# GF Herald Today



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

HUNTING REGULATIONS: Nelson County proposal shot down
North Dakota's open hunting law will stand, says Stenehjem
By Stephen J. Lee
Herald Staff Writer

Nelson County can't set its own rule reversing the state law regarding public hunting on private land, said North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem on Tuesday.

Last spring, Nelson County commissioners voted 5-0 to add a zoning regulation closing all land to public hunting unless it is posted as "open," and the hunter gets written permission.

That's the converse of what state law has been for decades: unless private land is posted as closed, it's open to any hunter without asking.

The proposed ordinance would have required a public hearing and Nelson County officials asked Stenehjem for an official opinion on its legality.

His opinion said that while state law allows counties general authority to pass their own zoning laws, it doesn't allow local ordinances to contravene or supercede state or federal laws.

Dan Marquart, the Nelson County commissioner who suggested the new zoning ordinance, said he was disappointed in Stenehjem's opinion.

"I guess we will have to abide by his judgment, but I still think hunters should respect private landowners."

It's all about city folk winning out over country folk, Marquart said.

"I couldn't come into somebody's yard in Grand Forks and drive in there and put up a camper and say I'm hunting there for a day. You'd have to ask."

Nelson County, between Devils Lake and Grand Forks, with one of the highest percentages of farmland put into the Conservation Reserve Program, has prime waterfowl, deer and varmint hunting.

"We weren't out to prevent hunting, we were out trying to prevent having to put up these new hunting signs, which take a lot of time and money," Marquart said. "Ninety-nine percent of the hunters ask anyway, but like anything, it only takes a few to ruin it for everybody. You put up signs and they don't abide by them, or they knock them down and say they didn't see them. What good does it do?"

But Dean Hildebrand, director of the state's Game and Fish department, told the Herald earlier that the current posting laws, while unusual compared to other states, is best for wildlife management because it makes harvesting game populations easier.

The Nelson County posting proposal is part of a wider effort by landowners to overturn the state's tradition of open hunting.

Rod and Kathryn Froelich, Selfridge, N.D., have sued the state, saying the posting laws violate private property rights by requiring landowners to post signs to keep hunters off. Rod Froelich is a state representative and former Sioux County commissioner, according to the Associated Press.

In his opinion, Stenehjem declined to comment on the constitutionality of the state's hunting laws because of the pending lawsuit.

Because of "big-city" interests, he and other landowners have failed to get state posting laws changed in the Legislature, Marquart said. "We will try again, someway," Marquart said. "We just have to get more support in Bismarck."

Marquart said he's also disappointed it took Stenehjem this long - until three days before the deer gun season opens - to issue an opinion asked for in June. "It's a little late, isn't it?"
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Perhaps it was "just a little stupid" instead. DM

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


----------



## TANATA (Oct 31, 2003)

I hunt on my my families land so I dont have to deal with this problem. :beer:


----------



## Perry Thorvig (Mar 6, 2002)

I told you so. Local laws must be consistent with state laws.


----------



## fireball (Oct 3, 2003)

These are the same people who want laws like this passed, then when their little towns go under, they will blame resident hunters for trying to keep nr's out. They are so far off base and they are the cause of the lack of nr hunters in this state, it has nothing to do with tiny little laws being passed, like the opening waterfowl weekend law. There are never any birds down that opening weekend anyway, so no one is losing or gaining anything with that law. I am totally bewildered. As we sit and watch these people trying to make their own laws and rules, we are seeing who the bad guys are in this whole mess, and it isn't the resident hunters. We are the victims. I say we quit giving them all the free rope they can handle, becuase it will be only a few yrs before they hang themselves.

I also am tired of the stupid, "what if someone was hunting in your backyard" comparison. If my backyard was thousands of acres, I would be happy to let anyone hunt. I highly doubt anyone is stupid enough to set up a camper on anyones land without getting permission first, but then again, I would have thought nodoby was stupid enough to hang themselves with greed like these groups are starting to do now.


----------



## Perry Thorvig (Mar 6, 2002)

Whooooo. Cool the rhetoric, Fireball.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Too bad it took so long - I avoided Nelson county this year

At least I can stop at the DQ in Lakota again


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

fireball,
This is yet another case of you being on the outside looking in and being, yet again, bitter about it.

What position do you take anyway. From all of your posts I have read both on here and on FBO, you are extremely inconsistent. The only repetitive theme I see you stay with is that 'if it is good for me great, if not I am going to raise holy terror about it".

cootkiller


----------



## fireball (Oct 3, 2003)

Hey coot, good to see you again. I think most anyone in both forums can tell you were I stand. I am for hunting, resident and non resident. I am for landowners rights and I am against G/Os being allowed to lease up every last bit of good land. Its not even about hunting on their side, it is about money. It is about me and my hunting brothers spending MILLIONS of dollars traveling to other towns to fish and hunt, and it is about how we are being treated by a few greedy groups/people.

