# Bismarck Trib today!



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

:eyeroll: Nonresident hunters are, first, tourists
By JOHN ANDRIST, Crosby Journal 
Do you ever feel like you need to pinch yourself because you don't really believe what's happening? That's the way I feel about the latest chapter in the North Dakota-Minnesota hunting wars.

There is nothing that drives more discussion around North Dakota than economic development. Not just in rural communities. Go to the larger cities and you pay a city sales tax to support the effort to attract tourists. Everybody loves the economic engine of tourism.

With the presidential election already heating up, the experts tell us it won't be Iraq or the deficit that drives our decision. It will be the state of the economy. This is the basis on which Americans vote.

In North Dakota, we elected as governor John Hoeven, who ran almost exclusively on the theme of job creation and economic development. One of his best moves was encouraging creation of a Department of Commerce with a unified focus on tourism and economic development.

But wait.

Minnesota is now suing North Dakota -- and for what reason? It wants to be able to send more of its people into our state for recreational purposes -- hunting. And we are ready to go to court because we want to keep more of them out.

Pinch me. This can't be happening.

The Minnesota suit would stop North Dakota from enforcing a law that prevents nonresidents from hunting during the first week of the North Dakota season and establishes hunting zones where nonresidents have limited access. North Dakota doesn't own migratory birds, Minnesota says. They are a resource that should be available equally to every sportsman.

But we are loading our guns to fight back. We will spend good tax dollars to defend our law and keep those Minnesota guys from spending their money in our state.

This is happening at the same time our tourism department is trying to bring more people here, focusing the biggest part of its dollars and effort at markets in -- you guessed it -- Minnesota. And at the same time our universities have a game plan to more vigorously recruit out-of-state students -- particularly Minnesotans -- as a solution to the declining number of graduates of our own high schools.

Pinch me again. I'm still dreaming.

Our governor is pretty indignant. States must have the right to manage their own wildlife resources, he says. Never mind that this fight has absolutely nothing to do with managing resources. It's simply about who can hunt, where they can hunt, when they can hunt and how much we can charge them for the right to hunt.

Would there be any sense in a tourism promotion urging people to come visit North Dakota, then zoning them out of Medora so we could have more space for ourselves in this prime spot? Only if they are hunters, I guess.

The only thing dumber than this lawsuit is the legislation proposed by our state administration and passed by the Legislature to discourage hunter tourists. Wetlands and wildlife habitat is one of the best things going for us. We don't have any Disneylands. Our goals should be developing, expanding and marketing this resource -- not fencing it.

A Minnesota congressman has said it's time for both states to get rid of all nonresident restrictions. If our governor doesn't grab that theme and run with it, pandering instead to eastern North Dakota's noisy hunting lobby, this fight will just set one more headstone in each of the small-town graveyards of western North Dakota.

(The writer, publisher emeritus of the Journal, also is a Republican state senator. -- Editor)


----------



## 870 XPRS (Mar 12, 2003)

(Sarcasm) Boy this guy hit it right on the head.(End Sarcasm)

[email protected]


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Is anyone writing letters to the editors of the major newspapers in this state representing a different view or is it just the fact that the papers won't publish those letters.

All I ever see is the "let them all in, we don't care about the effects on the wildlife we want more money baby.

It is pathetic to me that our own representatives are playing the big city little city games.

I think its time I start writing letters every week.


----------



## BandHunter (Dec 17, 2003)

What a jackass.... :eyeroll: There are plenty of out of staters that get to come in every year... They raise the number almost every year.. I dont even think that they sold all the liscenses last year ,so that must mean that everyone who wanted to come hunt got the opertunity... The first weekend is the opertunity for instaters to hunt and enjoy the spoils of working for less, and paying more for goods... The birds we hunt then are local birds that grew up in North Dakota supported by are local farmers and organizations... I dont think it is out of line to let instaters have first crack at them.. Were not saying we want to cut out tourism were saying that we would like one week a year that is our own.. There is still plenty of time for out of staters to come in and tour our state and hunt ducks..That is all for now.. A letter needs to be written..
Bandhunter


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

> I dont even think that they sold all the liscenses last year ,so that must mean that everyone who wanted to come hunt got the opertunity


There were no caps on NR's last year so anyone who wanted to hunt in ND had the chance!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

The money trail is unstoppable!


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Managing who can hunt, where they can hunt, what they can hunt and how much we charge them to hunt IS ALL ABOUT MANAGING THE RESOURCES!!!!! :eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll:


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

You guessed it, this Rep. from Crosby recieved an F on the scoring sheet.

Pay attention to the people in your districts and let them know where you stand, Vote them out!!!! :******:


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Odd that Mr Andrist neglected to mention the effect of the *Farm Bureau Trespass Lawsuit* in his letter. Slipped his analytical mind? The suit that would shut out a great number of tourist hunters or force them into the prostitution of fee hunting? Probably didn't want to mention his allies in that letter. Not the right time. Look up his grade on the scorecard and he issssssssss, yep *F*, 132 cd out of 141. And people wonder why there is a need for the ETREE.


----------



## walker870 (Aug 25, 2003)

I can't beleive what I just read from one of your State Reps. I think their are alot of people who don't understand the problem you guys are talking about. I am a NR but you have a hard fight with people like that only thinking of the money the towns receive from NR's. ND people should have the first week to yourself to hunt. I have no problem with any of that. But I see a bigger problem with your G/O leasing land. PerryT and some of you find folks have made a list of the land being leased by G/O. It is a total shame that these people have removed so much prime land from the state to make money. I have never use a guide in ND, no need to do that if you call yourself a Hunter. You do your home work and you will find the birds. Some day are better than others. As I told Dan B once that doing the right thing may cost me from being able to hunt in ND for a year or two. Thats the wait life goes. You move on a don't worry about things you can't control. Your Guides are doing alot of damage to the normal public. You need to have alot of money to stop this from consuming the remaining prime hunting areas in your state. They will take more prime land for their own profit. I am totally against the lawsuit which some big money people in Minnesota filed against your state. Just a NR view.


