# Access loss accelerates... food for thought



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Several years ago at my previous employer, I had a bourbon-induced epiphany of sorts. Similar to Tom Cruise's character in Jerry McGuire, I sat down and typed out a document that my co-workers later called my "manifesto". The purpose of the document was to re-energize my workgroup and spur meaningful discussion on where my group had been, where we were, and where we needed to go.

The legislative session is only a little over 2 months away, and we need to create a focused strategy if we want to postively affect change in ND hunting. Therefore, in an effort to re-focus and re-energize our efforts, I would like to put forth some food for thought. Some of these ideas run contrary to many of those posted on this board, so do not tar and feather me. However, maybe they will anger some enough to start focusing our efforts.

Here are some of BigDaddy's ideas on how to reverse the trends of decreasing access for freelance hunters in ND:

*1. Reverse the current posting law in ND.*
Many freelancers love the idea of scouting land and being able to hunt any land that isn't posted. However, this is also a major reason why NR hunters flock to ND each fall. It is also a reason why many hunter venture far from home (100 miles or more) to hunt different areas of the state.

Reversing the current posting law in ND should dramatically favor resident freelancers. Any resident hunter (let's define "resident" as a hunter that is local, say within 50-100 miles) willing to scout and put in time to build relationships with landowners should be able to gain access to private property easier than those hunters that live further away. I think that reversing the posting law would dramatically reduce hunting pressure in those prime areas of ND, improving the quality of the hunt for those that are willing to put in the time in the off-season to knock on doors. Not only would fewer NRs make the trek to ND each fall, fewer hunters from Fargo would make the trek to some areas of the state.

Reversing the posting law should favor local freelancers over NR freelancers or those resident freelancers that drive a long distance.

*2. Create disincentives for commercial hunting operations.*
If we reverse the posting law, people who live too far away to build relationships with landowners may feel inclined to work through a guide or outfitter to gain access to quality hunting land. Therefore, unless we provide some disincentives to commercial hunting operations, it may exasperate the problem of commercialization. The goal would not be to prohibit commercial hunting operations, but to create disincentives so that any Tom, Dick, or Harry doesn't suddenly decide to become a guide and make a few bucks. We also want to ensure that the public is adequately compensated for use of a public resource.

Possible disincentives include:

A. Limit the number of acres that any license guide could lease

B. Make the cost of a guide/outfitter license cost prohibitive

C. Create a system that will track and properly tax money spent for commercial hunting. After all, commercial hunting operations are profiting off of a public resource (wildlife), and the public should be compensated for use of its resource.

This not only includes the money spent by a client to a guide or outfitter, it also includes the cash spent to a landowner to gain hunting access. The landowner is deriving income from use of a public resource, but there is currently no paper trail to force him or her to claim that as income. We need to brainstorm about some sort of reporting mechanism that will lead back to the landowner so that the public receives its fair share of income tax.

D. Zone commerical hunting operations appropriately. At some point, land used for commercial hunting (be it leasing of land to a guide or outfitter, or sufficient income from cash transactions with landowners) is being used for a commercial enterprise. When does land used for commercial hunting cease being agricultural land and become commercial property? Do we need to create a new category of rural lands so that commercial hunting land is zoned and taxed as such? I can't open a commercial business on my land unless it is zoned commercial. The same should hold true for commercial hunting operations.

*Net result*
The net result from both components is a return to favoring the local, freelance hunter. Reversing the current posting law will create an advantage to local freelance hunters or those willing to put the time in scouting an building relationships. It will make it less attractive for folks to travel long distances to new areas.

Creating disincentives to commercial hunting operations will make it less attractive for landowners to lease their property to commercial hunting operations and make it more difficult for a commercial operation to lease up huge tracts of land. It will also make it less attractive for a landowner to charge access fees if he or she knows that they will need to claim it as income. This will also create a means whereby the public is compensated for use of a public resource.

I know that many feel passionate that we need to keep the current posting law the way it is. However, the current posting law is exactly why people flock to ND each fall. Personally, I ask for permission anyway so it won't really affect me at all. In those instances where I cannot find a landowner, I am willing to give up my right to hunt unposted land without permission if the overall gain is increased access for freelance hunters.

Okay, that's my two cents. Anybody want to disagree or propose another plan to increase access for freelancers?


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

I don't think a resident of ND should be discouraged from traveling across the state to hunt...now its not enough that your a resident but you have to be "local" as well?

Many landowners who don't post do so also because they don't want to be bothered with people asking permission. If its not posted I don't feel any need to ask in most circumstances.