I will always say thanks, if the answer is no to land access. I love to shoot my guns, I shoot thousands of rounds every yr, and in order to do so, I have developed relationships with landowners. No matter what their answer may be when I ask, I always respect their right to know who is hunting and set the rules for hunting that land. I am not going to start this into a rant, because everyone is aware how I feel about G/O's(this doesnt include fishing guides, as I am sure someone will imply).

If I could own land I would, but I have neither the money or resources. I am someone(part of the majority) that does not/will never, own land. I can offer my friendship and support, but that is all I have. I have only one way to try and fight for hunting heritage in ND, and that is through the voting booth. We are not instigating anything, we are reacting to a threat. I am not going to get into verbal battles with coot anymore, I really feel like I am wasting my time and life when I do so. He is a poster boy for their side and I am the poster boy for (in my own little world) our side. I may get a little passionate occasionally, but I try and keep it on topic and accurate. Anyway, I love the posts on this forum, there is alot of genuine thought and good views on both sides. Keep putting the facts up here and let us decide for ourselves.

Brian

ps, Perry, thanks for the compliment..lol. Thought I would share the meaning of the word rhetoric.

rhet·o·ric ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rtr-k)
n.

The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively. 
A treatise or book discussing this art. 
Skill in using language effectively and persuasively.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

For those landowners that want help, contact your local sportsman's club. Ask before you enter signs are free from NDGF and the landowners sportsmen's council and you may also find there is willing help in erecting the signs.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

As my non resident visitors have put it, "as the amount of posting goes up, the likelihood of our returning to an area goes down." If the same rural areas, North Dakota Farm Bureau, and state tourism agencies are interested attracting both resident and non resident hunters for their money, they should be supporting the current trespass law, encourage not posting land and make it more likely that hunters will hunt in their area. The rural communities, Farm Burean and tourism can't have it both ways.


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

I am neither a poster boy for this side or that side. I simply do not think that you any any group has the right to prohibit someone from making a living. What about other resources that we let get exploited for far more money by a far smaller group. i.e. oil companies. That is a far bigger injustice than 300 guides netting just over minimum wage for 47 days.

Rhetoric, educated way of saying 'talking around the issue' and 'double talk' or 'talking out of both sides of you mouth'.

Fireball, I don't hate you, just some of the assinine, off the wall crap that you say.

I am not a landowner either, I just have a couple close relatives that help me out in that department. Will be joining them for a family weekend in about 24 hours, it is called the NORTH DAKOTA DEER HUNTING HOLIDAY.

I hope you have a 'family' to go hunting with fireball, maybe that will put some joy into your life. It seems like you need some.

cootkiller


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

Coot,

Minimum Wage for guides?

Norther Flight Guide service: Kyle Blanchfield

Guided Day Hunt: $225 a day/ per gun group of 4 per guide /$900 Day

8 full time guides X $900=$7200 a day for Kyle

47 day season as you said X $7200= $338,400 in 47 days

not bad for minimum wage
Overhead+Wages for guides?


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

That is not the guides wages - that is the total net.

I would suspect that guides earn a $100 to $150 per day plus tips.

Traditional tip in the south is a Jackson per hunter per day or for four hunters another $80 (tax free?). ND guides should pick up the same if they are putting in the effort.

That would put the guides take at $180 per day. 
For a goose hunting guide 4:30 - 1:30 (if they really stay out till 1pm) is 9 hours

Add another 2 hours for scouting that evening for the next day.

11 hours worked per day = $16.63 per hour.

In the south where they hunt the same blind every day the guides work about 6 hours / day.

Then there are the "lucky guides" that get Mr. Big Spender. These guys (when they limit) often tip $100 or more.


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

PH

I didn't say it was the guides wages. It's the outfitters price before 
wages & overhead.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Tips can go way up if you produce birds (or Limits)


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

When you figure in gas, shells, wear and tear on vehicles and decoys, the actual take home is not what you all think it would be.

The tip myth is blown way out of proportion. On average a group of 4 guys that hunted for 3 or 4 days usually tips about $50 for that 3 to 4 day period.