----------



## BandHunter (Dec 17, 2003)

Thanks walker870 that means a lot..Your the man..It takes balls to say that...And you my friend have some beach balls .. It is guys like you who should take the fight up between your own boarders and try and restore Minnesota to what it once was...Which was no North Dakota, but it was a long cry from what it is now.. I like to hear what you have to say...If you ever need a spot to hunt you look me up in the Jamestown area i will put you on them..Good actions ,will seek even better rewards... Thanks for your input I appreciate it..
Bandhunter


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

Where do I find how my Senator scored? or any of them for that matter.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Dick Monson,

Fired back at Andrist in the Tribune. Got a call they want to print my letter so I suspect it will be in the thursday or Friday edition. It will be interesting to see what the response is to my commentary. Mainly I address his comments about wetlands.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

ADOKKEN
Find out how you area legislators did by going to the legislative scorecard on the home page on the left side of the screen mid page.

Well said 870 hats off to ya!!!! I gave perry enough info on the G/O's yesterday to swim in for awhile and I am still doing research, if they are out there I will find them!! Computer Hunting! The map is going to be a great tool.

Indy I hope they publish for you they have NEVER printed one of my letters in the Bis. Trib. did you send it to the forum also?

Have a Great day Guys!


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

So then, what about this article bothers you guys?

Honestly?

is it that nonresidents will have the right to hunt "your" birds?

is it that nonresidents will have the rights that are similar to yours?

is it that you feel nonresidents shouldnt have these rights?

what is it about nonresidents hunting rights that bothers you?

I am a bit in the baffled zone about all this hubbub about "ours, theirs and mine" when it comes to game (birds, deer and fish)

Without ripping my head off, someone explain to me why the bitterness towards non res?


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

WW
I will give you my opinion and please remember it is only mine!

North Dakota has not always had great hunting, it has cycles as with all of nature, dry years the local ducks and geese are not here in numbers and the migrating flocks tend to stop at big water only, when you concentrate hunters in central area the birds react to pressure and move on.

Pheasants and upland game as well as big game cycle with the winter, if you have a mild winter all is well if you have a nasty winter as in 1997 wildlife takes a major hit.

I do not want to see our borders closed to NR hunters I want to see a management plan that is adjusted to the natural cycles of nature. We currently have a Governor that has special intrest groups in his corner. if you read the posts and learn some of the history from this site you will fin reference to "Pheasant gate" read about it. draw your own conclusions.

Right now today I feel our most pressing issue is the G/O's (Guides and outfitters) they swallow up all of the prime land. Do not get me wrong, if ti is their land they can do as they wish and more power to them. but when they hunt public land for the first part of the season with their clients and save their land for the "big money boys" that is just wrong.

As a life long resident of ND i just feel it is wrong for one state to tell another state what they can do with their resources. MN used to have good habitat and through the draining of wetlands and other poor environmental decisions they have seen a decrease in their wildlife, and because of this they hunt ND. if you do your homework on this site, there are a lot of NR's that do not agree with the lawsuit.

So my OPINION is: let the NR hunters hunt ND limit the number and adjust the numbers to the resource, let us hunt our first week, it is our state, and get some of the laws changed.

North Dakota is a Beautiful State and one of the Great natural resources in the USA. I would like to keep it that way.

This is my opinion and there are some that will jump on me about it but I usually speak my mind and live with it.

I hope I have answered your question.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Open Field.....I wish I could have said it that well. If you don't mind, I will say....That's my opinion too!!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Open field....G/O cannot hunt on Public land...here is a thread where Amber Krapp and muzzy make that distinction...scroll down to July 6th and 7th posts...

http://nodakoutdoors.com/members/phpBB/ ... 50&start=0

So if you are seeing that happening...I would turn them in.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Wyoming Willie, here is a portion of my letter to the Tribune

In reply to John Andrist's letter of April 26th, I agree,
"Pinch me, I am still dreaming". If, as he states in the letter,
"Wetlands and wildlife habitat is one of the best things going for us.
We don't have any Disneylands. Our goals should be developing, expanding and marketing this resource -- not fencing it." If this statement is true, then he should be supporting stricter regulation at the state level against wetland drainage. He should be supporting strict regulation against guides and outfitters leasing and posting land that reduces the amount of land open to the 95% of non resident hunters who do not use a guide service. He should be supporting additional state dollars to restore wetlands and supporting farmers that want to restore wetlands and provide conservation easements that save our remaining wetlands.

The implied and subtle hint is that he is known to oppose any of the arguments I have put forth above as is the current party in power in our legislature. The hypocrisy of what the current party says and what they do is what got me going, not just the non resident hunting issues.


----------



## Buckshot (Nov 5, 2003)

I have a few questions.

Approximatey how much land do G&O's lease up in ND?

How is the lease paid? Is it based on #of acres, quality of resources, or #of hunters?

How much of the payment ends up in the land-owners pocket?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Am I off base or is there an ad campaigm running by the commercial hunting boys right now? Rep. Rod Froelich (Farm Bureay Trespass Lawsuit) has a 1/2 hour on the KFYR last week. Sen Andrist writes the Bismarck Trib this week. The Fargo Forum has a nonresdent editorial letter. Commercial boys bombard News and Views the other day. KB has a call to the same show today. These guys are cooking! Makes you wonder if someone is thinking about re-election. Excellant use of free media by the commercial side.


