# A nr's perspective on ND waterfowl hunting regulations



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Wed. Nov. 24, 2004 issue of the Steele Ozone-Press:



> The following letter was written to Dean Hildebrand, Head of the North Dakota Fish and Wildlife Department.
> Dear Sir,
> I must report that our hunting trip to North Dakota this year was one of the best ever. The water situation was less than in years past, but still plenty of spots to hunt given that there were considerably less out of state hunters this year.
> Our hunting group (all out of state hunters plus ND landowners) would like to share some of our feelings about the current rules for Out of State Hunters. Please share our thoughts with your constituents.
> ...


I don't think I will comment until I think about it for a while - except to say that I totally disagree with the opinions posed. What are your thoughts?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

ditto


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Maybe it is just me but when I hunt South Dakota, Minnesota, or Montana the last thing I think about is trying to change their system or rules to make it better for me. Hunting is a privilege, be it in North Dakota or any other state. I am just thankful that I am able to experience the adventures that a new and different landscape can provide.

North Dakota is my home, I feel it is my responsibility as a citizen to speak out and try to make suggestions on outdoor issues in an attempt to make a very good system of management better for residents and our visitors.

My upbringing prohibits me from going into someone elses home and telling them or suggesting to them what they can do to make my stay with them better for me.

just my two cents
Bob


----------



## Dakota Kid (Aug 17, 2002)

His only point I strongly agree with is the zones. They are a waste of enforcement dollars and a huge cause of heartburn for all parties mentioned in his letter. Obviously there are varying opinions on this.

Otherwise, as a NR I am embarassed by his letter. Especially the part about "bad weather" not counting against your 14 days? What?

This past month my Yukon broke down in the middle of nowhere. It cost me several days of hunting. I sure would like to have those days back but thats part of the trip (unfortunetly).

f


----------



## wiscan22 (Apr 4, 2004)

I wouldn't get to excited about this letter. Even though it may seem like the writer is impeding on "your home" ultimately he's like every other US citizen.... he has the right to state his opinion. The sullen truth about opinions are they're just like an a$$hole.... everyone has one! :lol:

As far as the content of the letter.... I agree, it's a bit embarrassing. Sure ND has a few flaws in it's regulations but so do the rest of the states. What these suggestions amount to is giving the individual the right to taylor the hunt to fit their specific times and needs. Wouldn't that be nice if we all could do that? :lame:


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

ditto.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I sympathsize with him...zones are a pain.BUT I think if we eliminate zones....then we lower cap numbers.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

I see his points but some of his positions are the reasons why we have the regulations in the first place. Sounds like a really good deal for him!


----------



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

Here are my initial observations. The author first makes the following statement about the time limit and zones being tough to coordinate their trip....



> Hunters coming from distances want to hunt together. It is difficult to coordinate arrival dates or hunting dates to directly match each other. Therefore, the current system does take away from the pleasure of spending time with hunting pals, relatives and local landowners that join us in hunting on their lands


Then he says that he wants a longer period because of the bad weather that is sometimes encountered....



> Please consider lengthening the period that Out of State Hunters are allowed to hunt waterfowl. Our argument is that we are under pressure to hunt good and bad weather days because of the short time limit of our license. This means that people are tired and sometimes stressed by severe weather swings.


Isn't this a point against himself??? I mean, if it is sooooo hard to coordinate times to get everyone together, then how could he possibly reschedule at a minutes notice because of inclimate weather??

I don't like the letter, but I do see some flaws in our system. Ken, I would be leaning towards your point of eliminating the zones and lowering the cap.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

His time limit complaint and not being able to coordinate with friends is bogus.

We have a 2 week deer season.If you want to hunt you make sure you are able to during that 2 week period or you stay home.I can't see that as a problem...his friends can surely go hunting during the same time he can...just like deer season here or in Minn for that matter where their season is 1 week.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

The one that really cracks me up is the one about being able to add days to the license that they couldn't hunt due to bad weather! LOL, LOL, LOL.

Comes down to: If you want to hunt the season, move hear and become a resident. If not......well.


----------



## eskay (Aug 21, 2004)

As an NR, I have to agree with you Residents on this. I would much rather see a cap on NR licenses and be able to hunt the whole state for the entire season than the present system. Make it a tight cap 5000-7500 NR licenses. I was out in the Kulm area the end of Oct-beginning of Nov this year, and had a great time. But I would've liked to have been able to travel into another zone at another time to follow the birds, and I'm fortunate in the ability to go when I want to.

