfowl.

It is a well known fact that ND raises a fair number of ducks that inhabit the central flyway. The dynamics of waterfowl hunting are ever changing. The last few years the season starts residents go out on opener and hunt, usually on a 3 day weekend, after that the birds rest for the balance of the week then NR opener is the following week and many come here on their one week or two week vacation. Now combine the resident hunters on the weekends and do this for 2+ weeks straight 7 days a week with a liberal season (6 ducks per day). Many duck hot-spots get hunted out or pressured out. In the past the northern migration would pick up the slack and add to the local duck populations, the weather patterns have changed and the last number of years the northern migration has been very late and very quick. The abundance of food and good weather have kept the birds north of the border until they are forced out by lack of food or the weather. as you know weather often moves north to south in this part of the country so it pushes the birds through quite fast. This has been happening in mid November, ND Deer season. you have mentioned that you think a split season is the way to go, debatable but not very economically or logistically feasible.

We already have a high plains and a low plains split but most everyone thinks there is no ducks beyond the Missouri River so not many hunt the western late season, some of us have a great time.

This post is very long and I am sorry for that but there is a lot of wrong and mis-information on this thread, as well as quite a few inferences to ND residents being selfish. Bottom Line if you want the benefits of being a resident, Move here and enjoy it to the fullest. If you do not want to do that accept the fact that you are a guest and deal with it. North Dakota in not like Minnesota or South Dakota, or Montana or the Canadian Prairie Provinces. I have hunted them all and have enjoyed the unique experiences that each has to offer. Isn't that how hunting is supposed to be? enjoying hunting adventures for what they are not for what we want them to be?

Bob


----------



## ND decoy

If the non-residents would work as hard on getting a plots program in there state as they do trying to get us to change our laws that runs our plots you guys could get a good program up and running. With some good bird production.

Please stop comparing your fishing to ours. It doesn't hold much water with many of us.

ND sportsmen should get there own pheasant opener oon plots land in there own state. You are not prohibited from hunting the rest of the state.

If you season doesn't work out well for you with the teachers convention. Talk to school systems and get it changed localy. There piss poor planning are the ones messing with you not us. I doubt that the NDGF looks at a callender and asks "lets screw with the Norweigens".

Every year we have problems out at our place with people who don't understand whagt posted signs mean. They are both non-residents and residents. For the most part it's non-residents and the suprissing part is that it's not kids doing it. Most of the people we have problems with are in there 40's and 50's. But every year we meet some really great people from other areas and have become great friends with these guys.

I strongly feel that the people of ND should have the first consideration when it comes to hunting in there own state. The same way it should be in MN,WI or where ever.

One last thing, this is probably the most civil discussion I have ever seen on this topic.


----------



## R y a n

ND decoy said:


> One last thing, this is probably the most civil discussion I have ever seen on this topic.


Agreed. :beer:


----------



## Bert

Plots or CRP or whatever will not increase bird production in Mn to the level of the Dakotas. There is decent pheasant shooting in parts of Minnesota but habitat is only part of the equation. If you look at a seed catalog and note the zones for growing seasons you will find that much of ND is the same as Iowa. For one reason or another the average temp drops soon after you cross the Red. 
I dont care about what you do with plots as I never hunted it. You never knew if you were the first or 15th party to go through it (essentially what you get on a WMA here in MN) and besides, there is plenty of private land out there that never gets hunted.
Point being, you can't just say "do what we do and you will have what we have".

I also dont appreciate the comments about how "you guys screwed up the habitat in Mn for ducks so now you get what you get". 
That is like telling a German kid today that it is his fault that millions of Jews were murdered in the 30s and 40s.
I and many like me are doing what we can to reclaim what we can but like the tourism dollar, the ag dollar is darn tough to compete with.

"Fishing is good in both states"...

Yes you have some good fishing in NoDak. But you cannot choose between 5 good fishing lakes all 5 minutes apart. Most of your good fishing is in resiviors. Most of it takes big gear to get at it. Most of it is less than what most people view as "scenic". These are my theories why, even though the fishing is so good in NoDak, so many NoDakers come to Minnesota to fish.

Drakekiller...yes I can compare it. You dont need an NR shelter license because...well...who wants to go there and ice fish other than the perch on Devils. The comparison is that fishing is our hot commodity and bird hunting is yours. The big game ops are about equal in my book so that is a wash.

Ken W.
Minnesota water is public. But if you add up all of the public water in an area the size of North Dakota and then you add up all of the public, plots and non posted private land in North Dakota I'd bet there is more dirt than water.

60 day duck season? 40 days? Doesnt really matter. There is a huge discrepency between money vs. time as it relates to the commodity that Nodak has to sell and that which Mn. has to sell.
The easy answer is going to come from someone here..."well do what we have done with hunting". My response? Id love to but it is way bigger than what I can do or what all sportsmen in this state can do because tourism being the number one industry here makes it impossible.

Those of you who equate it to big game hunting in Montana or where ever and then state that I cannot compare Dakota bird hunting to Minnesota fishing are way outta line.

Plainsman, I am NOT telling anybody what to do. I am merely voicing my views and opinions just like everybody else here. How many times in this post have NoDakers told Minnesota folks how to run there state to make it better? I dont look at that as directives, merely views and opinions.


----------



## buckseye

:lol:


> If you look at a seed catalog and note the zones for growing seasons you will find that much of ND is the same as Iowa. For one reason or another the average temp drops soon after you cross the Red


.

Bert...You might want to look at your garden catalog again we are 100% for sure way colder than any state south or east or west of us.
:lol:


----------



## DJRooster

Bert, thanks for summarizing your attitude when you said you could care less about the PLOTS. Now we know where you are coming from.


----------



## KEN W

Burt.....you are missing my point.It doesn't matter how many acres are under water or are "dirt."What I said was....all your water is open to the public....almost all our "dirt" is not open to the public.....big difference when Minn people are trying to compare our hunting to your fishing.

And yes your state is huge on tourism.....but your "I'm only a little guy with no influence" attitude is surely defeatist.Amazing what organized sportsman can di IF THEY TRY.There will be no change in Minn since you think it isn't possible.


----------



## Field Hunter

About the only reason CRP won't grow well in MN is that grass doesn't grow well in any location when the ground is all tiled and drained.

Without directing this towards anyone in particular, the real issue is that many of the sportsman that live between ND and MN are just plain upset with the fact that they live in MN and enjoy the unmistakeably beutiful lake country and can no longer enjoy traveling to ND on a weekly basis to hunt at a very inexpensive rate. Not that they can't hunt every weekend, it just costs them a new license every two weeks. Very comparable to the other states in the area. Oh yah, and the waterfowl license has has the two week restriction since the mid 70's..nothing has changed.

I'd like to see the guys continue this discussion but maybe with some new ideas....I've re-read the discussion and one point seems to come up. Pressure.....Does pressure affect the amount of ducks and how fast they are either hunted out or moved from an area? The ND guys who hunt every weekend can tell you that the effects of pressure are dramatic in any give area. I've hunted ND pothole country for 36 years....I can tell you that when there were fewer visiting hunters and the pressure was exerted on the weekends, the ducks and geese stayed around much longer in the Fall in any given location. Back then the NR hunted mainly on the weekend also and both NR and the resident manly hunted water and not the fields. The pressure was low enough to keep the birds in ND longer. Now the NR hunter, who has become much more mobile, come from longer distances and bring with them drastically better equipment have changed the way pressure is exerted on the resource. The ducks that used to basically rest 5 days a week are now chased day after day. What many NRs and residents don't see is the non-stop use of the resouce after they leave every Fall. One group after another hunts the same GOOD areas, driving the ducks out faster and faster.

As many on this board have said, over and over again, we do not want to restrict the NR from enjoying the resource....we would however like to see restrictions as to how many can hunt any given area in a set amount of time. I seriously doubt whether any of the this is attainable....the freelancers and the Outfitters are WAY to far apart on the issue of how many is too many. IMO the only thing that will reduce the numbers of hunters, both resident and NR will be another major drought and in terms of the upland hunting a major statewide blizzard, like the one in 1966. Either of those senerios would be very bad for everyone involved.


----------



## Bert

Growing season through pheasant land in NoDak is zone 4 just like SD and North Iowa....and what good pheasant land there is in Mn.
Where I live in OT County, there should be pheasants so thick you are afraid to let the kids out of the house. CRP, Cattails, corn...woody cover up the wazzoo. 
CRP grows fine here, pheasants dont.

Ken,
Your land is private but it is open to the public unless it is posted. Add that up.,


----------



## DJRooster

I would not wish a drought and a bad winter on anyone but that would certainly shock people back into reality. It's ironic how in this time of plenty even the NR want to take ownership of our natural resources but when the times are tough.....we will continue to support the programs that contribute to the resource. Yes there is a difference between a resident and a non resident. In the current climate with waterfowl and upland game as good as it has been for many years we have extended our hospitality to many guests who now have declared ownership in what we shared in friendship. Geez with friends like that...


----------



## DJRooster

Pheasants grow well in S. Dak, N. Dak, and Iowa but they don't grow well in Minnesota? Who are you trying to kid? It is not the pheasants fault.


----------



## roostman

Is this a record for number of post on one subject? I actually thought we were on the down swing a couple of days ago with this subject but it's kind of like the Bunny that goes on and on. It's great reading. Bert we do have a law that say's you can hunt land that is not posted, but more and more land every year gets posted up, and some day I feel we will be alot like other states were the farmers will not have to post their land, because everybody will have to ask? :roll:


----------



## Bert

Rooster,

Come to Ottertail county and tell me why there isnt a huntable population.
Short of more timber, there is plenty of food and cover. It isnt the pheasants fault but it isnt for lack of habitat.


----------



## buckseye

> Growing season through pheasant land in NoDak is zone 4 just like SD and North Iowa...


Now you changed this from most of ND to pheasant land, prime pheasant land isn't much more than 1/4 of our state. the rest is zone 3 I wish it were zone 4. Although when we get a very mild winter which isn't normal we are much like zone 3 except for our winds.


----------



## Bert

Just my theory. Whats your answer?


----------



## KEN W

Bert....It wouldn't be difficult to add up the unposted land....not much left at least where I live.

You pose an excellent question....Why doesn't the Fergus/Alex area with many WPA's and good habitat have more pheasants????Tougher winters?Maybe something you should ask your DNR.


----------



## DJRooster

Why are you asking me? I have no idea! If I respond I'm sure you will have an answer so you tell me. Besides that our discussion centered on North Dakota resources and how you think we should manage them for your benefit. I have stated that I firmly believe that our present system is about as fair of a compromise as can be reached with all the entities that have taken ownership in our natural resources but again some are in it for their own selfish reasons.


----------



## Bert

Ken

My thought is tougher winters and predation. Not all here seem to want to believe me.


----------



## Bert

DJRooster said:


> Pheasants grow well in S. Dak, N. Dak, and Iowa but they don't grow well in Minnesota? Who are you trying to kid? It is not the pheasants fault.


----------



## DJRooster

My friend from Long Prarie said he had a great year of hunting pheasants in his local area. You don't have to go to Canada to fish, or Saskatchewan to hunt geese or South Dakota to hunt pheasants. I have a hard time believing there isn't a pheasant in Otter Tail county. If you work on your population I'm sure it could get better but if you criticize our PLOTS program I can assume your not big into habitat or release programs over there. Bert, you kind of talk in circles and as soon as we bring up some of the issues from our perspective concerning our resource you come up with a bunch more rhetoric that has been discussed many times in previous posts. Why do you insist on telling us how to manage our resources? Your more than welcome to come and hunt but you are not welcome when it comes to writing the regulations. Please leave that to us and we will share our resources the best that we can because we fully understand that you are a victim of our regulations.


----------



## KEN W

Bert....are there Pheasants Forever chapters in the Fergus/Alex area?