The farmer is not the bad guy in this situation and interferring with what they decide to do with their land (as far as leasing) is going to cause trouble.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

drjongy:

I agree that we should not be telling farmers what they can and can't do with their land. What I do believe is that the public should be compensated for the economic profit that comes from use of a public resource. Farmers should be able to charge for access if they want to, but the income should be claimed on their income tax return.

My "local" statements simply illustrate one of the main reasons why people come to ND each fall to hunt. This applies to NRs that drive from other states or to resident hunters that might drive clear across the state to hunt ducks in Devils Lake, McClusky, or Medina, or roosters in the southwest. Along with the abundance of game, our posting law is one of the main reasons why we have such high hunter pressure in some areas of the state. If it is a contributing factor to loss of access, we need to be upfront and discuss it frankly.

Why don't I hop in my vehicle and drive to Arkansas to hunt ducks? There are lots of ducks there, but I wouldn't have the slightest clue where to start looking for land to hunt. People looking to hunt in ND don't have that problem. They can pick up a nice PLOTS guide anywhere, and they know that they can legally hunt any private land that isn't posted.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I'm not sure changing the trespass law law is going to deter the NRs. Every one I have encountered has either asked permission to hunt unposted land or has asked me if I know where the landowner lives so they can ask. Most are used to asking permission (unlike resident hunters) because they have had trespass laws in their home states for an eternity.

Keep in mind many residents work at least 5 and sometimes 6 or 7 days a week and often have very little vacation time. Not everyone has time to drive across the state in the off season to knock on doors. It is also pretty hard to scout for some game, especially migratory birds in July or August. You could secure permission to hunt on 2 or 3 sections and not have a bird on it during season.

How about setting up operation zones for G/Os and limiting the # that can operate in each zone? This could prevent 2 or 3 outfitters from locking up large tracts in one area and spread out the pressure. Maybe the NR zones could be further split to 5 or 6 subzones for G/Os to operate within.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

I have posted this in the past and I still believe it will work.

1. Outfitter/Guide operations only on land owned and managed by a permanent ND resident.

2. No land leasing of any kind for hunting. day leasing included.

3. Licenses required for all O/G operations, including soft outfitting.

4. Forms will be required to be filled out for every client, name, address phone, and fee paid. Mandatory verification by NDGF, Could be done online with NDGF as an outfitted and guided hunt permit.

5. Mandatory that all O/G businesses have at least one free youth day per each game season as compensation for the selling of state owned wildlife.

6. Habitat implementation/ restoration will be required for all O/G businesses. no exceptions.

7. Permanent loss of O/G license for any violation of state, federal or local laws, to include any NDGF violations, they represent our state to our guests they should be held accountable.

8. Create a recreational ag zoning ordinance. Any ag land that is sold for non-farming purposes should not be classified and taxed as agricultural.

As far as NR's go, I am going to say it again, All (22 total for all seasons) of the NR hunters that I hunt with agree to a man that something has to be done to cap the numbers! some of us have been hunting together for 20+ years we have witnessed the changes to date. It (hunting and access) will never return to days past but we may be able to keep it from getting worse!

Leave the tresspass law alone! if you want to hunt show a little respect for the landowner and ask permission. If you get turned down respect their decision and try again!

My two cents!

Bob


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

BigD,

I've killed more than a few beers and brain cells working through that very scenario over the last couple years. It's a pretty interesting approach, with multiple pluses and minuses.

At the end of the day, however, it's never netted in the black for me, for a lot of different reasons. As you've suggested, it would loose some pressure, no doubt. It would definitely also, as you've suggested, create the o/g's single largest expansion opportunity, as a bunch of folks scraping by with their own access efforts would finally toss in the towel and pay someone else to do it for them.

Which may be okay, sort of, if you got the o/g limitations in place you've described. Remember the o/g's and their recent allies would jump on the tresspassing thing, but theyd fight you tooth and nail on the second key element. It would be really hard to package legislation this comprehensive in one bill and ensure the whole thing came through in a form we could even begin to live with, and you certainly wouldn't want the one without the other. And all laws can be amended, except the tresspass deal, once that tips the other way, it's never coming back.

And, unless you almost operate only in one area, can you imagine what you'd have into plat maps? FB dekes would look like a minor investment. And the plat maps turn over every 3-5 years.

Also, we'll probably never see the level of unposted land we did in the early 90's, but we will see less posted than today, at least in certain areas. The next winter of 96/97 will bring down some of the posters in mixed duck/pheasant country, and more unposted waterfowl opportunites will exist. Again, probably never like before, but the SE/SC pheasant explosion has contributed to the posting.

Tony Dean and I don't agree on many things on the commercialization issues, but I think it's a fair attribution to say one of his biggest regrets was acceeding to SDFB on the SD tresspass change over. Fast forward many years : now SD sportspersons are fighting SDFB in court over the right to hunt road ditches - kinda gives you the heebie-jeebies doesn't it?