----------



## RWHONKER (Dec 22, 2003)

I have been coming to the Lamoure area for ten years now and I don't think the restrictions that you have on out of staters is bad at all. I have gone with the same group of guys that whole time and our favorite time of year is the first week in November. Even though I am not a resident (yet) I think your restrictions are more than fair.

All the residents I have ever talked to are all about the money but I don't get that impression here. The impression I get from the guys on the site is most of you are for protecting your birds that are there most of the year. As far as Minnesota bringing up a deal that it won't allow nonresidents to fish for the first two weeks on opener, that is crap. If any of you guys want to go walleye fishing anytime of the year let me know. I live in the only place in the state where walleye fishing is continuous and the water is always open. Good hunting and fishing.


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

Wyoming Willie,
somehow a guy gets a feeling of guilt by reading all these posts that put the blame on NR's for everything bad that has happened in the past couple hunting seasons. WE either chase all the birds away, take up all the space, do all the stupid things that happen in the field, bust up all the roosts, hunt too close to the next guy...on and on. The fact , my friend, is even though you are a guest in another state, you have still bought a license. That license was issued by the state of ND and it gives you certain rights, just like the residents do but with more restrictions and a higher cost. Go hunting and have fun, thats what I'm going to do!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

You're right James...all of us blame EVERY NR that comes here.

I even blame my relatives because they are NR that hunt here. :eyeroll:


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

sure sounds like it.


----------



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

Open Field said:


> WW
> I will give you my opinion and please remember it is only mine!
> 
> North Dakota has not always had great hunting, it has cycles as with all of nature, dry years the local ducks and geese are not here in numbers and the migrating flocks tend to stop at big water only, when you concentrate hunters in central area the birds react to pressure and move on.
> ...


I'd have to admit, I think most ND resident hunters probably feel more like this.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

I hate stupid people. I do not discriminate against this group based on state of residence.

Don't get upset with little Jimmy he just likes to stir the pot.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Heck...who's upset...I'm just playing the same game...

I blame my 2 brothers and 3 nephews that come and hunt with me just because they are NR.
I even blame myself because I was a NR until 30 years ago... :roll:


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

It all starts with the self hate Ken. Then you start getting mad at everyone.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Buckshot
The answer to your question is I do not know, Yet! I have done some research and it is not to the point where anyone can make any conclusions. however I do know it is very difficult to find land to hunt where there are large G/O operations. 5 years ago you could go to the western part of the state and hunt upland with little or no access problems, last year the people that I hunted with leased their land for the extra income. I did not ask them how they were paid, it was none of my business. I did find land to hunt in the Glen Ullen area, and it was good hunting. the hunting closer to home was just as good, Oaks, Rutland area. same with waterfowl dead lake and the area north of hwy 2 were pretty well locked up in some of the prime areas, and there were tons of hunters out there. i did not hunt that weekend. I did a little knocking on doors and lined up my hunt for the next week, and i got my birds I do not mind working for them. so I am sorry i can not give you the numbers that you are looking for but stay tuned they will show up.

James I do not hate anyone life is to damn short to waste time on that emotion.


----------



## 870 XPRS (Mar 12, 2003)

I emailed Andrist right after his column with a few questions about some of the point he brought up. It's weird he didn't respond. :huh:


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

I didn't say anything about hating anyone.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

OK ...James,maybe hate is to strong...I changed it to your term.... blame...

One question...can't you see how wrong it is for you to say all of us blame all of you because you are a non-res?


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

I'm not asking for ND's to embrace anyone, there pages of posts blaming NR's for everything, starting with the few I mentioned earlier. Of all people you should be aware of this, Ken, you're a moderator here!


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

This guy owns the Crosby Journal and also the Tioga Tribune, my wife used to work at the Tioga Trib, from what I've read of his stuff, he's out to lunch. He should be run outa dodge.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Yep, back to the same theme. I bought this... I drove this far... I spent this much money... blah blah blah. You aren't entitled to anything!! When are you going to understand??

Ken your a moderator, that means your opinion doesn't count. :eyeroll:


----------



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

Brad Anderson said:


> Yep, back to the same theme. I bought this... I drove this far... I spent this much money... blah blah blah. You aren't entitled to anything!! When are you going to understand??


Come on Brad, There are a lot of NRs who live with the restrictions placed on our hunt out there and don't have too much of a problem with any of them. (I'm not a big fan of the zones, but I'm trying) To say that we aren't entitled to anything is ridiculous to say the least. Who threw you the badge and put you in the high chair anyway??? :eyeroll:

Hard to back that attitude Brad. I forgot I wasn't going to get into this anymore, but never say never.

By the way, what does the NR license entitle us to?? The way I figure, it should be good for something. You would think, wouldn't you Brad?? :huh:


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Maybe I should have worded it a little different.

Just cuz you buy a license doesn't mean your gonna shoot birds or catch fish. You still have to work, nothing is giving to ya. This is what I meant.


----------



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

:lol: Yeah cuz before I expected mallard breasts shipped to me along with my license. I didn't know the hunting part was necessary. 8) You're a peach Brad. :splat:


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

For further clarification, NR are entitled to the same as residents. But nothing more than that.

JSM always complains of how far he drives or how much money he spends. Does that entitle him to more than myself?? NO IT DOESN'T.

And if spending money does entitle you to something extra, you have found yourself on a game farm hunting tame birds.