----------



## Goldy's Pal

I don't really see the big NR complaint on PLOTS. Yeah sure there might be a hole or 2 I'm restricted from because of the pheasant week, but cripes, a guy can easily hunt around that. The posession limit has me eating enough duck the way it is now that I have to force myself into the local watering establishment at least one night and learn the locals a thing or 2 on how we Minnesota guys shoot pool and hold our alcohol. :wink: Believe me the next morning I could care less about any PLOTS restrictions. Aaaah vacation.


----------



## Bert

No DJ

The problem is that this thread is way too long and therefore there are too many posters saying too many things and by responding to more than one guy at a time confusion reigns supreme.

I dont have a problem with your plots program. Never did. I never used it much out there because I didnt have to.

Somebody (might have been you) suggested that Mn get their own plots program as a solution to not having the birds that ND has. I pointed out that it is not lack of access or lack of habitat or lack of trying just that there is a great deal of Minnesota that cannot seem to sustain huntable populations of ringnecked pheasants.

My theory is weather and predation. You argued but didnt come with an argument or an answer. You just said "it isnt the pheasants fault".

You assume I havent made an effort. How does 360 acres of CRP and swamp, planted with reservation birds (wild trapped) every other year for 10 years grab you? No birds. NADA

Im not saying you owe me your birds (like they belong to you in the first place) I have avoided ND hunting of all kinds for 5 years now of my own volition. Keep your birds, keep the access to the private land (which doesnt belong to you) keep the public land (which doesnt belong to you any more than it does me) keep the plots land which doesnt belong to you any more than the NR license buyers.

I am willing to stay on my side of the fence.

Since you guys arent willing to do likewise of your own volition and you refuse to acknowledge the similarities between the marketing of hunting and fishing resources and that I personally probably encounter more NRs than you do, I will continue from time to time voice my opinions here.

I firmly believe that states should have different rules for NRs. You dont owe NRs anything. If NRs want the perks they should move there.
My OPINION is that the restrictions for small game in NoDak are out of whack for NRs especially when you take into account the deal that NRs get when fishing in Mn ESPECIALLY those who live on the border. You know, the same folks who make up the lions share of posters on this site.


----------



## Bert

Ken,

Yes there are PF chapters all over here. There some decent shooting by Alex and south of Fergus but not what I would consider populations that can stand a normal amount of hunting pressure. 
I gave up trying to make pheasants work in this area as I have come to the conclusion that pheasants are going to exist where they are going to exist and habitat alone cannot fix all the facets of what can go wrong. 
Not a huge deal to me as I hunt pheasants in SW Mn where I am originally from and do quite well. It is just about 3 hours farther to drive there than it was to go where I hunted in NoDak.
It is enough consolation that the grouse are thick when they are thick and there is a deer behind every tree.
Growing up where I did, I assumed upon looking at this area with ideal pheasant habitat that roosters should thrive. Not gonna happen.


----------



## always_outdoors

Minnesota pheasant count information

2004: surveyed about 2/3 of the state based on the map they provided found average of 101.9 pheasants per 100 miles. The state recorded a harvest of pheasants at right around 400,000.

1958: that same survey found 425 pheasants per 100 miles and recorded the harvest of pheasants at right around 1,550,000.

This was all based on MN DNR data.

In ND, for 2004 residents and nonresidents harvested 587,600 birds.

I couldn't readily find 100 miles counts, but I think you would find that our numbers have basically been climbing since 1958 and not gone down since 1958.

It seems to me the duck numbers would probably be relatively the same following the dry and wet cycles. I don't want to read too much into it, but it seems to me the MN DNR and its birdhunters quit caring about ducks and pheasants quite some time ago.

Just some food for thought but it seems to me that MN should be a haven for both ducks and pheasants.


----------



## Bert

Trouble is that there are fewer ducks. You guys just got whats left of them. 
We havent lost so much habitat in the last five years to merit the shortage we have seen in the last 5 years. I dont believe the counts.


----------



## always_outdoors

Wetlands have long been considered worthless and an impediment to development.They have been drained and filled to make way for houses, roads, and farmland. In Minnesota, over 52 percent of our original wetlands have been lost due to development. Of the remaining 13.1 million acres of wetlands, 3.3 million acres are regulated by the DNR.

More DNR data.

I am sure that loss of 52% of the state's wetlands had no impact on the amount of ducks. :eyeroll:

You don't believe the counts Bert? What don't you believe? That 1,550,000 pheasants were harvested in MN in 1958?


----------



## Eric Hustad

Bang head here  You make some good points Live2hunt with those numbers.


----------



## fishless

Im guessin the birds are there the access isnt


----------



## Bert

Duck counts not pheasant counts. I dont believe the duck counts the Feds put out.

Of course the drainage over the last 40 years have had an impact. Hell Ive been hunting for 30. Im saying that in the last 5 we have not lost as much habitat as we have lost numbers of ducks in this state.


----------



## R y a n

Field Hunter said:


> About the only reason CRP won't grow well in MN is that grass doesn't grow well in any location when the ground is all tiled and drained.
> 
> Without directing this towards anyone in particular, the real issue is that many of the sportsman that live between ND and MN are just plain upset with the fact that they live in MN and enjoy the unmistakeably beutiful lake country and can no longer enjoy traveling to ND on a weekly basis to hunt at a very inexpensive rate. Not that they can't hunt every weekend, it just costs them a new license every two weeks. Very comparable to the other states in the area. Oh yah, and the waterfowl license has has the two week restriction since the mid 70's..nothing has changed.
> 
> I'd like to see the guys continue this discussion but maybe with some new ideas....I've re-read the discussion and one point seems to come up. Pressure.....Does pressure affect the amount of ducks and how fast they are either hunted out or moved from an area? The ND guys who hunt every weekend can tell you that the effects of pressure are dramatic in any give area. I've hunted ND pothole country for 36 years....I can tell you that when there were fewer visiting hunters and the pressure was exerted on the weekends, the ducks and geese stayed around much longer in the Fall in any given location. Back then the NR hunted mainly on the weekend also and both NR and the resident manly hunted water and not the fields. The pressure was low enough to keep the birds in ND longer. Now the NR hunter, who has become much more mobile, come from longer distances and bring with them drastically better equipment have changed the way pressure is exerted on the resource. The ducks that used to basically rest 5 days a week are now chased day after day. What many NRs and residents don't see is the non-stop use of the resouce after they leave every Fall. One group after another hunts the same GOOD areas, driving the ducks out faster and faster.
> 
> As many on this board have said, over and over again, we do not want to restrict the NR from enjoying the resource....we would however like to see restrictions as to how many can hunt any given area in a set amount of time. I seriously doubt whether any of the this is attainable....the freelancers and the Outfitters are WAY to far apart on the issue of how many is too many. IMO the only thing that will reduce the numbers of hunters, both resident and NR will be another major drought and in terms of the upland hunting a major statewide blizzard, like the one in 1966. Either of those senerios would be very bad for everyone involved.


FieldHunter this has got to be one of the top 10 posts I have ever seen written in Nodak Outdoors on the topic of the problems with ND hunting. It is a spot on accurate assessment of one of the key reasons that ND hunting has changed over the last 10 years.

As a former resident and now going into my 3rd upcoming season of non residency, I can tell you how the current regs affect someone like me. I plan usually 2 trips home each fall to hunt. 1 trip for ducks/pheasants, and 1 trip for deer. If I'm lucky, I can arrange working from home for a week inbetween my "weekends" of hunting. I don't have the $$$ nor the equipment as other Minn NR's who come to hunt hard for 7-14 straight days. I'm at a serious disadvantage to only be able to hunt the 4 weekend days and maybe sneak off an extra day or maybe 2 to get out in the field while home. The way the current regs work, I"m paying big $$ for those precious couple of days to hopefully find some feeding flocks of mallards, a good slough where the geese are coming off of, or a few undisturbed spots to walk my dogs into some pheasants.

Realize that there are many different scenarios that NR's come to the state. The method by which Minn/Wisc NR's come to the state to pound it for 2 solid weeks seriously affects my quality of hunting. I can tell you that in the last 2 years I've spent around $3,000 in licenses, plane tickets, and incidentals. For that tidy sum, in approximately 16 days of waterfowl/pheasant hunting, I've only shot 6 limits of pheasants, maybe a dozen ducks and a couple dozen geese. I'm grateful for all the opportunities that I've had, and I cherish all the time I've been able to spend with family/friends, so don't take these statements as any kind of complaint. I'm only looking to provide some insight into my experiece with being an "out of stater". I grew up in ND, went to college in ND, and worked in ND for 6 years before needing to experience some new adventure in life. There are days I wish I could come back, but there are more days where I yearn to seek out new things I haven't yet experienced.

That all being said, I personally don't like how the NR regs are currently configured. I'd like to change the regs to lessen the hunter pressure impact that hard hunting NR's (both freelance and guided) put on the resource and drive the birds out, make the birds touchier sooner in the season, and generally lessening the quality of hunting compared to what it used to be. I can tell you that my "quality" of the hunt relative to positive shooting experiences has steadily worsened over the last 5 years. My family no longer hunts in the same fashion as they used to, we now hunt entirely different territories due to increased posting/pressure/guiding and the birds have changed patterns over the seasons. We now have a later and later migration.... the migration appears to be faster than ever, and more birds seem to be staging north of the border as they have learned that they can avoid pressure better further north.

What is the future of hunting for me? I've asked myself that question MANY times in the past 2 years. I've been very frustrated and looking to understand the source of my frustration. I'm certain that the answer is a combination of the things that I've listed above.

I can tell you this. If it were not for my family ties in ND, for the quality time I get to spend with my family/friends while in the field, and for the sweet song of the prairie in all it's peace and solitude I would have already given up the sport entirely. Commercialization, the increased competition from additional NR's, and the resultant locking up/out of prime areas have ruined the way hunting used to be as recently as 5 years ago. I'm not sure where all this is going. My gut and heart tell me not in the direction I'd like to see it go.

It really has me scared. I thought some day I'd like to return...maybe when I retire, maybe sooner to raise my family... Now I'm not so sure anymore. The very things that kept me in ND for all that time after graduation are forever gone. Am I willing to try and stay in the game? Do I want to commit time/effort/$$$$ towards purchasing my own piece of the pie & thereby become exactly what I detest so much about where the future of hunting is going? I don't know.... the future is cloudy...

I just don't know......

Ryan


----------



## Bob Kellam

Ben
Good post

I would suggest that we look at this in a somewhat different light. Looking at the waterfowl situation in ND it is not simply just the hunters that cause pressure. it is also the regulations. Let me explain.

Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM) is the current system for waterfowl management nationwide. When waterfowl are counted it is an ambiguous process at best. The counting process is, and this is said without malice toward the people in charge of waterfowl counts, a "wild azz guess". The waterfowl harvest numbers and regulations are based on May ponds in prairie Canada and mallard numbers. In the late 90's we had 9+ million mallards and a liberal season bag limit of 6 birds per day. Currently the count shows 5+ million birds and we still have a liberal season of 6 birds per day, all the while the AHM model and USFW are telling us that their goal is to build waterfowl back up to levels of the 70's. Confused? So am I.

The waterfowl pressure equation is in need of some logic. ND can agree with the USFW and set a liberal season OR they are allowed by the federal regulations to set their own limits as long as they do not exceed the federal maximum. As I see this the reduction of the daily bag limit to 3 or 4 birds would do more to reduce hunting pressure than anything I can think of. Now combine that with the use of leg tags to identify the harvested birds, which by the way is required by federal law anyway, and I think that the pressure can and will be reduced, without any reduction in hunter numbers. 3 pheasants per day seems to be adequate to satisfy most hunters, why do we need to kill 6 ducks?

Upland game in ND is probably commercialized than most other wingshooting . I was somewhat amazed at the number of hunters that I came across late season hunting this year. It is my guess that they were trying to avoid the early to mid season pressure that usually is associated with upland hunting in ND.

One thing I have noticed is that late season access is always easier to obtain. Upland Numbers continue to increase year after year. Although the upland population is only one catastrophic blizzard away from a crash, today hunting is good. If we can learn anything from upland hunting in ND, it should be that 3 birds per day and a spread out season is good for the resource.

