# 2019 Bills?



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

Is there a summary of f&g proposals yet?


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

From the GNF.......

https://gf.nd.gov/legislation?field_leg ... ue=&page=1


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

There are a lot of bad things in this legislative session. It's clear they place more value on the rich non residents than they do residents. Also the automatic posting bill us up again. I only see one winner there and that's the outfitters who charge to hunt. It's simply another move to bring back what is much like market hunting. It will kill things like coyote hunting where you drive for four hours to find tracks crossing in fresh snow, then the range of a coyote is so large he may be hitting four different landowners and three of those are in Arizona. I predict we will loose hunter numbers fast and the legislature will let in more nonresident hunters. I can see in the future more non resident than resident. The other bad thing is if this passes many hunters will blame landowners and farming will loose a majority of the support from hunters that they have had for years.

Let me tell you something disturbing. A fellow who was banned from here would go on nodakangler and agitate and frustrate people to get them to post more extreme reactions. Then he admitted reading those to our legislature. What a deranged person. He was banned here, banned from fishingbuddy, and now banned on nodakangler. We had to bad actors our to watch us and shaft us every time they had a chance.

In the end hunters and farmers are the two big loosers. Outfitters can sit on their fatter wallet and smile.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

You are correct in all but one. With NR deer hunters limited to 1% of the total tags, that's a few hundred out of a minimum of 50,000 licenses. And that's most likely the lowest number of tags.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

I host a number of(mostly VN) vets each year. Ages 70-81. They shoot from 1-10 birds each. Each struggles or is unable to get afield 7 consecutive days. Every one of the stated they wish they could hunt the whole season. They are NRs, who fought for their country, not their state. When they came home, they were spit on. I'd like to see a bill to allow a season license. No guide/lease.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

I'd restrict the license to veterans. Age65+.
Not valid with commercial guides.
May not lease or hunt leased lands.
Law would have a 5 year sunset (expiration), requiring renewed approval.
It is a proposal to accommodate veterans, not attract non-residents.
I am not a vet and would receive no benefit from this.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Your right Ken, not to many deer license, but I would bet the left one that up the road our legislature will want to increase it. Especially if we get our population back. I still see this two party system as the party of perverts and the party of money worshipers. I have fellow republicans get real ticked when I day that, but it's funny when I do everyone knows exactly which party is which. No one ever misunderstands which leads me to believe it's an accurate description.

Wildfire guy that sounds like a very worthwhile effort your putting in. I distinctly remember the liberals not only spitting on our Viet Bam gets, but also the police. They are still like that, but at last got smart enough to hide it. They really can't portray themselves truthfully or they would loose half the votes they now get.

Politics has gone into placed it never should have. It has corrupted science, our public education, and many other aspects of our lives.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Plainsman...

In reading that I only saw a 3 NR ones.

SB 2201....would actually make the days afield less for a NR and increase the amount of $ in the PLOTS program (cost of this license is $200). Instead of two 7 day licenses it would be three 4 day periods. Right now it gives people 14 days the purposed bill would give 12 days afield. Now I know people will say... well they can take more trips back. Well don't you want pressure spread out through out the season instead of just hammering them for 14 days? Also with this bill I would guess you wouldn't see as much pressure. Because people would use the 8 days in a row. Then "try" to make a trip back to ND. Which is all weather dependent with waterfowl and also other states deer seasons. Or if they use it for 12 days... that is two less days afield.

SB2285.... Which is pay $500 and hunt the whole season. This one... I could give or take as a NR. The only people who would take advantage of this are retired people or people who lived close to the border. Because someone who is working fulltime and lives over 5 hour drive wouldn't be going every weekend to go hunt ducks. But again IMHO is not a good bill.

Then bill SB2260. Is the Trapping one. Which is a reciprocity type bill. Which again isn't that bad. But states need to play nice with each other. If the home state doesn't allow reciprocity (which some don't)&#8230; then that NR has to go pound sand.

So again to say it is targeting NR over R isn't so true.

But I only got the bills from the link provided above.