So what if you only have a chance to enjoy ND hunting every 2 or 3 years? I'd much rather have this option available than to deal with the competition for hunting spots, the wariness of the birds from extreme hunting pressure, and the large influx of NR hunters that occurs during the teacher conventions in neighboring states. Much of the enjoyment of taking a hunting trip is in the planning and anticipation of the trip itself.

And if ND does decide to go with a cap, make sure that the g/o segment doesn't get another so many licenses that they can buy above the cap for NR freelancers. This is what is happening in Canada and out west. If you want a moose tag in Ontario, you have to get in a lottery, but if you go through a guide outfit, they have tags available that they buy from the government to sell to their clientele exclusively. This would REALLY create a land leasing problem in ND.

Just my thoughts on this on-going debate.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

If I plan a golfing trip to Florida in the winter and it rains everyday I would not expect extra days because of bad weather. Acts of God are not our responsibility. If you want to come back, ante up for another liscense. If I go to a Vikings game and they play like sh.. I certainly wouldn't ask for an extension. I'm sorry but we cannot accept responsibility for everyone elses inconvenience. It is what it is and take it or leave it. We offer world class hunting at a reasonable price and need not make apologies to anyone. With the increase in hunting pressure by residents and the access problems for resident hunters the non resident hunter has to expect more restrictions and not less restrictions. We have to take care of North Dakota first and I certainly hope that the non resident guest would be in agreement with this or else you are in it for your own selfish reasons.


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

There is a very easy fix to this problem:

*BECOME A RESIDENT!*


----------



## jamartinmg2 (Oct 7, 2004)

The weather? The crappier the better I say for duck and goose hunting! Get yourself a good rainsuit, or snowsuit, and quit complaining about the weather. That is just part of the game. I'm a non-res and I don't demand extra hunting days when there are 40 mph winds when I go out pheasant hunting. I consider it part of the sport, and the challenge, to get birds under any conditions dished out. Deal with it.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

This sound s like someone who is probably retired and has all the time in the world to hunt. Most NRs don't have that privilege. They have a week or 10 day time slot (vacation) they can hunt in. Extra days will do them no good because they have to get back to the rat race and thus they are stuck to hunt in good weather or bad. I see very few benifiting from such a plan.

I would also suggest that the writer is probably in one of the adjacent states. A longer season would probably result in the same number of days hunted with the change being the focus of those hunts being on weekends when the pressure tends to be the highest. Isn't that part of the reasoning for the regulation, to spread the pressure?

Same with zones. The state is attempting to give everyone opportunity without crowding. The biggest disadvantage to zones is timing. Without zones you can go to the birds wherever they are. With zones you have to hope the birds will be there during your scheduled time.

I have stated before I don't have a problem with NR hunters. But I do believe in the concept of spreading out that pressure and think everyone benefits from it. The writer is a bit contradictory. He states it was his best year ever, dispite a decline in water and the decline in NR hunters. Would his opinion been the same if the number of NR hunters was up and limited his number of hunting spots. It was his best year ever IN SPITE of the regulations. That alone should say something about the regulations. Sounds like they are working to his benifit.


----------



## PFPRES (Sep 24, 2004)

Keep the zones and lower the the number of NR's that hunt each year. The key is to keep the g/o from buying them up. We spent eight days in your state in Oct and never ran into another hunter the whole week. I'm not saying there is not a lot of pressure in other parts of the state. The state needs to find a way so both residents and nr's can both enjoy the great hunting that ND has. :beer:


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

To remove the zones it is going to require the Leg to do so. The zone issue was handed to the G&F back in the 70's. State law requires them but does not limit the number but does impose a minimum. This is another misconception that NR hunters have about the zones.

When I was a NR we had the choice of two zones with the third being open to all hunters. No birds in it so it was a mute point. All this is just rehashed over and over. What is needed is involvement and support come Jan through Mar in Bismarck.

On another site the Outdoor Life article on NR vs Res was really dissected and for the most part the majority of hunters think protecting the resource and quality of hunting for all hunters.

Most also complain of economic exploitation as the reason they now have to travel to states like ND or Canada to obtain quality hunting. G/O, club leasing,to much pressure on the resource all rate at the top.

If escapes me how these people think that their little slice of ND will remain unaffected. I saw the whole process start when I was out of state. I never thought it would come into my back yard where I hunted in ND. One thing I never thought about is guys like Tony Dean, and the INTERNET spreading the word as quickly as it did.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Joe missed one:

6. Please check on the teacher convention dates and other vacation opportunities of the 49 other states and factor them into setting your season dates.

Too much un-addressed in ND for too long - NR hunting on a nearly R equivalent basis has become an expectancy for some.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

It is just a letter with opposing views of many on this site. It does not have to be perfectly crafted - word by word - paragraph by paragraph. Just his wish list.