________________________

How come whenever the topic of guides comes up you guys always focus on Kyle Blanchfield. You make it like he is the enemy of the state or something. As has been pointed out on here many times before, I know Kyle very well(no, I have never worked for him) and he is not this money hunger corporate hunter you all make him out to be. I am guessing that not even half of you guys have ever even met and talked with him.

cootkiller


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Coot, the real difference is that these guides are selling game animals they don't own which makes your oil rights comparison a apples to oranges comparison. I'm for letting anyone make a legal living but I'm not for anyone selling game animals or any other public resource. I know guides claim they only sell the right to hunt but there is no real difference in what they do know verses actually selling the carcases except that they don't pull the trigger. Especially when guides use political clout to pass laws which essentially privatize hunting rights for the exclusive use of their customers. This is destroying hunting and already has seriously damaged it in the rest of the country.


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

Bobm,
You are wrong. Wether you or I like it or not, guides are not selling game animals. They provide access to land for a fee. They have no control over where these animals feed and do not confine them to an area. They merely bring their clients out to a field where they hope(and this year pray) that the birds want to feed.

The selling of game animals is done on pjrivate game farms where they do actually sell game animals, in fact, most charge by the number of birds released for each particular hunt.

Here's my question, which is worse, guides or game farms. I say game farms cause they are actually selling a resource. Guides just rent out access.

cootkiller


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Altough I think most pheasant guides are just the same as Preserves :roll:

I don't mind a true preserve - that releases their own birds & someone goes out & shoots them. (might be a ok way to train a dog ???)

But traveling shooters could do that at home :-?

But when the Vast Majortiy want to come to ND to Freelance hunt & Guides have most of the better places locked up for the tiny minority - I think thats terrible & this is what is going to Hurt small towns - I think they are starting to get it - if they do ??? they will do things to open up more land, instead of the way it is now - eveyone pizzed for the wrong reasons

I believe the Minority has used this to BS many - (including Tourism - Hospitality - small town economics) the more posted lands & hassles for Freelance hunters, there has to be more that will use them (guides) - But how sad to ruin what has been so special, for so long :******:


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Blanchard is short changing his guides.

If he was to state in his paperwork that an "average" guide's tip is $20/day/hunter for those that put forth the "effort". Those guides would get it.

I REALLY like the idea that most of Canada has:

Guides DO NOT CARRY GUNS.


----------



## fireball (Oct 3, 2003)

Coot, I have access to about 7500 acres of land right under your nose and about another 1000 where I live presently, so land access isn't this issue for me, I have stated that 1000's of times.


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

What are you talking about fireball,
When did I question the fact that you had access to land or not. This thing isn't about just YOU, or just ME. It is about the future of ND outdoors. 
I was only conveying the fact that I hope you have some friends to hunt with for deer this weekend to make you feel better because it sure seems like you undies are in a bunch.

Three cheers for speaking before thinking :beer: :beer: :beer:

cootkiller


----------



## fireball (Oct 3, 2003)

In your reply post to my first statement, you said you had some family that provided you with your land access oppurtunities. Then a cpl sentences later, you said "I hope you have some 'family' to hunt with..." I assumed you meant for land access. And yes, I have plenty of family that I hunt, fish and camp with, and you have served me many beers at Kyles resort, as I stay there a cpl times every summer. From now on I will choose Grahams Island.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Coot I agree with you hunting preserves are a farce and an insult to the term hunting. However I am not wrong about the fact that guides sell game animals. I just made this point in the Market hunting thread and I would appreciate it if you would take a look at it and give me your response on the points I made in that thread. You are technically correct guides don't have absolute control over the animals but they do have a major impact on both the number of animals taken and the number of hunters attracted to an area for the purpose of hunting that regions game. A high percentage of guided hunters would not have the confidence, equipment, local knowhow, ability to effectively scout ect. that the guide sells them, and thus wouldn't come to the area at all. The guide isn't actually pulling the trigger but the triggers wouldn't get pulled nearly as much and there wouldn't be near as many triggers in the area if it were not for the actions of the guiding business. Your point that they don't sell game animals is really a matter of semantics. IF they really only sold access they wouldn't provide scouting expertise, equipment, or have to accompany the clients, call birds, show them how and where to set up ect. ect. all that would be needed would be a map of the various lands they have leased for the hunting purpose. So they are actually selling the killing opportunity that most of their clients would not be able to accomplish on their own at least not with the same efficiency. Read the adds guides run in the various hunting magazines and you will see a big emphasis on kill rates, success ratios, some even guarantee kills. I don't know you have strong ties to this industry and I respect your right to your view point and just ask that you consider some of these points I've made and read the other post I've made in the market hunting thread. I wish you could see what the commercialization of hunting has done to the rest of the country I believe it would give you the same concerns I have. The end result is not good for the sportsman or the game animals. Infact I believe the commercialization of hunting is a good example of short term profit at the expense of the hunting tradition as well as the industries that depend on hunting and gun ownership rights, as the the continued decline in hunter numbers occurs the political clout of the hunters in this country ( which is the backbone of the pro gun lobby will decline as well).


----------