Bob


----------



## djleye

Hey Ben, I am not trying to be a smart *** here. Guys like you are the guys that we need back here in this state to try and preserve what we have left. Don't wait until you and /or your family are too intertwined into another society to make the move back. You will never regret raising your family here. You know what the values are here, you have a good chance of knowing what your neighbors and your kids friends values are. Don't put it off, make the move!!!

Bob, great post as usual!!!!! :beer:


----------



## DJRooster

To quote a famous Minnesota resident, "The times they are a changing" and it affects everyone, resident and non resident. Despite what some believe, the North Dakota Game and Fish Dept has logic behind what some perceive as illogic. It's this change that is the hardest to deal with because it affects everyone but on an individual basis we sometimes think we are the victim. North Dakota is not out to get anyone because in the end we are all victims of our reality.


----------



## g/o

Here is what really happened.

In the 60's we had wet years farms were small and Mn was along ways away especially with the vehicles and roads those days. Some of the fortunate ones made the trip but most stayed at home because there was pleny of game there.

In the 70's things got a little more exciting when the MN boys game after the snow geese. Most of the hot areas in the state were pretty much leased out by Mpls. and Fargo money. In farming we saw the birth of the 4 wheel drive tractor. $4.00 wheat and Katie bar the door we farmed fence row to fence row. In MN they drained those pesty sloughs and tiled there land.

In the 80's we had 10 years of drought and some failed farm policy. This also when they enacted CRP. Many of us put there land in because it was the last resort to keep a float.

What happened in the 90's? It rained,and it rained and it snowed and god we were fighting water. Now all those potholes were full of water and with the CRP nesting was perfect. Bingo we had a duck explosion a few from the east ventured over here and could not believe the hunting. Now several other things have come into play. We have an Interstate highway system. Where it use to take me a better part of a day to got to Mpls. I can leave home here and in 4 1/2 hours later I'm in the cities. Vehicles are much better and everyone is driving SUV'S. We have the internet and websites such as this and people have more disposable income. The word got out and here they came the boat people as some would say.

Small towns since the 70's have been drying up. Farmer have gotten bigger. Many families left the farm or small town went to towns like Fargo,Bismarck and Mpls. In the 90's now we have people from all over competing for a place to hunt. The guys from the cities in ND found all these out of state plates in the country along with many more No Hunting signs. There were also people such as myself who watched all those pretty blue license plates go buy and said how can I make a buck off these guys. Let see, I have all this land in CRP and the old house at the farm, guys are already approaching me about leasing and I'm not getting anything for it now hmmmmmm. Now like the rest of the country our land is worth something for hunting.

The city boys in ND did not like the competition so they tried to pass laws and were succesful in some. This is when the hatered for outfitters started. We had a govenor who tried to do what was good for the state but a few so called sportsmen revolted. This whole pheasantgate thing was issued against one place Cannonball. These people who fought against it never once thought about the mom and pop resturant,bar,motel,gas station or any other small town in ND. They only thought of there greedy little selves and we will shut down these outfitters. The only thing Hoeven and Hildebrand were trying to do was open the pheasant season a week early on years like this one. So this fall we open on the 14th if pheasant gate would have been enacted we would be opening the 7th. So now with the expanded pheasant range look at the millions of millions of dollars we are missing out on. You are not only hurting some outfitters, but how about all the mom and pop buisnesses let alone the tax revenue.

2 sessions ago NoDak outdoors really came into play. The etree worked and took everyone by surprise and the opposition was succsesful in passing legislation in which Bert and others were offended by. We now have a seperate waterfowl and upland license no longer are you allowed to buy a waterfowl license for 15 bucks. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with this still the cheapeast part of your trip. The 14 day upland really hurt the bordering FREELANCE hunter. It does nothing to the guy who come to my place he only comes once anyway. Again this hurt the blue collar freelance hunter and the mom and pop buisnesses. And then there is the week of resident on PLOTS and many know my feelings on this. Again this is directed at the Non resident blue collar worker, the freelance hunter plus there kids. The guides and outfitters are a small group of indiviuals in this state and do not care much weight and get beat up a lot. It wasn't the guides and outfitters that bought the zone buster bill from the dead. It was the small towns and buisness people so start compaining about them. Sorry this is so long but the truth needs be told here once in awhile.


----------



## njsimonson

> Is this a record for number of post on one subject?


Nope, the "I shoot fawns" was like 9 pages long! But this has been a fun thread to read, thanks for keeping it civil. :beer:


----------



## always_outdoors

> The city boys in ND did not like the competition so they tried to pass laws and were succesful in some.


That isn't true g/o. Not sure if you attended the G & F advisory meetings in Minot and Bismarck, but the majority that spoke were small town residents. Are there residents in Grand Forks and Fargo upset as well, yep, but small town resident hunters are feeling the impact too.



> These people who fought against it never once thought about the mom and pop resturant,bar,motel,gas station or any other small town in ND.


If you really cared about our small towns, then do the opposite of posting your land. Open up the flood gates in ND and take all the posters down this fall and I would bet that NR and R's would flock to this state from October until January and small towns would be packed with people spending money in those towns.

Think about it. When Cannonball developed, how many Residents hunters quit going to that area? On top of that NR's came only when they could handle the cold wich meant no business in December and January. If you and all the other g/o's pullled the posters and let everyone and anyone hunt, this topic wouldn't be 7 pages long.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Bob Kellam

g/o

You know me pretty well and I know you pretty well also but in your view of the issue that you presented you make the outfitter the victim and us "so called sportsmen" as you put it the evil epitome of death to small towns. Isn't it more of a shared responsibility?

You still have contact with small towns in your neighborhood, but how many outfitters in ND have built lodges and food service facilities that impact the small towns as well? Resident hunters still visit those small towns where access is available. If land is leased day leased and the areas have small acreage totals of PLOTS land, does it really make sense to drive 300 miles for the chance to shoot some upland game when it is available with better access closer.

I agree with your assessment to a degree, however, to throw all of the fault on some "city" resident hunters is wrong. One of the reasons for objecting to the early opening of pheasant season was the Roosters would not be easily identifiable, even today with the season the way it is set it is still difficult to determine roosters from hens at opener. Maybe not for you or others in the prime areas where the population is great enough to support carryover. Then again the areas previously mentioned have limited access for your so called "blue collar" freelance hunter.

So g/o in search of the truth as you put it lets not blame a single entity for the conditions and feelings involved in this issue. There is blame to go around.

:beer:

Bob


----------



## djleye

> If you and all the other g/o's pullled the posters and let everyone and anyone hunt, this topic wouldn't be 7 pages long.


Best one sentence delivery of all that ails ND hunting that I have ever read!!!!!! :beer: :beer: :beer:


----------



## DJRooster

I agree with g/o. He also is a victim just like the rest of us. There is so much pressure on the resource that we are all victims. If the hunting wasn't so good we wouldn't have these problems. It is no one groups fault but we all contribute to the problem just by buying a liscense. It is a Catch 22 but instead of complaining about being victimized we should just sit back and enjoy the ride. I like our present system because it is a compromise we can all live with. Our local economy(bars, motels and resturants) just had the best year they have ever had because of the hunters that were attracted to our area so whatever system we have is certainly working to everyones advantage.


----------



## Goldy's Pal

Last year if the NR wanted to hunt statewide it was a "pay to play" option, I think $30.00 extra. A good deal for the hunter and also the towns on the border. Without trying to tell anybody in their state how to run something, :roll: why not throw the same option at the NR into the 1st. week of pheasant season to open PLOTS. If you want PLOTS so bad here is the alternative, charge whatever extra on the NR license and put that income into the PLOTS program. You help create more public habitat and eliminate the pizz and moan on the subject.


----------



## KEN W

G/O....Bob is right....your side is just as much to blame for small town problems by limiting access to paying customers as the res. hunters are.

I find the following statement you made very contradictory......

"Let see, I have all this land in CRP and the old house at the farm, guys are already approaching me about leasing and I'm not getting anything for it now hmmmmmm. Now like the rest of the country our land is worth something for hunting."

"They only thought of there greedy little selves and we will shut down these outfitters. "

Aren't both being greedy equally?????Aren't you thinking of your greedy little self by selling the state's resource that belongs to all of us and charging people to hunt on land that you are already collecting money from the federal government to put into CRP.

We want good no pay hunting....you are just as guilty for wanting money for a public resource.


----------



## g/o

Live, Are you referring to the meetings during pheasantgate or are you referring to the ones last year? No I was not at Minot but did attend several others. Yes there were people from small towns also on each side. Tell why should I take down my posters and close a good buisness down for what? So you can hunt my land? The lands been posted for over 50 years and we will keep it that way.

Bob, My freind again we will disagree and I am right this time. First lets look at the argument which doesn't hold water at all the birds will not be mature. Last year we opened on the 8th, can you honestly Bob say that by opening on the 7th this year one day will make a difference? Second as was said back then by none other than Dean Hildebrand "if you don't know what you're shooting at, you better not shoot." Trust me Bob I know there are many more factors that contribute to whether we have mature birds come the opening of pheasant season. We can and will disagree on the issue on outfitters hurting the small towns. Why is it that we have several motels in my area and they are full all fall. Yet I'm accused of taking buisness away from them I don't understand? Bob, I'm not going to say the all outfitters are great. All we have to do is read the papers but all in all they are in hunting areas and in those areas the buisness booms in the fall. Again Bob competition is good for buisness.

Ken, I have never sold anything that belongs to the state. You and others put up this public trust thing, but when I challenge you on it you just point your finger and say its the outfitter. Ken go and read the commercialization of wildlife positon paper posted here. Very interesting because they not only go after the outfitter but also big buck contests,fishing contests. As I asked before what about hunting shows? What about the one showing Todd Siemers? How about the Buckmasters and all the other videos being sold? How would they sell if they were not shooting a bunch of wildlife? You guys have got to find a better argument than public trust, it just doesn't fly sorry.

The facts still remains what Hoeven and Hildebrand tried to do was good for this state not Cannonball. This year if it would have passed we would only be one day apart from last years opener. By not letting them go through with it you cost the people of ND millions in lost revenue.


----------



## Ripline

Always the almighty $$$  
Quality will always lose!!! Just look at the rest of the country.


----------



## Field Hunter

If I remember the biggest issue that came up with pheasant gate was that Cannonball offered a way to the Gov to open the season a week earlier without having the gov asking if this was good idea from the rest of the sportsmen in the state......why did Cannonball do this.....Greed...plain and simple.


----------



## Bob Kellam

> The facts still remains what Hoeven and Hildebrand tried to do was good for this state not Cannonball. This year if it would have passed we would only be one day apart from last years opener. By not letting them go through with it you cost the people of ND millions in lost revenue.


Cannonball and other outfitters had nothing to do with it? come on now I didn't just fall off the turnip truck :lol:

g/o I guess I am a little puzzled as to how opening a week earlier costs anyone "Millions" of dollars in lost revenue. Please explain?

You know as well as I do that the area you are in is the second highest commercialized area in the state, that is why the hotels are full. So I guess if your area outfitters and or communities are satisfied with the influx of short term income and want to shut out residents it is their choice, not much anyone can do to change it, except to ask why they are always after more hunters when legislative issues arise. Are the communities in your area really that content with outfitters and their clients only??

Bob


----------



## always_outdoors

g/o: I would never say you can't post the property. It is your land and you pay the bills on it. That is your right. Not argueing with you there.


----------



## Dick Monson

Very good posts from all. I beleive there were 6 advisory meetings on Pheasantgate and I believe 5 were against it, the exception was Dickinson. Don't change proveable history, NDGF was against it too, the lead biologist opposed it in the recorded meeting with Hoeven.

The added week for pheasant season was, if I remember, added as an amendment to the PLOTS bill as a way to get it through. As a farmer, I'd still prefer the old season opener and strech it out on the back end.

If small town folks are so hurt by these regs, why haven't they picked up the Community Access Program? No cost to it. That arguement of getting crimped doesn't wash. HB-1189 (community match for PLOTS) is going into effect soon. We will see what communities really care and the proof will be public. Remember, Cannonball said to keep PLOTS east of the river.