Now I get your points about outfitters with these waterfowl bills. Because an outfitter could rotate people faster with 4 day packages.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I was thinking future based on them extending the goose seasons etc for the non residents. I don't mind non residents at all it's just irksome when landowners I know have declined residents because they are waiting for paying non residents. I'm thinking of the Devils Lake area. I'm surprised our legislature hasn't considered prostitution like Nevada. They never met a business or a dollar they didn't like.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Chuck......one point on the number of days. I am now a NR like you. I live 20 miles from the border. If I was able to go to ND for three 4 day periods, I would pick 3 weekends. You can't get 3 weekends now.That's when most residents are out. To me this bill would clearly add more pressure than the way it is now. Yes less days total. But being able to go 3 times instead of 2. Weekdays to a resident mean nothing.

Going 3 times is clearly what the bill is trying to get for a NR. The business community is clearly behind this bill.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> The business community is clearly behind this bill.


 The Chamber of Commerce and the Tourism are the first two to sell out residents. Clearly we all define quality of life differently. For some it's all about the dollar. They could care less about a quiet morning in the duck or deer blind. To them there is no value in sipping a hot cup of coffee while the eastern sky turns the bottom of the clouds red, the mist rises from the river, your dog quivers beside you with excitement and you share stories with a friend about years gone by.

Should say a friends dog is excited. I don't have one. I love dogs, but I have never had time to take care of one.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

SB2285.... Which is pay $500 and hunt the whole season.

This one would result in rampant leasing of land. Suspect that some already just hunt more than their days allowed, but this would allow people to spend the entire season on their large (and growing) lease. Maybe outfitters would oppose since it ups the $$ level of the leases ?

Question: *Nonresident guides :* I assume they are only allowed to "actually hunt" or "carry a gun and shoot at waterfowl" for 14 days of the season even though they maybe guiding all season long ?? Is that how the law works for a licensed NR guide in the state of ND ? or do they carry a gun all season long ??


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Isn't a town like Gackle, ND already about 1/4th to 1/3rd owned (houses) by nonresidents ??

If you already own a house in ND or lease a section or two ... a $500 license is nothing.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ken...

I totally know what you mean about the weekends to "3". But for the average NR hunter. They go 7 days or 10 days that is it. Because of time constraints. I understand about the people who live close to the border. Which would make it the 3 weekends. But I am sure weather would be dependent on when they go... ie: storm coming in pushing birds down. Because it still doesn't allow NR hunters that first week.

I get that. But the actual number days afield is less.

The $500 yearly license... I agree yet disagree with this. If you are going to have it.... Make it expensive. But it isn't needed.

I live about 20 miles from the Mississippi River and have a yearly WI waterfowl license. I hunted in WI a total of 4 days! Granted that is just the WI side of the River. I never hunted "inland". But that shows you how these things can work. So "fearing" you will be over runned by NR is false. Just like I ran into hunters from WI who do the same in MN. Most of the time it is because of the season "split" is why each hunted on the other side of the channel. IE; Open in WI not MN... and vise versa.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Chuck.....then why change this law if not to gain more days in ND? Just look at the teacher's convention weekend. My guess is that opening weekend and the convention weekends have by far the most NR hunters. Those hunters are done by the middle of Oct. I am thinking that quite a few would like to be able to go again in early Nov if the weather cooperates..


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ken,

NR don't have a choice or tell elected officals in ND what to purpose. Tourism, business owners, and ND residents do. So that is why this bill is introduced. I think Guides would want it more because instead of a 7 day type turn around it would be 4 days. So they could "spin" out clients. Which would be more $$$ for guides, taxes, licenses, hotels, etc. (this is not saying NR save ND... that is BS if you ask me. This is just saying it is about revenue for the state...ie: hotel tax/fees go towards state)

MN had this issue where guides didn't want to raise the goose limit around Rochester because they could turn and burn a field with clients (2 bird limit). The guides would shuffle clients in and out all day long.

So of the % of NR license sold in ND to people from MN you wouldn't get all of them coming back. I bet you would maybe get 25% possibly coming back for that "third" weekend..... if that! Which again... is still two less days in the field. From other states you wouldn't get even close to that because of deer seasons. Plus all weather dependent.... freeze up.

I know people from ND like to always point to MN for blame or out of hatred. But insight on MN.... Our deer season is in the "rut" so many NR deer hunt in MN. Many MN deer hunters hunt multiple states as well because of timing. WI, IA, ND seasons are after ours or don't over lap too much. Plus in the SE part of the state you get "another" season with Muzzleloader and now the "CWD" type hunts. Lets put it this way.... people are still hunting deer this weekend! Most people who hunt ducks also hunt deer.