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

No Brad, JSM doesn't always complain about the drive and money spent. If you would take the time to read the posts and do some thinking about what people are trying to say, you would have less problems and not have to clarify yourself all the time. Do you need anymore clarification?


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

NOPE. I think I got a good handle on things.


----------



## Powder (Sep 9, 2003)

It definitely doesn't entitle him to more but does it entitle him to less?


----------



## Mr. B (Mar 16, 2004)

Brad



> For further clarification, NR are entitled to the same as residents. But nothing more than that.


Since a NR are entitled to the same as a resident should we be restricted from hunting the first week of the season?

Sorry Brad I couldn't resist.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

MR B...yes you should...tell your own DNR to let you hunt in Minn that same week for res. only...


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Every state gives residents preferential treatment. In Montana residents can buy an elk license over the table. NR cannot spear or hunt moose in MN. I believe SD has a resident only pheasant opener.

ND fianlly levels the playing field and everybody cries foul. What gives?? You're lucky the licenses fees aren't any higher. I know first hand an elk license in MT isn't cheap.

On a similar note, I see ND increased the price of a NR fishing license to match Minnesota's. $35, has it always been this much??


----------



## Mr. B (Mar 16, 2004)

If you guys have read my posts you would have seen I am not in favor of the lawsuit and I respect your laws.

I should have refrained from stooping to a low level. But after reading lots of differant posts I just could not help it.

Ken

I have written letters and contacted the MN DNR. I have told them what I think and continue to do so. They might listen they might not but there are still some of us in MN that continue to fight for MN resources.


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

A resident of MN can't spear any lake he or she wants to, and they can't just go down and purchase a moose license, its a poor comparison to hunting migratory waterfowl. Why does't ND raise it's resident license fee to $100 and double the fee to $200 for NRs, that would help to fund some projects, or better yet charge the youngsters, ND is losing out money on resiprosity with MN. How about a dog fee?


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Brad,

NRs can't buy a moose licenses in ND either or a bighorn sheep tag or an elk tag. So that might not be the best comparison.
Park


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Just stating the same things happen in other states.

Why don't you guys have a problem with SD?? They restrict NR the most! 4000 NR waterfowlers a fall. Plus they have all the ducks.

Being a resident has its advantages. Low license fees are one advantage.

Just keep complaining, it will all go away :eyeroll:


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

I still can't understand why people are so upset about not being able to hunt public land the first week. Can you not wait an extra week? Are you that impatient. Trust me guys the birds are not gone after the first week. The birds start leaving after the first week nonresidents show up. :wink:

Does any one hunt private land? Are there any guys tough enough to brave the elements and hunt a little later in the season like November and December? Especially for pheasants, grouse, partridge. There are still lots of birds on public land later in the year too.

Asking permission from landowners has become a lost art. In the last two years I have been turned down for hunting on private land a grand total of 2 times. 1 time they gave permission to someone else and the other time they were going to be hunting. Both of the landownders said stop by again if there are birds and we will let you hunt. I probably knock on 25 to 30 doors a season.


----------



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

Oh I trust ya gander grinder. :wink: If asking permission to hunt private land has become a lost art, Then I'm proud to be considered an old classic from days gone by. I enjoy meeting these farmers out there and sometimes learning a bit from them at the same time. Mostly about stuff not related to hunting at all. I will say that I often feel a bit of guilt when they are working hard while I just ask to enjoy their land. But at least by asking you show them well deserved respect. As far as puting up with the elements, I hate the t-shirt weather. I much prefer some snow in the air, but for me to travel as far as I do, I am really taking a huge risk by planning a late trip, although one of these years I'm going to roll the dice and see what happens. 8)

:beer:


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Goldy,
You are not risking anything. There was not one weekend last year that could not be hunted due to the weather. And even if there was a Blizzard in November it would probably only stop you from hunting one day. Come on out this year later in the year....I'm betting you'll never come for the opening day circus crowd activity again.


----------



## duane (Mar 29, 2004)

Wyoming Willie makes a good point here guys but knowing it will be difficult to change opinion it is not worth the time. 3 points to make however. Since when does living in a state (any state) and paying taxes there give a person any more "rights" than a person (NR) willing to pay an inflated price to participate in recreational opportunities?

Also, if there is such an outcry over G and O's. why not have your state simply raise their operating licenses to a fee that the majority simply cannot afford? Look what happend to the high number of licensed gun dealers when the ATF raised their licenses significantly higher?

Think also, this "FIRST WEEK TO RESIDENTS ONLY" seems to me a little harsh!? Where do most of you think the $$$ for WPA's and PLOTS come from? ALL HUNTERS! Resident and non resident. Yes, some states do actually restrict but it is simply a rarity to find those states that give the first week to their residents only. So why should some be excluded? I for one know what can happen to some of the good PLOTS land after the first week. Sloppy seconds is not always a pretty sight...and certainly reduced opportunities! Ever hunted deer on public land after the first week?

Please do not pound on me for these questions. I would greatly appreciate an intelligent response to each point. Thanks!


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Before you get an intelligent response answer one question please, Where are you from? What state?