----------



## DJRooster

Actually, I may be wrong on this but if an outfitter releases birds on his property the opener does not pertain to the business. Can anyone give insight to this? South Dakota opened a week later than we did and it seems to work for them but when you look at the calender for next year it is going to be a little tight between the pheasant opener and the opener of deer season(only 2 weekends) and if we get some pretty good early snows it could make for a short season for the easy walking and hunting. Let's face it, we have been spoiled rotten down in this part of the state since 97. With all the carry over roosters an early opener would not have been that big of a deal keeping in mind it is about impossible to overharvest roosters. One of these years there will be hell to pay and we will wish we had hunted the birds harder in the earlier part of the season because snow will make the walking too tough for all but the true hunters and we will grossly underharvest our birds.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Goldy I mentioned that about 5 pages ago....yes if you open up plots to the NR on opening weekend....charge them extra. That is fine. But my thing is if you pay the same for a program ($15) you should be able to use it. That is my only complain about the present system all along. But we don't need to keep beating our heads on that one.


----------



## Dick Monson

> The facts still remains what Hoeven and Hildebrand tried to do was good for this state not Cannonball. This year if it would have passed we would only be one day apart from last years opener. By not letting them go through with it you cost the people of ND millions in lost revenue


Respectfully disagree here too. Dean opposed it also initially, but had to carry water. 
If you look at hunter numbers from '04 they were down in the SW and outfitters were *****ing about it, even though that's where the pheasant pop. was high. It is the leasing and posting that dropped revenue, as those hunters moved to SE ND. Which is exactly what we always said would happen. g/o, your boys can control the land, but not where hunters choose to spend their money.


----------



## wirehairman

Bob Kellam said:


> Being angry about not being able to hunt PLOTS the first week of the season is an issue you need to look at in this light. Many resident hunters who just happen to be landowners hunt the opener and that is it for many of them, they also happen to be the ones that put their land into PLOTS for all of us to enjoy, That PLOTS payment doesn't even come close to even paying a fraction of the taxes on that land. Doesn't matter if you helped pay for it or not giving some of these guys first shot at the birds is the right thing to do.


Bob,

As usual, you make an excellent point here. However, following your logic, shouldn't the PLOTS land be closed the first week to both R and NR hunters and only the landowners allowed to hunt it?

Otherwise, I'd have to agree with Chuck that if both R and NR hunters pay equally (or proportionatly) for the program, they should have equal access.


----------



## Chuck Smith

One way to get rid of this Plots thing I have brought up.....Have a R phesant opener. I would see no problem in that. Because as many have stated....it is a privilige since they live in the state. Then the NR won't fell slighted that he can't hunt something he has paid for. At least that is in my eyes. Just like I have no problem with the R duck opener.


----------



## R y a n

djleye said:


> Hey Ben, I am not trying to be a smart a$$ here. Guys like you are the guys that we need back here in this state to try and preserve what we have left. Don't wait until you and /or your family are too intertwined into another society to make the move back. You will never regret raising your family here. You know what the values are here, you have a good chance of knowing what your neighbors and your kids friends values are. Don't put it off, make the move!!!


DJ

Thanks for the encouraging words. Until I see definitive G&F regulations changed for the benefit of the resident sportsmen, I can't justify coming back. The benefit of remaining in ND has slowly eroded away over time. When I was in college in the 90's that benefit was there. Now a NR can come in and do as they please provided they have big $$$ and the regs are acceptable to their hunting style. ND needs to change NR regs so that being a ND resident has real quantifiable benefits.

Ryan

(aka ben-elli)


----------



## R y a n

Dick Monson said:


> Very good posts from all. I beleive there were 6 advisory meetings on Pheasantgate and I believe 5 were against it, the exception was Dickinson. Don't change proveable history, NDGF was against it too, the lead biologist opposed it in the recorded meeting with Hoeven.
> 
> The added week for pheasant season was, if I remember, added as an amendment to the PLOTS bill as a way to get it through. As a farmer, I'd still prefer the old season opener and strech it out on the back end.
> 
> If small town folks are so hurt by these regs, why haven't they picked up the Community Access Program? No cost to it. That arguement of getting crimped doesn't wash. HB-1189 (community match for PLOTS) is going into effect soon. We will see what communities really care and the proof will be public. Remember, Cannonball said to keep PLOTS east of the river.


Hey Dick

Thanks for the PM. I wrote you back. I have lots of insight into many things related to ND hunting (and PheasantGate), due to some unique insight/relationships/contacts/jobs.... you'll soon see. PM me again to chat.

Ryan


----------



## Bob Kellam

Wirehair

I understand your logic, would the landowner not be able to ask friends and family to join them.

Chuck
So what would be the difference if ND had a resident opener only, instead of the way it is now where residents get to hunt all land that is open or open for the asking, and Non-residents can come and hunt, just not on land controlled by NDGF? I am afraid that it would cause more heartache than the current system. Would you open it a week early or cut a wek off the total for NR?

Maybe it would be better to lower the NR license fee by a dollar, or would NR still fee like they are being cheated. Should i ask for the $6.50 fee on NR, R licenses to be returned to me when I hunt MN.?

From MN DNR website



> ** Includes a $6 .50 surcharge . This $6 .50 surcharge is being paid by hunters for the
> acquisition and development of wildlife lands .


http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/rlp/regula ... ements.pdf

Bob


----------



## always_outdoors

> Until I see definitive G&F regulations changed for the benefit of the resident sportsmen, I can't justify coming back. The benefit of remaining in ND has slowly eroded away over time. When I was in college in the 90's that benefit was there. Now a NR can come in and do as they please provided they have big $$$ and the regs are acceptable to their hunting style. ND needs to change NR regs so that being a ND resident has real quantifiable benefits.


I hope legislators who visit this site read this statement with great cause. Great paragraph Ryan. It is what these law makers don't understand, yet they can't figure out why people are leaving. I have two buddies that moved out of state and they share the same feelings. That is 3 families right there that are not living in ND. Bet we could find alot more.

I share the same sediments. If I can't hunt or it becomes so restrictive, then why live here.


----------



## Chuck Smith

About asking to get the fee back....did you get restriced in anyway?

My thing about the PLOTS is that the NR can come to the state and hunt private land that is fine....but why not PLOTS....I pay the same amount (for plots). But if you have a R opener....The NR is not in the state....He won't feel like "what the hell.....I can hunt here but why not PLOTS (walk in programs...)....In my mind it defets the purpose of PLOTS.....ie....OPEN TO SPORTSMAN....when it in fact is not for that first week....

ALso if you have a R opener....you could still charge the NR a little more on the PLOTS fee....more habitat, more access for all.....IMO

Again in my mind if I pay the same amount of $$ for access but can't access the land when I am allowed to be in the state to hunt....why pay the same amount then. But if I am not allowed in the state...Oh well...the fee is the fee. I hope I made what I have been trying to say clear.

That is why if you have a R opener....it is kinda the same thing. The R will have access on all the land with out the NR pressure. That will be a perk of being a R. Just like the waterfowl opener...you get your own week...a perk to being a R.


----------



## roostman

DJRooster said:


> Let's face it, we have been spoiled rotten down in this part of the state since 97. With all the carry over roosters an early opener would not have been that big of a deal keeping in mind it is about impossible to overharvest roosters. One of these years there will be hell to pay and we will wish we had hunted the birds harder in the earlier part of the season because snow will make the walking too tough for all but the true hunters and we will grossly underharvest our birds.


 This is one year I think they could've raised the limit to four, there is a lot of Roosters left over and the way the winters going we could have a great year next year. When this whole NR subject came up I was thinking more on the pheasant side of it and DJRooster you hit the nail on the head when you said it is "about impossible to over harvest the Roosters". So if it is about impossible to do this for pheasants then the issue is not lack of birds, it' more lack of land to hunt on. Well maybe Chuck was right about some kind of split season hunting if land is the big issue. By the way welcome back to the Fourm Chuck and Live2hunt


----------



## Bob Kellam

Chuck

What can I say that has not already been said, you will not be happy until you get to hunt PLOTS the first week.

I am not going to go into being restricted as a NR in MN. I really don't care about the fee I was just using it as an example. When i come to MN to hunt I do so without complaint and enjoy the experience and abide by the rules. I am a guest and I act like it. Just like any other state that I hunt in.

You talk about the perks of Resident opener and seem to be OK with that, would some ND hunters be hunting PLOTS that week as well? You helped pay for it in the past if you have ever hunted here. It has been stated over and over, First week of PLOTS is a perk because it is our state we live here. The only thing I can say is that if it bothers you that much don't come here to hunt. Not trying to be a jerk but it is that simple. Unless you feel strongly enough about this issue that you work to get the law changed. In that case you are preaching to the wrong choir.

:beer:

Bob


----------



## g/o

Field Hunter, Why should the Gov have to ask the sportmen if he wants to do something. Isn't the game and fish enough?

Bob, How many dollars do you think would be generated this year if we would open Pheasant hunting on the 7th instead of the 14th? How many dollars state wide will one week of hunting generate. My guess millions. Yes Cannonball had some to do with it, so jump back on the truck Bob. Poorly explained on my part, the point I was trying to make is they were the ones the finger pointing was at. What I'm trying to point out the state would have been the biggest benifactor. Bob we are not shutting out resident hunters there is room for every one. I don't see your short term effect. We hear about nowhere to hunt, that is bs. As you say Bob my area is the second highest commercial in the state. My township is heavily commercialized with 2 oufitters side by side. In my immediate area there are several sections of land owned by outfitters. On the same hand there is several section of WPA and PLOTS plus a youth hunting area. There is more acres than the outfitters have that is privately owned in which you ask you can get permission, don't believe ask Rick Acker. Problem is that most people are afraid to ask permission.

Dick, Dick, Dick You keep bringing up this piece of crap 1189 which is all but useless. Since you refuse to to I will explain how wonderful this bill is. I took yours and Bobs advice on this and tried to do something with it. There was a partial of land I knew was up for lease, I talked with the gentelman who owned the land about it. He wanted 5 bucks an acre,reasonable amount. Proposeded an idea to our local cvb to lease this land and if we kicked in 3 bucks an acre an the game and fish kicked in 2. Then we could have this as a nice thing for everyone to enjoy. Also it could be opened for the nonresidents on the opener. Well guess what,I called game and fish and there answer was this. No we cannot allow any more to be paid then the PLOTS rate 2 bucks an acre. I asked him why if only PLOTS rate is allowed why would someone do this. He laughed and said there is no reason it is nothing more than PLOTS, and we have buckets full of money to spend on PLOTS acres. He also informed me it was the poorist piece of legislation written even they could not figure it out. So Dick tell us how 1189 is so good? Thanks for proving my point on pheasant gate. Like you say you can't control where the hunters go. You have been preaching about the expanded pheasant range. That is where the hunters are going. Again by opening the season up a week early the area you live in would see some much needed income. Instead they will enjoy less this year. Dean was in it right from the start.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Bob:

I abide by all the rules as well....I don't hunt until later in ND.

But all I am saying is that if NR are paying for use of land why can't they use it (that week)?

The R opener would be fine if they hunt plots.....I would not care....it is the R opener. But my only statement is that it seems a little unfair that I can come and hunt put I can't use what I am paying for. That is the only point I am trying to make...But it seems it is not getting through. A R opener would be the exact same thing....but the NR would not feel shorted. How can u feel shorted when you are not there.


----------



## DJRooster

A week of no statewide hunting sounds worse than a week of no PLOTS hunting for non residents and that would not be good for the economy and certainly not good for the outfitters.