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

Dan Bueide said:


> And, unless you almost operate only in one area, can you imagine what you'd have into plat maps? FB dekes would look like a minor investment. And the plat maps turn over every 3-5 years.


Plat maps are $35-$45 and an incredibly inexpensive investment when compared to a dozen bigfoots or even a tank of gas spent looking for a landowner. They may publish new ones every 3-5 years but I just use a pencil and an eraser to record changes. They will give you the location and phone number of the residents of the county in addition to showing who has ownership of the parcels of land. Most of the residents left have probably had the same address and phone number for a long time. I think of my Father-in-law and realize that he has had the same address and phone number for 52 years. A plat map and a little homework will open up a tremendous amount of opportunities for those willing to work them. They a

I presently have 18 of them and some of them are 20 years old but very functional. They have saved me more in gas than I paid for them.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

redlabel said:


> They may publish new ones every 3-5 years but I just use a pencil and an eraser to record changes.....I presently have 18 of them.....


Holy buckets, how would you ever know? Granted, half a township doesn't turn over every 4 years, but how could you ever keep track of all of the transfers in 18 counties. I could see one or part of one if you tended to spend a large percentage of your time in that one spot......


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

*Redlabel Wrote:*


> They may publish new ones every 3-5 years but I just use a pencil and an eraser to record changes.....I presently have 18 of them.....


We do the same thing with our PLOTS maps. We write in good areas, landowners that gave us permission, landowners that seem like they will NEVER give us permission, and so on. It is a helpful tool, but a lot of work because we decided to transfer some of it to this years map.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Remmi 
use clear plastic overlays with fine point permanent markers, good to go from year to year.

Bob


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

I would guess that finding private lands to hunt is different for different hunters. I hunt ducks over water, although I know many waterfowlers that hunt on land.

Since I am looking for quality potholes, I concentrate my scouting on 1 or 2 areas within a reasonable drive of my home (Bismarck). If I can get access to some quality potholes by building relationships with landowners, I might hunt the same sloughs year after year.

This isn't the case for field hunters. They like to be mobile, and they may find a field holding lots of birds on a Friday that they want to hunt Saturday morning. They may never hunt the same field more than once in a given season, and they may put on hundreds of miles scouting.

I own a couple of plat maps, but I honestly don't use them very much. Instead, I knock on lots of doors and talk with lots of landowners. I have found that many farmers respond better by meeting someboy face to face instead of receiving a phone call. This isn't easy and it takes lots of time. However, it works.

I have never found a landowner that felt bothered that I would ask permission to hunt a slough that wasn't posted. Instead, most are flattered that anybody would bother to ask. For example, I found a landowner outside of McClusky that only started posting their land last year. They told me that for the 10+ years that the land was unposted, lots of people had hunted it. However, I was the only resident hunter that had ever had the courtesy to ask for permission. Besides me, the only other people that asked were non-residents. Now that the land is posted and people have to ask, who is going to get access? The resident hunter that has hunted there for years as a stranger and never introduced himself, or the guy from WI that has stopped by and visited with the landowner for the last few years?


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

Dan Bueide said:


> redlabel said:
> 
> 
> > They may publish new ones every 3-5 years but I just use a pencil and an eraser to record changes.....I presently have 18 of them.....
> ...


Half a township usually won't turn over in 20 years and in most cases the change was by one of the current landowners getting bigger or their children starting up.

I'm not interested in the transfers in 18 counties, only those in the areas I like to or have permission to hunt. You assume to much and you know what that does.

It is a fact that I own 18 of them. In any given year I may use 3 or 4 as I already know where I can and want to hunt.

It is a fact that I have obtained permission to hunt on land that was posted without the landowners name or phone number by using the plat map.

It is a fact that I have been able to find peoples farm or ranch headquarters and saved many miles of driving by using the plat map.

Landowners do appreciate being asked in person about hunting opportunities. The plat map saves time in that if you are looking for John Does farm or ranch you can find it. It is better than driving into a yard and asking the people there, "can you tell me who owns that slough 1/2 mile south and 1/2 mile west of here. I have had many landowners point out other areas on the map to hunt and correct some of the information on the map when we are looking at it. All in all it is a very useful tool for me and would or could be for others. Most people probably use the cost as an excuse when the real reason is they don't know how to ask for permission any way.