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

This same argument keeps coming up non-res. are not the enemy here! I do not know of any NR that is asking for more then any resident,simply to be treated fairly or equally! Minnesota does not prohibt any NR from starting any hunting or fishing season a week or two after the operner of any season! Because that would be considered prejudice!! I know personally a good number of ND res. that spend a great deal of time in MN enjoying the resources available here. Consider this guys one of MN's greatest resources is the deer population what would happen if MN said no NR could hunt the first week on public land. Well many of the seasons would be closed because some of the zones are not even open for one week secondly if you have ever deer hunted in MN you know that after opening weekend when the deer have been educated. That your chances of getting a deer let alone a buck have dramatically decreased. This same event happens to birds after they have been shot at a few times, and the last time I checked birds could not read so they do not know if it is a NR or a resident that is shooting at them!! Anyone that has hunted in ND knows that the really good hunting for waterfowl does not occur in the first week of October, usually it is the third or fourth week when the migration is occuring. So for all of you fair weather hunters go buy some wamer clothes and come to ND a couple of weeks later and find out what good hunting is all about! Also my understanding of the law is that NR's cannot hunt on plots or state managed land, for the first week they did not say that NR's cannot hunt in the entire state so get off of your lazy butts or get out of your fancy new trucks and knock on some doors. The farmers love to talk they don't get alot visiters. I have never in 24 years been treated poorly or badly by any farmer who I have taken the time to find to ask permission to hunt on their land. And hey guys for the same 24years that I have hunted in ND they have had zones no big deal it's been that way for a long time get over the zone thing. Most of the arguments on this subject do not even relate to the real content of the issue. Don't look for arguments or create them we have enough to do just try to patch up relations between the states. :sniper:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Sorry jd...but you will probably not find any res. hunters here who don't feel we residents should get special treatment over NR except maybe G/O.

I don't know of any state that doesnt give perks to people who live in the state.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken w please re-read the post and tell me where I asked for special treatment and as long you made the remark tell me what special perks MN res. get over any NR coming to this state. Oh and talk to me about spearing because we can not spear in ND either so that is not even a point of any validity, nor am I asking to spear either I believe it is one of the most unsporstmanlike sports there is the fish does not stand a chance!!!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

JD, just so were clear on this. In '02, 2,502 (.003% of total) MN hunting licenses - all species - were sold to ND residents. Same year, there were 23,850 (16% of total) - all species - licensed MN hunters in ND.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

"I do not know of any NR that is asking for more then any resident,simply to be treated fairly or equally!"

What I'm saying is that you are being treated fairly.But residents should recieve special treatment....everything should not be the same for Res. as Non-res.We should charge you more,we should be allowed to hunt the first week to ourselves.You can ask your state to do the same for you.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Dan what's your point and how is the percentages of lisc. sold in either state pertinent to the discussion of the situation of not being able to hunt at certain times or on certain lands? Just because you don't have lisc. numbers to back up your statement does not mean that ND res. don't come here to vacation. Some of them just come to enjoy our many lakes and water ways, they could be just boating and water skiing, or shopping, hiking, etc. don't try to put up numbers that are not consistent with statement I made. I said that I know people from ND that come here and enjoy our resouces, alot of them I did not say they where here fishing and hunting!!


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken w. you do already have special treatment your lisc fees cost less, you are not restricted to zones, you can buy your lisc over the counter, you do not have to buy a seperate lisc to hunt small game and waterfowl, and fur bearing game. Are you a politician? You talk like, you already have many privledges that you take for granted or at least don't seem to appreciate, and yet you ask for more. And then speak in circles about the issues like said before we are not asking for anything special! just to have back what ND has been giving us for as long as have been hunting in ND!! That is not special treatment!! It is just fair!!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

jd,

A couple of points. First, most ND R hunters think we've got a "problem", and feel the "problem" is getting worse. Because such a large percentage of our total hunters are NR and NR's represent almost all of the marginal increase in hunters over the last 10 years, most R hunters feel restricting NR hunters is essential to getting this thing turned around. Checking o/g's is important; so is checking total NR hunter numbers and/or other NR restrictions to re-establish a reasonable quality of hunting. Not eliminate NR, not banish them, not shut down the borders, just check/restrict.

Also I thought in your first post you were trying to draw analogies to MN and ND hunting, on a good for the goose/gander theme. We hear from time to time, anecdotally, about all the ND hunters in MN wanting it both ways. Stats show ND hunters don't play much of a role in the MN hunting scene.

Haven't heard anybody in ND talk about restricting NR fishermen, hikers, birders, bikers, etc., just hunters, as that's the resource under serious threat, in large part because of the massive increase in NR hunters.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

This is why we need restrictions on NR hunters...this is from Dan Nelson's article in Dakota Country...There are to many of you and you are to good at what you do...

"In 1997---due in large part to an influx of hunters from Minnesota, Wisconsin and other states---North Dakota's all-duck harvest jumped to a record high of 454,000. By 2001 it had climbed to almost 700,000. The 2001 harvest was double the average harvest of the 1970's and a 400% increase over the average harvest in the 80's. In fact ND's 2001 all-duck harvest was higher than the combined harvest from Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta that year.

Scientists don't know what impact---if any-- this dramatic increase in the harvest of locally produced birds might have on duck populations because there is no precedent for it. South Dakota, the other big duck-producing state in the U.S., has never seen harvest levels that high. Scientists also don't know what biological impact the increased hunting pressure might have on migrating birds."


----------



## duane (Mar 29, 2004)

I made 3 points or questions on my last post of which no person could answer? Does anyone out there have a good response to these ???