----------



## Goldy's Pal

Well I know I'm not loosing sleep over the PLOTS restriction, it's not worth it, but I know this, I would really be in favor of having an optional donation box for PLOTS when I purchase my license but the way it is set up now which just so happens to restrict me, I'd have to evaluate it differently, meaning by still donating $ to PLOTS I would still help create huntable land for someone and if it means creating a quality hunt for someone else and maybe their kid it would still be worth investing in. I think PLOTS is a GREAT program that I wish Minn. would understand. More available hunting habitat is what we all want in the end when we hunt ND, looking at the bigger picture. Besides creating more "honey holes" for the resident might keep them away from mine during my trip. :wink:


----------



## Chuck Smith

Like I have stated before the Plots thing is not that big of deal to me....but I just think in is unfair or the NR is getting shorted (very, very little, but still shorted). But I agree with Goldy....if a NR or R when they buy there lisc can donate a little extra to PLOTS or other walk in programs. I bet that would generate some good extra $$ for the good.


----------



## fishless

Ben Elli some good posts just hang in there I use to think like that once an awhile (been in wi 6yrs now) but now that my kids are getting closer to school age I see alot more benefits in ND that I seemed to overlook before. I truly regret ever leaving and hope to be back in the next year or so. Just hang in there :beer:


----------



## Bob Kellam

g/o



> I don't see your short term effect.


I know many more resident hunters would come to the greater area surrounding you if available access was not tainted. You even seem to jump on the bandwagon and refer to some of us as greedy and big city boys in a negative way. So there is a preceived notion by many resident hunters that we "Fargo hunters" are the scum of the earth. I have told people in your area where I am from when asking for permission and I have been told NO! go back to Fargo. You know it is the feeling of many down there as well as I do. It wasn't that many years ago that our group used to stay over for a weekend down there and and some of us would hunt there exclusively. That was the point I was trying to make, sorry to be so vague. I agree most need to learn how to ask for permission. Some of us will never be able to get on land in that area so we go elsewhere.

I agree that hunting is good in the area, I have permanent access in the area through close friends farther west we get a weekend every year. BUT this fall when I tried to set up a hunt for You Know Who, I was told over and over by your neighbors NO, so once again I gave up and will take my business else where. You get tired of being beat up because you are an outfitter, I get just as tired of it because I live in Fargo.

This was still one of the best upland hunting seasons I have ever had. So I am not complaining about my season. Late season was fantastic.

:beer:

Bob


----------



## Goldy's Pal

I still like the idea of the tag system. Where did that end up? I stand quite firmly on this too, :lol: 6 birds, 7 days = 42 tags, when they're gone they're gone. seems fair to me. oke: Lets gitter done.


----------



## Dick Monson

g/o, we need to sit down and have brew one day. 


> Why should the Gov have to ask the sportmen if he wants to do something. Isn't the game and fish enough?


What possible unknowen skill does this governor possess for wildlife and resource management? Name one. ????? He was a banker for God's sake! The professional staff at NDGF was hired and mandated to do that job. Commercializers lobbied him for their narrow benefit over the good advice of NDGF. Even over perch limits at DL. No end to it.

The Community Access Program had nothing to do with NDGF. It was voluntary, no cost, strictly local. It just needed local folks to put their money where their mouth is. BCWF signed up a huge chunk of ground in 3 counties that was accessable to all hunters. What other community made an effort? We couldn't even get the ND Professioal Guides and Outfitters to endorse it, much less assit. I talked to a hospitality business that took in $18,000 from NR sportsmen, he was complaining about lack of hunters and restrictive legislation. So I asked him if he would care to get a CAP going, or contribute to a local PLOTS and he ran for the door so fast I thought he peed his pants.

When it comes to HB-1189, the PLOTS match bill, I think you will get your wish. It is ready to go.

When commercializers talk of the "millions" lost to ND from one week of season, why can they not add the millions lost when our residents leave for lack of hunting opportunity, or the millions lost in out-of-state land sales. Business demands an accounting of both sides of the balance sheet. The debet side of commercialization is ignored. And yet hunters are called greedy and whining. :eyeroll:

ps, if I ever proved your point it must be a typing error on my part.


----------



## wirehairman

I can't seem to keep up with this thread but wanted to throw out something on the R only opener. They tried that here in MT a couple of years ago. Pheasant season opened on the second Saturday of October for R's just like normal but did not open for NR's until that Monday.

Big game (specifically elk) is king here, and I don't personally know of a single g/o that focuses solely on upland birds or waterfowl. The majority of our NR bird hunters are freelancers, and it turned them away in droves. The small communities in "bird country" lost so much money and raised such a ruckus that the R only opener was quickly eliminated.


----------



## Field Hunter

We used to stay in the many of the popular ND towns in the SE and S for at least a long weekend.....now the acces is so bad we've moved on to areas where the access is better.

I'd have to agree with Dick...besides DL going after the NRs what other towns ever do anything to get hunters to the towns.....unfortunately as soon as a town did get something going there would be an exterprising farmer that would think, "geeze, there's all these blue license plates going by..how can I make some money?" Just a never ending cycle.

How many times have we all seen the local cafe closed in the early morning hours on the opener of waterfowl, upland and deer season. It's almost laughable to think how many times we've hunted areas of ND and the locals just didn't get around to doing anything to pull some of the visiting sportsmans dollars.....Much more money could be had in the towns if someone just noticed all those "blue license plates"......and the brown ones, other than the outfitters. I've often thought that I could probably pay for my entire yearly hunting just by giving up 3 days and running a steak fry in the evening and serving eggs/bacon and toast at say 4:00 am on just one of the openers.

As to the early opening....if it bothers you so much that you can't hunt the PLOTS then stay home until the next weekend.....the PLOTS are hunted so lightly that first week by the ND guys (the majority of which only hunt one or two days on the weekend) that the second weekend of the season is as good as the first. I've got a bunch of friends from out of state that yearly come to ND the 1st weekend of the pheasant season.....we have NO TROUBLE finding places to hunt.....Ask the farmers, if they're not an outfitter more than likely they will let you hunt.

In many cases the later you travel to ND to hunt the better it becomes as more and more of the crops are harvested. It's alot easier to get the birds when they can't fly into a corn field for cover.


----------



## g/o

Bob, There is an old saying "it's not what you know, it's who you know". Now if you came into my neck of the woods and never called me, this was your first mistake. You know damn well I would line things up for you, thats what freinds are for. Unfortunatley Fargo gets hit hard that why I always refer to the cities. There are many good people in Fargo, some just need a little awareness in the Support your Local Outfitter. The great one "Cootkiller" use to refer to you guys as SLBCK'S. I miss old Coot, if he was still around this would either be locked or an all time high.

Goldy, I'm with you all the way on this one. The biggest violation they are getting outfitters on now days are not having birds tagged. Let make it easy have preprinted tags. Only problem will be is the game and fish will fight it. But I see no problem if the "sportsmen" and commercials get behind this.

Dick, What possible unknowen skill do you and I have for wildlife and resource management? Yet we feel strongly on some issues although we are usually on opposit sides.We're just a couple of dumb old farmers, but that being said I've been the sponser of some pretty fair legislation I must say. I'm sure you have been a part of some also. Now the Govenor does possess one thing you and I don't the Game and Fish Commisioner as part of our cabinet. Now if you think when a group of people from DL or where ever approach him, he just runs out and says were going to do this. Come on he listens and his people research things whats wrong with that? I'm not afraid of the Game and Fish and I'm not afraid to point out to them when there wrong. When you find that you can buck them let me know we will have that brew and work on some things that will better this state. :beer: I don't know of anyone who left this state because they could not find a place to hunt. :fiddle: I know many who left for better money, so they could have a better quality of life.

wirehairman, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Whay you said is music to my ears. All we hear is how Montana has this and South Dakota has this. Which of course is bs like what most that is spread here. So Montana has nothing and SD has the weekend before the opener on public land only. Thats a big difference from one week. Thanks again your the man, wirehairman

Field Hunter, Of course you agree with Dick, what else is new. I'm lost here, you want towns to advertise. Then when the hunters pull in and you loose your honey holes. Why would you want them to do that? Many towns cater to hunters and have steak frys etc. They are usually ones that have lots of hunters there. You do however strengthen my case on closing PLOTS for a week. You are exactly right no one uses it so let you guys have the first weekend and on Monday morning let everyone hit it. That way when those freelancing blue plates brings there kids over here on Thursday it will be open for them.


----------



## Bob Kellam

g/o

You know me I am kind of a stubborn old blankety blank. I always try to do things on my own when it comes to hunting. There have been some ideas kicked around here that definitely have some merit and need further study. I learned my lesson It won't happen again.

One thing I would like to mention that ties in with wirehairmans comments on Montana. last fall while hunting in SD on my second trip I was visiting with some residents that just finished hunting a field, their opinion of the SD resident opener was that it was a joke and all it ended up being is window dressing. We ended up hunting some pretty good ground with them and is was an enjoyable time. I kinda got a kick out of the fact that they thought hunting upland in ND was more enjoyable than the Pheasant Capital of the World.

I hope if anything came out of this thread that NR should not think that we do not want them here, it is just the opposite. And as far a waterfowl hunting goes there have been some very good ideas listed here.

I have been hanging around Nodakoutdoors for awhile and I have to admit that this subject usually turns really ugly. it has on pretty much every thread on the subject. I would just like to compliment everyone on their civility toward others opinions and the meaningful discussion to this point.

Later

:beer: 
Bob


----------



## roostman

Goldy's Pal said:


> I still like the idea of the tag system. Where did that end up? I stand quite firmly on this too, :lol: 6 birds, 7 days = 42 tags, when they're gone they're gone. seems fair to me. oke: Lets gitter done.


 I think at one time in the mid 80's we had a tag system for NR's, does anybody remember that? but I think the season was open until there tags were full. I don't know when they changed this to are present way they do things for NR's. I have never heard of this Pheasantgate you guys are talking about, can you fill me in on this? :roll:


----------



## jhegg

roostman,
Once upon a time, nr's were issued leg tags with the nr license, so many birds and you were done for the season. I seem to remember something like 20 tags for geese or ducks. When they were used, the hunting license expired. I would be in favor of this type of system. I asked Dale if he was in favor of a tag system for nr hunters at the SE advisory board meeting and he was not. So, now where do we go?


----------



## KEN W

The tag system was in effect in the 60's but I believe ended by the 70's.We had them when I first came to hunt in ND fromMinn. in the early 60's.I believe we recieved about 3 daily limits of tags per species.When you used them up you either quit hunting or hunted something else.


----------



## roostman

I remember when I first started hunting in about 83 or 84, My buddy got me interested in hunting and he lived on the Mn. side and got a NR license and I'm pretty sure he had tags when I first started? I might be wrong it's been over twenty years ago.


----------



## jhegg

Personally, I prefer the tag system (3 days limit is fine) over any other nr waterfowl restriction scheme. Hunt where you want, whenever you want. When the tags are gone, your hunting is over.

This would curb the "I have to get a limit every day" mentality that some seem to express. There would be no restrictions on which days you could hunt. There would be no restrictions on where you could hunt.

There would have to be some serious consequences for not tagging your waterfowl immediately though.

Any thoughts on this idea?


----------



## buckseye

I'm sure it is a good idea and does work it's just a shame it has to come to more regulations. When 20,000 NR's start clamoring for change then maybe look at it but for now I don't think it is more than a handful that are putting effort into the idea.


----------



## jd mn/nd

I too remember the days of tagging your birds it was no big deal the only problem was the tags would lose thier stickyness when they got wet and they were attached to your lisc. so you had to carry it around with you, they would not stick to any thing by the end of the week. I would suggest that if you were to redo the tag system that you would have to use some thing like a zip strip with a lisc. number embedded on them, however what do you do when you clean the bird as we use to have to attach them to the legs as they would only fit around the leg, now if you clean the bird you would not have a tag any longer, so then what, I would imagine that you would have to take the tag and put it in the bag with the bird, however this would not be considered to be attached to the bird so you would still be illegal.