I will have to try that idea of clear plastic overlays, I have been using tracing paper and it tears easy and yellows over time. Great idea.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

rl, I own a couple of plat maps too, for some of the areas I get to every year. For areas where your hunting efforts are concentrated, they can be very helpful. But, land does change hands (especially better hunting lands in certain areas) and they get stale. And, with the number of non-producer landowners today, often you need to make two connections. First to the landowner and then to the renter (increasingly three, first to the landowner, then to the ag renter and finally to the hunting renter). Easier for upland or I suppose hoofs, where planning is more long term. Tougher for a waterfowl gig you find minutes b/4 sunset and you're trying to secure permission for the next day.

If you like to roam, they still have significant practical limitations. If a budget is no object, they certainly are a nice arrow in the quiver. Even if they were free, I'd still prefer the current trespass format. Posted signs usually get you right to the decision maker.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

RL

Trust me it works great and you don't have to worry about getting them wet.

I also take an exacto knife and cut my plots book apart, I put the pages in slip covers and then into a 3 ring binder. easier to read one page going down some of the "goat paths" out there. sorry everyone this is off topic 

Bob


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

Bob you may want to think about downloading the PDF's from the website of each map sheet and then putting them in the sleeves. May be easier than cutting off a finger.

Plat books are the single best tool anyone can have to navigate the ownership landscape out there.

Tom


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Ya I tried that Tom, I am to cheap to by a decent printer. Maybe this lottery ticket is the one!

Bob
:beer:


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

Bob: I really like the idea of putting them in slip covers. It would make it easy to rearrange them in my logical order as opposed to alphabetical by township name. It's too hard to remember all those townships.

Tom: I'll show my ignorance. What is a PDF?

I will stick by the claim that they are incredibly affordable if used right. If budget was no object I'd have several dozen bigfoots and a trailer to haul them in but I'll stick with my silouettes that fit in the back of the expedition.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

Bob Kellam said:


> Remmi
> use clear plastic overlays with fine point permanent markers, good to go from year to year.
> 
> Bob


Thanks for the tip. Looks like I'l be downloading PDF's tonight!!


----------



## goosehtr4life (Dec 16, 2002)

:eyeroll: Big Daddy...you in my humble opinion are WAY OFF base...

Are you a member of the FB in disguise??? Very few farmers want this law so why would we try to impliment something they don't want????

It is a tradition we have always had and hopefully will continue to have..

Having a plat book to look up who owns the land and trying to get access wastes both the hunters and Farmers time...

Currently farmers who don't post do it so they won't be bothered by hunters calls...

Also could you imagine the confusion as someone ends up hunting land that they thought they had permission on but did not because they read the map wrong???


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Nope, I'm not a member of FB. I am simply a freelance hunter that has noticed the increased hunting pressure in those prime areas of ND like everybody else. When I ask NRs and those that have driven to those areas from considerable distances, one of the common reasons why they do so is our current posting law.

I would rather address the cause of a problem rather than a symptom. The symptom that I describe is increased pressure in certain areas of the state and a lower-quality hunting experience. What are the causes of this symptom:

1. Fewer areas for freelancers to access because of widespread leasing of property by commercial hunting operations, and

2. More hunters flocking to those areas from large distances because they know that they can hunt unposted land without asking for permission.

There are lots of areas in the country that have decent habitat and widespead commercialization. What sets North Dakota apart from other areas of the country is our posting law.

Again, I don't care if that person hunting downwind from me is from Minot, Minneapolis, or Milwaukee. I am simply looking at the problem objectively to identify the core causes. Eliminate one of the prime incentives to traveling to ND and pressure will decrease.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> Eliminate one of the prime incentives to traveling to ND and pressure will decrease.


No it won't all of us have to ask permission everywhere we hunt at home its just the way it is everywhere but ND. 
The pressure will continue to increase because ND arguably has the best upland and waterfowl hunting in the country. The commercial guys will continue to lease the prime spots in progressively larger chunks for the "moneys no object" people that hunt and the rest of you will get the crumbs or nothing at all. Stop or reverse the commercialization, put some reasonable caps on NR liscenses and there is one heck of a lot of ND to play in and everybody can have fun and some elbow room. The way its headed now a huge amount of land will be the exclusive playground for the elites from weathier areas of the nation and none of you North Dakotans will be hunting unless you own the land or can outbid the Rich NRs.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Question 1: Say we put restrictions on commercial hunting operations (which we must do). As commercialization gets worse throughout the rest of the country, isn't North Dakota going to become even more attractive to freelance hunters? Yes, it will. Therefore, we also need to put some curbs on the NR influx.

Question 2: What is the status of the MN lawsuit against ND? If the lawsuit is thrown out, we can curb the NR influx by simply putting stricter limits in place. If the lawsuit is upheld, we will not be able to put a discriminatory limits on NR hunters. If that's the case, we need to look at other strategies.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

BigD

Go to the 2005 legislative thread, the Information you are seeking is there PM me if you have questions, The other strategies are proposed.

Bob


----------