Also, I think it was Ken that stated the number of Ducks harvested in ND beginning in 97. Has anyone looked hard at the significant numbers of Ducks harvested (Many of which probably originated in ND) in the southern sates...i.e. Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, etc? Average number of ducks harvested is between 24-30 birds...this is an average! The average for a ND hunter is somwhere in the 6-8 area. Hmmmmm


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

duane said:


> I made 3 points or questions on my last post of which no person could answer? Does anyone out there have a good response to these ???


d, most of us aren't above replowing ground, especially when it hits a nerve. But your questions pose very broad thems that have been heavily plowed here. Pick any NR or pressure themed thread that has over 30 posts from the last couple of years and you'll get a broad range of views to your questions.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Dan my point exactley, we are not restricting any NR activity of any nature. What gives the state of ND the right to restrict anybody from doing any activities in ND including hunting of any species? When someone restricts or prohibits anyone else based on race, color, sex, or state status of residency it is called PREJUDICE or DISCRIMINATION!! Prejudice and discrimination is a very narrow minded point of veiw no matter what form it comes in. When someone or some entity is publicly prejudice or discriminatory you find your self involved in a lawsuit!! Again please note that no one seems to be upset or angry about increased fees for these related activities, most of are willing to pay our share in order for the right to share the resources of the state of ND. The way that you and Ken W. talk openly about how you are more deserving of those same resources leaves questions in my mind about the type of people you are. I certainly glad that people of ND that I know and have met over the years are not like you.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

JD, chill. We can talk about this civilly or just drop it.

*************
"Dan my point exactley, we are not restricting any NR activity of any nature."

Yes you do: Spearing, fish houses, prairie chickens, moose, etc. Then there's the bill about the first two weeks of fishing and I believe I saw another MN bill pending that prohibits NR's from preditor hunting on any land they don't own. Admittedly, most ND's care little to none about any of those, but MN has and may have more similar restrictions.

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

"What gives the state of ND the right to restrict anybody from doing any activities in ND including hunting of any species?"

Traditionally, recreational game laws and NR restrictions have been within the purview of individual states. States have treated R/NR differently here for generations. Even with respect to waterfowl, outside of federal frameworks, states have great latitude and control.

What gives MN the right to set its own college admission policies or decide who is and is not eligible for public assistance, even though both receive a heavy dose of Federal funding? Like game, one of those state's rights things.

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

"When someone restricts or prohibits anyone else based on race, color, sex, or state status of residency it is called PREJUDICE or DISCRIMINATION!! Prejudice and discrimination is a very narrow minded point of view no matter what form it comes in. When someone or some entity is publicly prejudice or discriminatory you find your self involved in a lawsuit!!"

Been a long time since con law, but you're mixing a lot of constitutional concepts and largely barking up the wrong tree here. The closest thing to recognition of anything implicated in your statements is the Montoya (AZ outfitter elk and deer) case. That case was based upon the commerce clause and represents a break in a long line of similar cases holding otherwise.

Montoya is also the case upon which MN bases it's current suit against ND, after MN had joined ND, SD and about 20 other states in support of AZ against the outfitters just 18 or so months earlier (anyone see any irony there?). And even Montoya, if extended to ND, won't prohibit all NR restrictions; they'll just need to be carefully tailored and created (e.g. HPC).

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

"Again please note that no one seems to be upset or angry about increased fees for these related activities, most of are willing to pay our share in order for the right to share the resources of the state of ND."

We can get back to the right number of hunter-days or hunter-hours many different ways. One way would be to jack NR license prices something akin to a MT elk tag. We'd drop demand a whole bunch that way, at least for a while. Pretty crappy way of doing it, but it would work. Other options include caps, shooting hour restrictions, more zones, closed shooting days, less total days allowed, more res-only periods, etc. Any of these to an extreme or in combination with others will reduce hunter-days and/or spread pressure by time and/or geography.

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

"The way that you and Ken W. talk openly about how you are more deserving of those same resources leaves questions in my mind about the type of people you are. I certainly glad that people of ND that I know and have met over the years are not like you."

Like my seven year old says - you think what you want and I'll think what I want - guess you'll have to make up your own mind there.

Hunting means a lot to ND for a lot of reasons. You choose not to live here - guess a very close contact to premiere wing-shooting is lower on the priority list for you. Hunting is in the amenities package that brought me back and keeps me here. MANY others too. It's in ND's best interest to bring back and maintain high quality hunting for its residents and not let ND trend to commercialization like most other states. You don't have to like it, or me for saying it.


----------



## widgeon (Jan 13, 2004)

jd,

I wouldn't worry too much about the thoughts expressed by the "almighty residents" on this forum. They don't represent the opinions of the average North Dakotan that I have contacted.

I read their posts for a good laugh, and that's it.

The discrimination against non-residents will get worked out, and the statists (kind of like racists...) on this site will have to play fair and share their little playground.

"I have a dream.... that someday I will be able to hunt on land that I own in North Dakota.." haha, I love it.

The statists are like an animal with a mortal wound. Their feeble argument is fading fast, and will be lost in a short time.

I'm just sitting back and waiting to follow the blood trail when all the kicking and screaming is over.

It's frothy--that's a good sign. It won't be long.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

"The way that you and Ken W. talk openly about how you are more deserving of those same resources leaves questions in my mind about the type of people you are. I certainly glad that people of ND that I know and have met over the years are not like you." 

That is really a poor attitude just because we don't agree with you...I agree with Dan's 7 year old.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Widg,

Grow some, and post up your name and address. I'd love to send you some things that show how the average ND feels about these things.

Your "I will buy and conquer you" attitude might play well some places. ND, not so much.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd mn/nd

If you read the ND Hunting Regulations
I quote "Nonresident waterfowl licensing details, A Nonresident May Not Hunt G&F Lands Oct. 9-15, Nonresidents may not hunt on lands owned or leased by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, including state wildlife management areas and Private Lands Open To Sportsmen (PLOTS), for the first week of Pheasant Season (October 9-15). This provision applies to all types of hunting, not just pheasants. The best way to remember this is that if the sign on an area says "North Dakota Game and Fish Department" on it anywhere, the area is closed to nonresident hunting from Oct. 9-15.