----------



## DJRooster

It has taken a few years for our regulations to catch up with the demand for hunting opportunities and we are pretty close to being where we need to be as far as managing the resource for everyones benefit. After listening to all this good discussion and all the possible options in my opinion we have about as good a system as we could possibly have with the only difficiency being a very short season if we get some heavy early snow. With populations being where they are it has been a great run for everyone and let's hope mother nature continues to be kind because the problems we are having are simply the result of a healthy population. Greed is the root of all evil and whenever one entity wants to take sole control of the opportunity it will be a rich man's game. The only person I fear for is the little guy whomever that may be! Are you a little guy?


----------



## jhegg

It seems that freelancing resident hunters are the little guys. I hope they wake up and vote in the next elections!


----------



## KEN W

If leg tags were used....there would be no more breasting birds....have to keep the bird whole in order to attach the tag to the leg.

I really don't see this happening until the number of non-res. gets intolerable to resident hunters.It is done to cut down on the pressure while still allowing all non-res. who want to come here are able to.

The continuation of CRP will make a huge difference in the future.No CRP....lower numbers of ducks available...lower limits.Less hunters willing to come from long distances for fewer birds.Price of gas in the future will have an effect on numbers also.


----------



## Bob Kellam

I found it interesting that the waterfowl survey that is posted in Duck Hunting shows info that even 3 to 4 ducks per day are considered good by many.

What would be the opinions on setting duck hunting to mirror the goose hunting times, 1/2 days certain days of the week etc.? Maybe do it during OCT then open it up unrestricted on NOV??

Bob


----------



## KEN W

Bob....I think most non-res. that come here are dedicated hunters.If they spend money and vacation time....they will have their limits by noon.Whether guided or not.So 1/2 day hunting won't make a big difference to them....the ones it would affect are resident hunters who go out after school or work....you would basically be limiting residents to weekend hunting.Unless the 1/2 days was for non-res. only like Manitoba now is.


----------



## Field Hunter

Well then lets make it only NRs in the mornings and residents all day! :stirpot: :beer:


----------



## R y a n

Bob Kellam said:


> I found it interesting that the waterfowl survey that is posted in Duck Hunting shows info that even 3 to 4 ducks per day are considered good by many.
> 
> What would be the opinions on setting duck hunting to mirror the goose hunting times, 1/2 days certain days of the week etc.? Maybe do it during OCT then open it up unrestricted on NOV??
> Bob


I'd be super interested in that, provided they also offer an additional alternative NR option of 4 three day periods you could hunt... instead of 2 seven day periods they have now.

Additionally, if you agreed to this alternative option, there would be a mandate that you could only have 2 periods in a given month. In this way, it would provide more flexibility to those who don't come up to pound the resource for 7-14 straight days, would give the birds a rest (with your suggestion), and MAXIMIZE the tourist dollar brought in, as it would require serious NR hunters to travel back and forth several additional times!

I also believe, that for the first 2 weeks of the season, that half day hunting be the norm except for Saturdays and Wednesdays as it is now. This should apply to both ducks and geese for the first 2 weeks.

If the alternative 4 period option is not feasible, I'd more than welcome the opportunity to have tags for waterfowl & pheasant. Allow me the option to have the # of tags for a full season. (14 days multiplied by 5 ducks a day = 70 duck tags (that is WAY too many)... I'd think half that is more than reasonable)... So let's say for duck season I'd have 35 tags. I would only be able to shoot 1 daily bag limit per day... but would have the entire season to do it. This would work great for former ND youth like myself. I could hunt more days on weekends with my family, and not have to worry about "choosing" the right day(s) to start my hunt. Once my tags were used up, I'd be finished. If I chose this option I would not have the ability to harvest as many birds (not a big deal), however that is my choice. I actually would get to be in the field for those special moments with the family.

Thoughts? Would this be a reasonable fair compromise? What are the benefits? Drawbacks?

Ryan


----------



## buckseye

I can't see limiting the children of ND to please NR hunters. We do everything we can to give our kids access to good clean fun and there are some who would take that away. For crying out loud at least let them grow up before you run over them with all the baloney surrounding hunting these days.


----------



## KEN W

Buckseye....I agree...which is why I would not favor res. only being able to hunt until noon just to get more non-res here.This would basically limit us to weekend only hunting.

35 duck tags is to many....20 is about right with a 6 duck limit.Less with a 2 or 3 daily limit.

I am also not in favor of 3 five day periods.....would allow more weekenders to put more pressure on.

Just leave it the way it is and maybe require some reasonable number of tags to be given for all species except snow geese.


----------



## R y a n

KEN W said:


> Buckseye....I agree...which is why I would not favor res. only being able to hunt until noon just to get more non-res here.This would basically limit us to weekend only hunting.
> 
> 35 duck tags is to many....20 is about right with a 6 duck limit.Less with a 2 or 3 daily limit.
> 
> I am also not in favor of 3 five day periods.....would allow more weekenders to put more pressure on.
> 
> Just leave it the way it is and maybe require some reasonable number of tags to be given for all species except snow geese.


Where did you get any of those numbers from my post? Am I missing something?

It would not put more pressure than is currently there. Take a moment to think about it. With the current regs, I can choose 2 7 day periods... I'm still hunting 2 different weekends! With this alternative, it says.. "hey you can hunt an additional couple of weekends, but you have to go back and forth or wait...AND you can only have *2* of those *3* day periods in any given month!" How does that option put additional pressure on? With my suggestion, you can only hunt 2 weekends in October?

You do realize that NR's can now shoot 5 ducks multiplied by 14 days which equals *70* ducks! I have never shot that many in any season whether R or NR.... not my point... I was actually compromising at _*35*_! Wow

Ryan


----------



## KEN W

Ben Elli said:


> Bob Kellam said:
> 
> 
> 
> I found it interesting that the waterfowl survey that is posted in Duck Hunting shows info that even 3 to 4 ducks per day are considered good by many.
> 
> What would be the opinions on setting duck hunting to mirror the goose hunting times, 1/2 days certain days of the week etc.? Maybe do it during OCT then open it up unrestricted on NOV??
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
> I'd be super interested in that, provided they also offer an additional alternative NR option of 4 three day periods you could hunt... instead of 2 seven day periods they have now.
> 
> Additionally, if you agreed to this alternative option, there would be a mandate that you could only have 2 periods in a given month. In this way, it would provide more flexibility to those who don't come up to pound the resource for 7-14 straight days, would give the birds a rest (with your suggestion), and MAXIMIZE the tourist dollar brought in, as it would require serious NR hunters to travel back and forth several additional times!
> 
> I also believe, that for the first 2 weeks of the season, that half day hunting be the norm except for Saturdays and Wednesdays as it is now. This should apply to both ducks and geese for the first 2 weeks.
> 
> If the alternative 4 period option is not feasible, I'd more than welcome the opportunity to have tags for waterfowl & pheasant. Allow me the option to have the # of tags for a full season. (14 days multiplied by 5 ducks a day = 70 duck tags (that is WAY too many)... I'd think half that is more than reasonable)... So let's say for duck season I'd have 35 tags. I would only be able to shoot 1 daily bag limit per day... but would have the entire season to do it. This would work great for former ND youth like myself. I could hunt more days on weekends with my family, and not have to worry about "choosing" the right day(s) to start my hunt. Once my tags were used up, I'd be finished. If I chose this option I would not have the ability to harvest as many birds (not a big deal), however that is my choice. I actually would get to be in the field for those special moments with the family.
> 
> Thoughts? Would this be a reasonable fair compromise? What are the benefits? Drawbacks?
> 
> Ryan
Click to expand...

35 is the only number I used from your post.And you said 4 three day periods,I said 3 five....I would not be in favor of either one of those.This WOULD put more pressure on birds than the way it is now.You said it yourself....4 weekends instead of 2.

And I really don't think there are a lot of people hunting 14 days straight.Most come for 1 week if they travel far or are weekenders.

I repeat....leave it the way it is now and require tags.With a reasonable amount like there was the last time tags were required in the 60"s....20 for ducks etc.


----------



## R y a n

KEN W said:


> 35 is the only number I used from your post.And you said 4 three day periods,I said 3 five....I would not be in favor of either one of those.This WOULD put more pressure on birds than the way it is now.You said it yourself....4 weekends instead of 2.
> 
> And I really don't think there are a lot of people hunting 14 days straight.Most come for 1 week if they travel far or are weekenders.


I've tried to find a compromise by lessening # of birds harvested, spreading out the pressure to multiple weekends/months, and offered an alternative option whereby the # of days spent in the field is lessened to try and achieve the same.

Here are multiple alternative options. I've taken the time to present them in a well thought articulate post, and the responses I've received have been inaccurate and jumbled.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of my original post?

Bob, Dick, Field Hunter what are your thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

Ryan


----------



## R y a n

KEN W said:


> 35 is the only number I used from your post.And you said 4 three day periods,I said 3 five....I would not be in favor of either one of those.This WOULD put more pressure on birds than the way it is now.You said it yourself....4 weekends instead of 2.
> 
> And I really don't think there are a lot of people hunting 14 days straight.Most come for 1 week if they travel far or are weekenders.
> 
> I repeat....leave it the way it is now and require tags.With a reasonable amount like there was the last time tags were required in the 60"s....20 for ducks etc.


Hey Ken

I just saw that you edited your post to include add'l info....

You are correct if they are not coming now for the 2 week period, the pressure will be further reduced by only allowing them to come for a 3 day period! Voila! Pressure reduced further! If they are not coming up multiple weekends, this would have the net affect of further reducing NR days afield!

Does this make sense better? Let me know...


----------



## KEN W

The last I saw the GNF figured that about 60% of the hunters come from Minnesota.So how does giving them 3 or 4 weekends instead of 2 make for less pressure?It doesn't....it makes for much more pressure on the days when residents can normally hunt.


----------



## Bob Kellam

Ken Wrote



> Bob....I think most non-res. that come here are dedicated hunters.If they spend money and vacation time....they will have their limits by noon.Whether guided or not.So 1/2 day hunting won't make a big difference to them....the ones it would affect are resident hunters who go out after school or work....you would basically be limiting residents to weekend hunting.Unless the 1/2 days was for non-res. only like Manitoba now is.


Very true Ken

Would it be better to manage it for the quality of the hunting experience for everyone or the benefit of Resident hunters. I was thinking of a situation where closing at noon would be on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. That could backfire by increasing hunter pressure on Saturday and Sunday. I doubt it will make a hugh difference though. If leg tags were implemented the result would be shorter stays. Goose hunting has been similar to this for quite some time and it has not had a multitude of complaints associated with the process. Why not make it somewhat uniform, This plan for ducks would still be more liberal than white front and Canada geese??

Bob


----------



## KEN W

Bob....it might work....but the demographics are different now.In the 60's,70's,and 80's most nonres. came here to hunt geese,especially snow geese.Now they come to hunt ducks.

I guess there are a number of options to give ducks a rest.Closing at noon is one way,but it would hurt res. more than non-res.

And your right about leg tags....non-res. going home earlier or hunting something else when all the tags are gone....unfortunetly the tourism and hospitality people would never let that happen....no way do they want people going home early.To them it would be just like putting on a cap.I think we could live with unlimited numbers of licenses,no cap,if there were tags that limited what can be taken.Either way cuts down on pressure and still allows res. the ability to get some perks for living here.


----------



## R y a n

KEN W said:


> The last I saw the GNF figured that about 60% of the hunters come from Minnesota.So how does giving them 3 or 4 weekends instead of 2 make for less pressure?It doesn't....it makes for much more pressure on the days when residents can normally hunt.


OK great question.... here is my take on that. I'll use the MN NR analogy for a moment....Currently they are coming up for at least 2 weekends in October. That isn't going to change. Many of those that are coming up that are doing the most damage in regards to constant pressure are those coming up for 7-12 days straight, harrassing the birds every morning, chasing them down south faster etc...

By limiting their max days in the field, we would be limiting them to 3 consecutive days max at chasing birds out of the state. I agree that you would be giving them an extra weekend or 2 in compromise, however what is the greater benefit?

To me, the reduced daily pressure during the week, would allow the birds a "rest" period compared to the mid week pounding they take now.