I would suspect Steele newspaper will support pro-NR issues.

There have been about 24K - 25K NR waterfowl licenses sold in ND in 2004.

Balance has been achieved through fee increases. Zones should go.

Anyone that wants to lower caps can help voluntarily by staying away every other year.

I return home to hunt with friends and family. We are successful and adjust to weather, habitat, etc... It is more than just duck hunting to me and I do not plan on missing a single year in ND.

Will be an interesting '05.


----------



## wiscan22 (Apr 4, 2004)

Quite frankly I think the zones are a good thing for ND. It gives a tool to the state to control hunter numbers in "high pressure" areas. Hell when I first started hunting ND there were eight zones and had limited licenses based on the zone. The zones then were plenty big enough to hunt in and rarely did we ever see the need (missed hunting opportunity) to hunt outside of our zone. Personally I think if the zones are eliminated for NR's the consentration of hunters in the more popular hunting areas will go up compounding the problems that the residents are experiencing. I also believe that the majority of the G/O land lease issue affects the popular hunting areas and if the zones were eliminated, would increase the amount of land leased.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

The purpose of zones is to spread out hunting pressure for the benefit of both the hunter and the game. Residents, being familiar with the state are likely to hunt a variety of locations probably moving around a bit more than NRs. NRs are going to depend on highly publicised areas or areas where they have had the most success. The reports from most NRs is that the hunting here is great and access is not a big problem. Many fail to see our regulations as a factor in that. They don't get much competition from ND hunters for access because we are still learning "how to ask". But take away the NR limits, zones and time limitations and watch the NRs start getting in each others way. It won't be but a few years that the locals won't be the only ones complaining about access and excessive pressure.


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

Ok, as a non resident who loves ND, I have to agree with the residents who weighed in on this one. Honestly I don't understand why some out of state hunters feel that they should be catered to. If you want to hunt in ND, you go by whatever rules and laws that the state comes up with. PERIOD. Quit whining and *****ing about it. If you dont like that they have zones, or dont like that you only get a certain number of days and it might rain and you may have to hunt in the rain that day, too bad. Stay home then. Solves all your problems. I really dont understand this one. I guess it is just because ND has became so popular the last five years or so. You dont see people going to other states and thinking they should change the rules to fit their needs. Just doesnt make since. :roll: :roll:


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Been hunting ND 30 years straight about 60/40 NR: resident ratio.

The views on this site are just one side of the story.

*Waterfowl conservation: Just because some of us do not believe in caps does not mean we are greedy or do not care for the resource.*

Said it before: 4 duck limit would be fine. Those that need satisfaction of limits reach it sooner. Some NRs may not return because they can not get the kill level they need to justify the trip - good - don't come to ND then. Afternoon pressure could possibly decrease since many have filled out for the day.

*ND could certainly have a more restrictive limit than the Feds allow. *

Biologists say season length not bag limits control total kill, well pressure and respect for the resource may dictate something lower.

If ND or the central flyway is killing to many ducks with the current regs, than the central flyway should move to season length similar to Mississippi flyway => 60 days in liberal year.

It is the feds bowing to political interests that keep the liberal season and 6 duck limit. Correct me if I am wrong, but a few years ago the Adaptive Harvest model was leaning to a more restrictive season --> all of a sudden the model is "modified" or "corrected" and we are right back on the liberal season.

In soutern states it is season length that dictates the G/O money flow.

Again - just because one does not support some type of cap does not mean they do not care for the resource.

******************

Since I was a resident through the 70s and 80s - when were there ever eight zones in ND?

It is interesting to see that the old zones (designed with goose hunting in mind) are gone and the new zones developed around duck areas.

??? Where these new zones simply developed to quiet the Sportsman's alliance and serve the interest of those living in Bismarck?

If hunting pressure really is the key to developing zones - why was the DL area eliminated from zone control?

Politics or science???


----------



## cooter (Jul 16, 2003)

I'm a Nr and saw this years ago in Kansas when we wouldn't let NR's shoot our Monster Bucks. Now every D**n deer show on tv is in Kansas. Point is it's all about money to the state agencies. If they can charge $100 for a nonresident license and sell 30,000 of them why would they put a cap on it and keep them from making an extra $2,000,000.

I think the guy was just giving his opinion he wasn't being nasty. If I had my way they'd shut down hunting in the state for a week in oct., except for me of course.


----------



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

cooter said:


> If I had my way they'd shut down hunting in the state for a week in oct., except for me of course.


Ya, I like that one too :beer: Only I would add that for that week no land is posted!


----------