This restriction does not apply to lands owned or managed by other state agencies that may be open to hunting, such as state school lands US Fish and Wildlife Service Waterfowl Production areas, other federal lands open to hunting, or private lands not enrolled in the G&F PLOTS program." end quote

So hunt your heart out, do your homework, find a friendly farmer, have all of the fun you can stand. and let us hunt our first week on land owned and managed by our state, paid for by our taxes and put into the PLOTS program by farmers from our state., If you can not find hunting land, Get after the G/O's they are the ones locking up all of the prime land, NOT US![/b]


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Nice post wigeon!! By the way how is freelance huntin' in Texass? Oh thats right there isn't any!!! :bop:

Gotta love them G/O. dd:


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Open field your statements are correct about the week in question. However your closing statement is false to a degree, in that yes an extremly small portion of your property taxes may go toward the purchase of new lands or leases however your legislature set up the program to be primarily funded by lisc fees. That would be your fees and mine!! Also just in case you really wanted to start laying deed to land bought with prop tax money. Explain to me what the state is doing with prop tax dollars I am paying on my prop in ND do they seperate out my taxes and do something different with those dollars? If not that gives me just as much right to those lands as you. You see your arguments or answers do not apply to everyone. Ken W. you are foolish to believe or try to make us believe that all 700,000 birds shot in ND where all local population the state of ND does not even have nesting snows, blues, or specs. and we all know that those numbers include those species!!


----------



## fishhook (Aug 29, 2002)

KEN W said:


> "In 1997---due in large part to an influx of hunters from Minnesota, Wisconsin and other states---North Dakota's all-duck harvest jumped to a record high of 454,000. By 2001 it had climbed to almost 700,000. The 2001 harvest was double the average harvest of the 1970's and a 400% increase over the average harvest in the 80's. In fact ND's 2001 all-duck harvest was higher than the combined harvest from Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta that year.
> 
> Scientists don't know what impact---if any-- this dramatic increase in the harvest of locally produced birds might have on duck populations because there is no precedent for it. South Dakota, the other big duck-producing state in the U.S., has never seen harvest levels that high. Scientists also don't know what biological impact the increased hunting pressure might have on migrating birds."


JD mn/nd......you better read his post again. You seem awful confused based on your reply.


----------



## fishhook (Aug 29, 2002)

ps..... i have spent a lot of time in southern sask. and manitoba. And i can tell you they r dry as a bone. The MAJOR reproducing of ducks has to be in north dakota. There just isn't any water up there. It could, however, be better way up north, i don't get up there much.

Ken, I have been wondering the same thing the past few years. You sure can tell when the first weekend of duck hunting is over and the locals have started flying the coop. It keeps getting tougher and tougher to find whats left. I think patterns have changed drastically.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

"Ken W. you are foolish to believe or try to make us believe that all 700,000 birds shot in ND where all local population the state of ND does not even have nesting snows, blues, or specs. and we all know that those numbers include those species"

jd....Read what Dan Nelson said again...it says ducks

Since when are snows,blues,and specks considered ducks????

As far as the 700,000 ....that IS ducks not including geese...and what difference does it make where they were raised????

They were shot within the borders of ND.WE have the right to make the laws within the borders of the state of ND...unless there are federal laws to supercede state laws...the federal gov't leaves it up th each state to make the laws...I don't come to your state and try to influence lawmaking....why do you insist on doing it in my state????


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd mn/nd
If you are a land owner in ND. Great! hunt your land is it good hunting land?, to me the only issue here is Upland game is it not? other than the supposed discrimination that you feel from the state of North Dakota, or do you feel that hunting the local ducks the first week of the season is so great that you feel left out? in one of your previous posts you said you wanted it (hunting regulations) to be the same as they used to be, My Friend I DO NOT LIKE CHANGE EITHER! but when you see the result over the years of increased pressure on the resource, something has to be done. Do you agree? or should we go the way of the "Greater Prairie Chicken", hunt the resource to near extintion in the state? There is no easy answer to these questions, but I do know that if we as fellow sportsmen can't find some common ground here we will all loose. and if you pay taxes in ND, Thank You! but I disagree that it gives you the same right as me because you do not live here, i do, is it any different than a ND resident Paying Taxes on Lake Property in MN We can not "Homestead" our lake place unless we choose to move to Minnesota.

Change has to happen it is part of life, it is not always popular, I really dislike getting a year older every year, and i dislike the fact that i used to pay 35 cents per gallon of gas and now it is 1.98 per gallon. but i have to deal with it. I am sorry that you feel discriminated against, i do not think the law was ment to do that. Tell me what you would specifically change in the laws and lets discuss the items

Have a good one!


----------



## Mr. B (Mar 16, 2004)

Guys I have a question enstead of argueing about local ducks and the first week of the season wouldn't we be spending out time better trying to figure out how to improve the duck population as a whole?

Wouldn't it be better to get more ducks to fly through our states enstead of restricting hunting so we can hunt the limited number of local ducks?

I am not trying to be for or against the restrictions I am just thinking since the restrictions are in place wouldn't our time and efforts be better spent other ways? With all the time we spend on this site going back and forth of the same old thing how many letters to politicians and papers could have been written?