Plus, with my suggestion, you would only be allowed to utilize those extra 2 periods in the month of November and December, further spreading out the pressure later in the year. This might also have the reciprocal effect of lessening pheasant pressure, as NR's might use one of their upland weekends later in the season providing Resident upland hunters less pressure in October?

Thoughts?


----------



## KEN W

So what you are saying is only 2 of those 4 or 5 day periods could be used in Oct.If that is what you are saying,yes then there would be less pressure as long as you can't take them back to back.

Only problem is like I said above....if the outcome is that they would have to go home after 3-4 days,the hospitality people would scream.

If they could only come twice in Oct for 3 or 4 days....then leg tags probably wouldn't be necessary.

Now you are talking just waterfowl here....upland is a whole other question because of much longer season and the ability to buy more than 1 license.


----------



## R y a n

KEN W said:


> So what you are saying is only 2 of those 4 or 5 day periods could be used in Oct.If that is what you are saying,yes then there would be less pressure as long as you can't take them back to back.
> 
> Only problem is like I said above....if the outcome is that they would have to go home after 3-4 days,the hospitality people would scream.
> 
> If they could only come twice in Oct for 3 or 4 days....then leg tags probably wouldn't be necessary.


Yep precisely! Thanks for sticking with me on the thought... there is a bit to it! I think this could seriously be worked for a win/win... Everybody gains a bit, and the birds aren't harrassed as much.

The Tourist/Hospitality industry should like it, as it would give the NR's more opportunity to come back and forth INTO the state if they so choose. The average NR would have a better overall experience, as the pressure would be spread out more, more birds would be huntable etc...

I can see your point about it not being perfect, but it is the glass half full/half empty analogy for the Hospitality industry. How could they not like the idea if the net effect causes more traffic flow to all the small town industries later in the season that formerly would not have been there?

I've thought about this proposal alot of the last year. I really can't see a downside to it...

Ryan


----------



## KEN W

The guys who come from a distance and can only hunt 3 or 4 days would not like it.

Actually I would be OK with 3 four or five day periods for upland also as long as only 2 of them can be used in Oct.And eliminate the option of buying another license.


----------



## Goldy's Pal

I think one thing to consider in this short 3-5 day proposal is that you almost promote more roost busting. The guys will come, take what they can get however they can get it and pack it up and do it all over again on their next trip somewhere else in ND. I'm just throwing this out there as a possible back fire, who really knows. I know on the last day the way it is now, guys blasted the roost near where I was field hunting. I spotted their truck glassing this roost and when I stopped seeing their truck for a few days I also stopped seeing birds on the roost. I know this has been harped on over and over but yeah it totally screws the guy (myself in this case) who was "milking" the nearby field for a few hunts/days on a few green heads who is there for a full week who has to maintain a possession limit.


----------



## nickle ditch

Goldy's got a point. I've met guys who will jump the roost on their last day up here because they're leaving the next day. I asked them, what about the locals and they just shrugged their shoulders.


----------



## jhegg

Hand out 20 tags each for ducks and geese to every nr who buys a nr waterfowl license. No time limits or zones. You use up your tags and you are done. There will have to be some pretty serious consequences for not immediately tagging your birds though. This will work.


----------



## fishless

Roost busters will always jump the roost. And I think the tags are the best idea they will keep honest hunters honest and with stiff penalties will make the violators think twice.


----------



## Goldy's Pal

Yeah but 20 for 7 days? Do you sell used cars? Come on loosen the choke collar a notch so I can breathe a little. :lol:


----------



## Bob Kellam

I really do not know what the best resolution would be. I spent a bunch of time reading the waterfowl survey that is a sticky in the duck hunting forum, it is 160+ pages of data and at first glance it looks like there is not a problem with waterfowl hunting in ND until you realize that when they split the flyways into 3 sectors areas of very different makeup were included together.

The data that is contained in the survey for ND is a little fuzzy in some areas because they combined the ND, MT and SD (upper central flyway) as a unit in many of the resulting numbers. that would be great if all of the regulations were of equal conformation, we all know that they are not.

I also noticed that on many questions that the neutral answer was not always the majority opinion on some of the tough questions. Example many questions have answers , very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, and very dissatisfied. combine the satisfied percentages and the dissatisfied percentages and the negatives are often the greater percentage.......

All of that being said I have to fall back on personal experience and say that the scenario that the survey portrays is not what I have personally encountered on many occasions. I am not alone in my opinion.

ND has good hunting there is no question about that. Is it consistently good or are there gaps in that consistency? recently there are gaps and the hunting public has not adjusted to the situation of the current supply and demand of the resource. One of the results that I found somewhat confusing was the answer to the question on the survey on page 29 where residents were asked how many ducks they needed to harvest to feel they had a satisfactory season 30% said between 21 and 50. 46% said less was acceptable 12% said more and 11% had no opinion. then on page 33 the question was asked about the number of ducks in the daily bag limit before you would quit hunting and 47% said they would quit if it were 1. 2 or 3. 36% said they would hunt with any set daily limit and 17% said they would quit if it was 4, 5 or 6..

Without going into more detail isn't this what many on this site have been advocating for quite some time now?? Lower the harvest numbers to increase the Quality of the hunting experience?

Are leg tags the answer? Is lowering the daily hours the answer? is lowering the daily bag the answer? I tend to think that it will be a combination of all of the above with the added incentive for resident and nr hunters to think outside the box and realize that there is waterfowl to hunt beyond the traditional so called "prime flyway" areas. managing hunter numbers is not an acceptable solution, that has been tried and it lost by the slimest of margins but it still went down in defeat. It is quite likely that any proposal brought forth will suffer a similar fate. The parameters will need to be the resource the experience and the economic impact. In a day where instant gratification has become so ingrained it will require some tough choices by all concerned.

sorry this is so long.

Bob


----------



## R y a n

Bob Kellam said:


> I really do not know what the best resolution would be.....
> 
> Are leg tags the answer? Is lowering the daily hours the answer? is lowering the daily bag the answer? I tend to think that it will be a combination of all of the above with the added incentive for resident and nr hunters to think outside the box and realize that there is waterfowl to hunt beyond the traditional so called "prime flyway" areas. managing hunter numbers is not an acceptable solution, that has been tried and it lost by the slimest of margins but it still went down in defeat. It is quite likely that any proposal brought forth will suffer a similar fate. The parameters will need to be the resource the experience and the economic impact. In a day where instant gratification has become so ingrained it will require some tough choices by all concerned.
> 
> Bob


Hi Bob

You never really responded to my specific post. I'd truly like your thoughts on whether this would be feasible, acceptable to both R and NR etc...

I'd be super interested if the GNF would offer an additional alternative(or completely change) the NR option to 4 three day periods you could hunt... instead of 2 seven day periods they have now.

Additionally, if you agreed to this alternative option, there would be a mandate that you could only hunt 2 periods in a given month. This means you would be only able to hunt 2 weekends in October... and only 6 days in October... 6 days in November... with a requirement that 2 days seperate your 3 day periods..

In this way, it would provide more flexibility to those who don't come up to pound the resource for 7-14 straight days, would give the birds a rest (with your suggestion), and MAXIMIZE the tourist dollar brought in, as it would require serious NR hunters to travel back and forth several additional times!

If a NR came up to the state, they could focus on upland hunting for those 2 days. This would effectively give the waterfowl a rest, while giving the NR the opportunity to pursue other game.

Thoughts? Would this be a reasonable fair compromise? What are the benefits? Drawbacks?

Dick did you have any thoughts about this?

Ryan


----------



## g/o

Ben Elli, are you out of your mind? These guys want to see less of you not more of you.


----------



## R y a n

g/o said:


> Ben Elli, are you out of your mind? These guys want to see less of you not more of you.


G/O are you out of yours? Have you been following these posts? Are you simply implying that NOW that I have become a NR that I am immediately hated and no post of mine will ever be taken with more than a grain of salt?

Or are you just plain ignorant in general? :huh:

After thinking about this for a minute, I believe that YOU of all people would support my idea, as this would get you more business. Then I thought to myself....hmmm maybe he is worried about that kind of idea taking a foothold, so rather than contribute his thoughts on the idea, he would rather attack me... (if you can't attack the message attack the messenger)..

I'm not sure which side of the fence you fall on G/O... worried about something? Bob and Dick know which side of the fence I fall on based on my previous posts. I would like to see more restrictive NR regs, even though I am one. I'd like to put the cap back on the genie bottle, but it is too late for that..... I'd like to see a provision for former ND youth...not sure how. That all being said... I have not bashed either side to this point. I consider myself moderate on the issue, not leaning to one side or the other. I have taken the time to find a possible solution to many of the issues presented on this thread.

You on the other hand have simply tried a pathetic attempt at an attack? Is there merits to this idea from your point of view?

Ryan


----------



## g/o

Ben Elli, Thanks for the kind words. It doesn't matter if I support this or not. What you have to look at is the people in ND. Now that being said a favorite son is not favored. If you think that would fly then why did we go from a season long pass for pheasants to a 10 day license?? Please Ben Elli tell me why 4 weekends for waterfowl will. By the way did you ever get that project done you were working on last spring? I'm still waiting for an answer.


----------



## Bob Kellam

Ryan

At first glance it looks like it would work. The drawbacks I would suggest is the demographics tell us that many NR hunters as a rule hunt "vacation time". Reducing it to 3 day periods would put an undue burden on some hunters that come from great distance to partake in ND's hunting. Many come from GA, SC, NC, CA etc.



> This means you would be only able to hunt 2 weekends in October... and only 6 days in October... 6 days in November... with a requirement that 2 days seperate your 3 day periods..


Just my opinion but how would this work for enforcement? How would the CO's know if it was your 2 day waiting period without stopping every hunter they encounter. Or would the two day period be the same for everyone? That would be a logistical nightmare I'm afraid.



> If a NR came up to the state, they could focus on upland hunting for those 2 days. This would effectively give the waterfowl a rest, while giving the NR the opportunity to pursue other game.


That would be fine if they wanted to hunt upland, if they don't what would the hunters do if they came here for ducks only.

It would alleviate the pressure on paper but would it? Many would elect to hunt long weekends and that would concentrate the r and nr hunters into a tighter time frame. Possibly more pressure on the resource?

The "zone buster" license that was created last session was very popular according to the NDGF stats. Simply put the 3 day restriction would be looked upon by many as further restriction. So lets say we allow all the hunters to come that want to come for the current times allotted. Would it still give the birds a rest by not hunting evenings 2 or 3 days a week? Enforcement with leg tags would also be a little more labor intensive because the honest hunters would follow the rules, others would not.

Changing Gifting regulations would also be a benefit but again the enforcement would be very difficult.

I had no intent to ignore your previous post, some things I just need to think over a bit. I think it is a given that the number of hunters will never be restricted unless and until some catastrophic event happens in the future. Our legislature has made that very clear. Contrary to what g/o may post I don't want to limit NR hunters. Just balance things a little better than they currently are.

Bob


----------



## R y a n

g/o said:


> Ben Elli, Thanks for the kind words. It doesn't matter if I support this or not. What you have to look at is the people in ND. Now that being said a favorite son is not favored. If you think that would fly then why did we go from a season long pass for pheasants to a 10 day license?? Please Ben Elli tell me why 4 weekends for waterfowl will. By the way did you ever get that project done you were working on last spring? I'm still waiting for an answer.


Several points. I've had discussions on these boards and PM's that suggest otherwise. I've had support from members here to figure out a way to make a favored son law happen. That's for another topic another day. More to the point.... We went from a season long pass on pheasants to a 10 day one due to the negative impact commercialization has had to the detriment of all NR's irrespective of their former residency status or # of years coming to the state before the commercialization nightmare began.

My 4 weekends would work, because it actually REDUCES the total number of days compared to what it is now. Further, it REDUCES total number of birds harvested. It IMPROVES flexibility for the traditional NR's that come to the state each fall (both native sons and freelance NR's), by giving them more chances to be here when the migration comes through, and other weekends they'd like to be in ND but not necessarily feel the need to hunt because they're days are ticking away....