So to say MN "hunters" would keep coming back later in the year isn't correct. It is more of a "fear". because many of those hunters would be hunting deer during those times or hung up the wadders. Some diehard would possibly do a run up to ND but odds are things would be froze up by then. Plus your deer season is going on and people know how hard it is already to get on land when deer season is going on. :beer:


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

If leases and guides are a "problem" for residents, why not outlaw leases and guides?
I'm not advicsting that. I have 40,000 actes wpa within 30 minutes of my camp. Add in thousands of state and plots lands, an 15,000 acres posted lands permission.....I'm not affected.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Things change in North Dakota. Bird migration patterns, climate (wet/drought), land use, etc... all can change from year to year and oven more so over each decade.

Drought / wet is fairly obvious, but ND has undergone a significant shift to soybeans and corn across much of the middle of the state which has made ND less interesting to geese and mallards that used to stage and feed in these areas as early as September.

Influx of an outfitter / guide into an area can change access patterns for everyone. We had access to one farmer who managed a couple thousand acres (or more) of prime waterfowl land. He eventually fell into the spell of an outfitter. The outfitter is not very busy, but the acres went off the grid. It was a guy that we actually hunted with for years ... things can change.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

ND Guides and Outfitters have a pretty good lobby in the ND legislature. Ag of course has powerful lobbying. Small ND businesses know that NR hunters and fisherman bring in fresh $$ to their local economies. Local / resident hunters also try to lobby the ND legislature.

About a decade or two ago, ND legislature found a series of compromises that seemed to calm the situation (no caps, but residents got a week of waterfowl hunting before NRs could hunt & a separate week of residents only on PLOTS). For the most part ND has been reluctant to make any changes since then.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

KEN W said:


> Chuck......one point on the number of days. I am now a NR like you. I live 20 miles from the border. If I was able to go to ND for three 4 day periods, I would pick 3 weekends. You can't get 3 weekends now.That's when most residents are out. To me this bill would clearly add more pressure than the way it is now. Yes less days total. But being able to go 3 times instead of 2. Weekdays to a resident mean nothing.
> 
> Going 3 times is clearly what the bill is trying to get for a NR. The business community is clearly behind this bill.


It has its advantages and disadvantages. Many hunters have family that lives in MN and giving them the ability to have more hunts with family is a good thing.
But as mentioned it's gonna add some additional pressure on weekends .... Quite frankly current pressure even with the non residents is nothing close to what I remember back in the 70s . There may be a few areas that are exceptions but I haven't hunted them. We have gotten a little spoiled in that aspect.

Another idea might be to designate that the 4 day time periods have to be used mid week when fewer local hunters are out. But I can see residents complaining that the non residents are chasing the birds out before the weekend . Personally I do more hunting mid week when there is less hunter competition.

It would be interesting to see the stats on when and how long NR hunt. I doubt that a majority hunt the full 14 days. I would guess most hunt two weekends or maybe 1/2 of the days allowed. This is why they would favor the 3 4day license.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Dakota...

I agree with you that it does push to "weekend" hunting. But I still say that it wouldn't make that much difference. But some would say that if 1 NR hunter hunts the extra weekend it is too many. :beer:

I also liked your post in the "trespass law". With the need permission to drive onto fields. Just like you still need permission to hunt a certain distance near live stock and buildings.

I still say that if the state got a "trespass law".... it would cut NR numbers big time. I know that is why lots of NR hunt ND is because if not posted you can hunt. It makes scouting easier, less days you need to track down land owners, etc. I mean it makes it that if you want to go on a 5 day hunt (2 being a weekend and two travel days)&#8230; you can and have great success. It is why NR like that...and so do R :beer: . But that vehicle access would be a huge change for the good if you ask me. But again... I don't have a vote in your state or pull since I am a NR. :thumb: But that is a great idea to run past elected officials. You also forgot to mention that down by the border of SD... many land owners live in SD and farm in ND. So trying to track them down might be even more difficult and they don't care if you hunt or not. :beer:


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

I wonder what the critical balance point is between NR access (if further constrained by trespass law changes), balance that against length of hunting season, time and dollars NR spends in local communities.
Finally, the $8 million + in license fees, when matched by PR and DJ funds is a significant component of F&G budget. Kudos to those willing to undertake those issues.


----------