In regards to your last jab... I went back to look at that post. Strange. I see where you edited all your posts from back then. Why? Afraid of something? What does the number "12" signify? I couldn't find the question you posed as you have erased all your comments.... Oh by the way.....yes the project went wonderfully.... completed ahead of time and on budget. I know you'd care to know that....


----------



## Goldy's Pal

> In this way, it would provide more flexibility to those who don't come up to pound the resource for 7-14 straight days, would give the birds a rest (with your suggestion), and MAXIMIZE the tourist dollar brought in, as it would require serious NR hunters to travel back and forth several additional times!


One thing that I hear over and over is how the NR pound the resource for 7-14 days straight. Tell me how. I drive 10 hours to get there and try to find a good field and if I'm in the right spot can shoot my limit of Mallards. Yes a limit. Right out of the gate it is nice to get in some shooting, something I often can't get at home, that's PART of the reason I make the trip. With that limit in possession I am done for the rest of the day. If I do it again the second day I have a full possession limit and cannot hunt until I eat duck. This is where a lot of bird watching starts to kick into the trip, I shoot a few, eat a few, and hardly call this pounding the resource. :eyeroll: Some days are also just scouting days, is that pounding too? I sometimes have to chuckle over this "the birds need time to rest statement." If in fact the birds are being pounded that hard maybe the game and fish should consider closing PLOTS to everyone and not just NR's. I know it's "the benefit" if you don't like it move here, heard it. I just think if resting areas are such an important benefit to the birds to keep them in the area then how come they can't rest on PLOTS statewide for a week? I donno I just don't get it. If in fact WE ALL want better quality hunts painted in the big picture why isn't this ever tossed around?


----------



## R y a n

Goldy's Pal said:


> In this way, it would provide more flexibility to those who don't come up to pound the resource for 7-14 straight days, would give the birds a rest (with your suggestion), and MAXIMIZE the tourist dollar brought in, as it would require serious NR hunters to travel back and forth several additional times!
> 
> 
> 
> One thing that I hear over and over is how the NR pound the resource for 7-14 days straight. Tell me how. I drive 10 hours to get there and try to find a good field and if I'm in the right spot can shoot my limit of Mallards. Yes a limit. Right out of the gate it is nice to get in some shooting, something I often can't get at home, that's PART of the reason I make the trip. With that limit in possession I am done for the rest of the day. If I do it again the second day I have a full possession limit and cannot hunt until I eat duck. This is where a lot of bird watching starts to kick into the trip, I shoot a few, eat a few, and hardly call this pounding the resource. :eyeroll: Some days are also just scouting days, is that pounding too? I sometimes have to chuckle over this "the birds need time to rest statement." If in fact the birds are being pounded that hard maybe the game and fish should consider closing PLOTS to everyone and not just NR's. I know it's "the benefit" if you don't like it move here, heard it. I just think if resting areas are such an important benefit to the birds to keep them in the area then how come they can't rest on PLOTS statewide for a week? I donno I just don't get it. If in fact WE ALL want better quality hunts painted in the big picture why isn't this ever tossed around?
Click to expand...

Hey Goldy

Great question. The term "pounding the resource" can take many forms. In the context I'm currently describing, my definition is "Causing migratory waterfowl to become increasingly wary, vehicle and/or location shy due to pressure placed on them on a daily basis by sitting in shooting lines near their roost areas, moving them off roost areas, pushing them from field to field when they are trying to feed and establish patterns." These actions cause the birds to not locate to a particular lake/slough or to a particular set of fields.

In the past many resident hunters (myself included) were able to experience what it was like to see birds on lakes/sloughs and be able to consistently work them either by pass shooting or field hunting by scouting earlier in the week. More recently, this has become increasingly difficult to do. Birds that once fed in a certain field, or sat on a certain slough would do so for 4-7 days or so...not anymore. With the advent of non-stop daily pressure (during the middle of the week), birds no longer pattern consistently. They are immediately gun/vehicle shy within the first week of the season rather than slowly getting used to pressure. They are constantly banged away at 6 hours a day 7 days a week. They don't get "established" in a field as a result.

Yes Goldy your hunting style may not exactly seem like "pounding" the resource. However your style is not typical. For example, If you imagine a bunch of NR guys coming out to sit along a fenceline along a major goose holding slough, let's say they are typically not the best marksmen in the world. Each hunter sits along that fenceline and gets some shots. Some shots are close others are longer shots. These guys are having a great time with some shooting. They manage to scratch out a couple of birds each. However in doing so, each has shot 2+ boxes of shells. So in this one instance those birds coming out that morning have had over 500-1000 rounds shot towards them. Imagine that happening over the course of 7-14 straight days. Would you be a little touchy flying around?

This analogy is one of many possible scenarios. Granted. However these kinds of scenes are taking place all over ND. Yes this same scenario has also played out in the past, however the volume and sheer magnitude of all these extra NR's doing this day after day after day(especially during the middle of the week) eventually has a traumatically negative effect.

Not every hunter comes along as you do, shoot there 2 day possession limit and bird watches/scouts the rest of the trip. In regards to your comments about PLOTS...not sure what you are referring to. Often times, Plots land is entirely ground cover. The type of pounding I'm referring to has to do with giving the birds a rest for consecutive DAYS on alkali sloughs, deep water lakes and crop fields. Generally speaking those types of areas aren't enrolled in PLOTS.


----------



## g/o

Ben Elli, You have some poeple sending you pm's, I get a bunch also. Lets first look to the favorite son bill, I know you say it's for another day but it's an easy one. NoDak outdoors etree was dead against this so were most of the people on this site including myself. All this would be is a touchy feely bill to make former residents feel good. When the dust settles you left here and when you gave up your residency here you gave up those rights. You can't have them in both places. Sorry.

The pheasant scenerio you elate to is completely full of holes. Simple as this, the 14 day pheasant license has no effect at all on commercial enterprises. My people are here no longer that 5 days anyway, and again they can afford it. The ones it hurt was the freelance hunters who came here every weekend. It forced them to buy multible licenses

Now onto your brain child of 4 weekends of waterfowl hunting. What would happen? Now a nonresident can come out 4 weekends, do you suppose this would not for one minute encourage more leasing? Why do you think we went to the 14 day license to begin with? I was around then I'm sure you were to young to remember. All the good snow geese hunting areas were leased up buy big money out of Mpls. they reduced it to 14 days and many pulled up stakes and left. Did things change? NO. Big money from Fargo then leased the same areas. So I hate to break your heart but your idea will never ever fly.

In reference to my last remark. Last spring you made a comment in which you said the last session of the legislature was all in favour of the guides. I challenged you to prove to me how it was and what bills were in favour of the guides. Doesn't really matter because you could not then and will not be able to now. The only bills the guides had in there got killed big time. Have a nice day

Goldy, I have suggested several time and still am a strong believer in rest areas. There is a fear hear that the outfitters will lease alll the land around it and it will be counter productive. Which i say bull, Make it like a shooting preserve law which states you can't have one with in a mile of a Public area, refuge etc. etc. Have it so guides cannot lease with x amount of area.


----------



## Chuck Smith

Ben,

Your fenceline shooting/pass shooting example.....I wonder how many NR really do this....Because I am a field and water hunter. Most duck hunters I talk with hunt the feild or water. Most people I talk to that have hunted in ND before are feild/water hunters...

I am just wondering because most NR that I have talked with only feild or water hunt.

But I do understand what you are saying by the example. That is pressure. Birds will get pushed out.


----------



## Dick Monson

*g/o said:*


> I have suggested several time and still am a strong believer in rest areas. There is a fear hear that the outfitters will lease alll the land around it and it will be counter productive. Which i say bull, Make it like a shooting preserve law which states you can't have one with in a mile of a Public area, refuge etc. etc. Have it so guides cannot lease with x amount of area.


So would the ND Professional Guides and Outfitters advance this with the wildlife organizations? I have a vested interest in asking because the old rest area system used to have super pheasant hunting when they expired for the year. :wink:


----------



## g/o

Dick, as I've told you many times, I do not speak for the NDPGOA. I will say this much I will support this and bring you support. We do need to work together on things like these which are good for all.


----------



## Goldy's Pal

> My 4 weekends would work, because it actually REDUCES the total number of days compared to what it is now. Further, it REDUCES total number of birds harvested.


How are you figuring less birds harvested? 4 different trips allows you 4 possession limits to take back (or 48 total). 1 trip=1 possession (12), I may eat a few ducks in maintaining the 12 but a short/multi-trip hunter will still have their annual good ole' duck feed with the fellas'. I still believe this will allow 4 "last days" to roost blast before the next trip, not good on the resource since I last chimed in here. Just curious on your logic behind your theory. On a side note times I scouted from the vehicle never scattered birds more than a few yards if at all, it's hard to believe that this would be considered under the pounding category or even pressure of any sort. Totally flushing and a gun shot, different story, you know that as well as anyone from ND. I fell off the wagon and may have knocked a screw loose but I have atleast one good lag bolt in me yet. :wink:


----------



## Bob Kellam

Again i agree with the "more rest area" theory with some leasing restrictions. It does have some interesting possibilities. Would WPA's work without reinventing the wheel? Maybe the feds and the state can work together, I seem to remember that they (DOI) were going to get rid of some of them last year.

Bob


----------



## g/o

This would be my first choice also. I know years ago when we trying to establish dark geese. There were many rest areas that were WPA's they had these neet little red signs on them. Unless policy has changed I don't know why they wouldn't be the coice of rest areas. Maybe some of our fed freinds will chime in here.


----------



## KEN W

G/O....I agree with what you said.

As far as the rest areas....when I asked the GNF about making more....there answer was that everything around it would be leased up.Maybe your solution of no leaseing within a mile would work.The biggest problem with this is getting landowners to go for it.

As far as making some WPA's into rest areas....we tried to do this back in the 80's on a large WPA just west of Bottineau that always held 1,000's of geese when the season opened.The USFW service was ready and willing to do it.BUT in order to set the right boundaries some landowners had to go along with it.They were totally against it because they didn't want to be hounded by hunters constantly trying to get permission to hunt the land around it.

But yes the fed's were willing to go along with it.


----------



## Bobm

this thread needs a little humor :wink:

After getting all of Pope Benedict's luggage loaded into the limo, (and he doesn't travel light), the driver notices that the Pope is still standing on the curb. "Excuse me, Your Holiness," says the driver, "Would you please take your seat so we can leave?"

"Well, to tell you the truth," says the Pope, "they never let me drive at the Vatican when I was a cardinal, and I'd really like to drive today."

"I'm sorry, Your Holiness, but I cannot let you do that. I'd lose my job! And what if something should happen?" protests the driver, wishing he'd never gone to work that morning.

"Who's going to tell? Besides, there might be something extra in it for you," says the Pope with a smile.

Reluctantly, the driver gets in the back as the Pope climbs in behind the wheel. The driver quickly regrets his decision when, after exiting the airport, the Pontiff floors it, accelerating the limo to 105 mph. (Remember, he's a German Pope.)

"Please slow down, Your Holiness!" pleads the worried driver, but the Pope keeps the pedal to the metal until they hear sirens.

"Oh, dear God, I'm gonna lose my license -- and my job!" moans the driver. The Pope pulls over and rolls down the window as the cop approaches, but the cop takes one look at him, goes back to his motorcycle, and gets on the radio.

"I need to talk to the Chief," he says to the dispatcher.

The Chief gets on the radio and the cop tells him that he's stopped a limo going a hundred and five.

"So bust him," says the Chief.

"I don't think we want to do that, he's really important," said the cop.

The Chief exclaimed, "All the more reason!"

"No, I mean really important," said the cop with a bit of persistence.

The Chief then asked, "Who ya got there, the Mayor?"

Cop: "Bigger."

Chief: "The Governor?"

Cop: "Bigger."

Chief: "The President?"

Cop: "Bigger."

"Well," said the Chief, "Who is it?"

Cop: "I think it's God!"

The Chief is even more puzzled and curious, "What makes you think it's God?"

Cop: "He's got the Pope as a chauffeur." :lol: :lol:


----------