----------



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

With the local hatch ND produces every year, residents SHOULD get first crack at the birds they raise out there. No problem. If you can raise em', more power too ya. The PLOTS deal doesn't seem the greatest but I live with it. No real biggy. I just wish that if something to me was closed for pheasant hunters, there could at least be someone using it then. :huh: I'll drive by a PLOTS area and never see a vehicle for days while I'm out there. Someone could be hunting this. ME. :lol: I wouldn't mind donating a coin or two towards something like this,(Have the option built into the license purchase) but not if I can't hunt it anyway while I'm out there. How could this be changed somehow so an area like this could be utilized better for everyone. Do many pheasant hunters start up this early in their season anyway?? :huh: I know this has been around the block a time or two but is there anything in the cards for a change in this anytime in the near future??


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken w your right I did read carefully enough it did say ducks however they still are not all local ducks because they do still migrate, so that does not make them property of ND GNF, or anyone elses for that matter. and Ken w this comes out to an average of 10 ducks per hunter per season in ND and these are only estimates based off of surveys, there is a percentage for error in those survyes. Open Field, yes we do hunt up there on the first weekend of pheasant season we go up and make sure the house is ready for the following trip 10 days later for the migration hunt. This second trip is usually when we do the majority of our waterfowl hunting. As for the changes in laws put the small game and waterfowl lisc back on one paper and make them the same number of days. It sucks to only ba able to hunt for 10 days of small game when I am there for 14 days to hunt waterfowl. It let's hunt mid-day when the birds all in the refuge until that evening. It is ok that they charge more for the combo lisc. just make them for same amount of time!!


----------



## fishhook (Aug 29, 2002)

Mr. B, I think that is what is being talked about by most. Or course you have some bad apples who want it all controversy, but for the most part I think the guys using this web site are trying to improve the outdoors.

The fact remains, to get the ducks to continue to breed here as well as fly through and stop here, they cannot continue to be hunted as hard as they are. Its that simple. Is keeping non-residents out the answer? I do beleive we have to take care of our resource as a state...yes. But I think everyone has a right to these birds. However, I would love to see more father son types of non-res hunters than the groups of retired business men that hire g.o.'s.

ps...i sure wish i had the magic wand to make it rain...it sure is dry out there. Anyone know a rain dance?


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

jd...I would bet that last week of sept....Res. only that most of the ducks are locally raised...We are not shooting migraters then...so I am all for res only.I don't know where you are from....but if from Minn...you had the same option we did....your DNR chose not to take that early week....which they could have made for Minn. res only....so to me,your complaint holds no water.

I agree with you about the 10 days...I don't know why it was set at 10 and not 14....especially since the upland season is almost 4 months long.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

KEN W said:


> I don't know why it was set at 10 and not 14....especially since the upland season is almost 4 months long.


Because we had a pattern to follow that seemed to work well and accepted by tens of thousands of hunters for many years - SD. And, it is posession + one day.


----------



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

Goldy's Pal said:


> I just wish that if something to me was closed for pheasant hunters, there could at least be someone using it then. I'll drive by a PLOTS area and never see a vehicle for days while I'm out there. Someone could be hunting this. ME. :lol: I wouldn't mind donating a coin or two towards something like this,(Have the option built into the license purchase) but not if I can't hunt it anyway while I'm out there. How could this be changed somehow so an area like this could be utilized better for everyone. Do many pheasant hunters start up this early in their season anyway??


Nothing biting in the other hole. I try over here.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Dan...so is SD NR waterfowl 14 days???

It still seems illogical to have waterfowl 14 days out of a 60 day season ...

and 10 day upland out of a 120 season.


----------



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

I'll dial the farmers up. Maybe they know.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd mn/nd
Thanks for the post
I agree but what do you think of capping the numbers, last year there were 29,000+ NR waterfowl hunters, and 30,000 residents, do you think the duck population can sustain that much pressure? I do not think so. is my gut feeling supported by statistics, I have to admit I do not know. I do know that there seems to be less ducks every year, from my observations anyway. If someone could post some real numbers I would like to see them.

I hope you don't think I am picking a fight, I am not I just want what is best for all sportsmen,and if I come off as a little arrogant it is because I am Proud of North Dakota!! we don't have a lot of people but the majority in this state are "Salt of the earth" I have traveled this country from one end to the other in my job and there is nowhere in this country where people have a work ethic like we do in ND, MN, SD, out of state guys please don't bash my brains in.

that is enough of my little speech, Would you support limiting numbers Like South Dakota for the good of the resource? The only thing I worry about is that if we leave the numbers where they are, all hunters are not like us Ethical! you always hear about the guys that were stopped with hundreds of ducks over the limit, the last ones I remember were from IL. I think, G&F can not stop everyone.

The other thing we can do, is do more Predator hunting, I don't know if you have ever done it in ND but it is a hoot! I took 20+ coyotes last winter out of the central and western part of the state, I used to think calling ducks was a challenge until I got into calling these things. I don't want to take up any more time I guess my mission in life lately has been to do everything I can to coserve the resource so I can keep doing what I love and that is "shooting at things with wings"!!

Have a good one!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Ken,

My understanding is SD is 10 for waterfowl, but a straight 10. Their upland is 2 5's.

Personally, I don't think there's anything illogical about our 10/14 not meshing. Really, there's no limit to days in upland - just another $85. And how many don't have a possession limit after 5 days, even with giving away or chowing a few?

And, I would guess between Uplanders that hunt where/when there is no waterfowl, waterfowlers that hunt where there's no upland and NR's who don't hunt more than 5 days/trip, not a great percentage is affected by the difference even if they eat or give away ( :wink: ) past the 4 day possession.

*********
Goldy, not entirely sure what answer you're looking for. Could some sort of special NR PLOTS access stamp (I guess for the first week of upland) be created. Sure, anything is possible. But I think that would largely defeat the primary purpose behind 1223. It's not about more money, it's about sane hunting.

You know, I cover a really large part of the state over the course of a couple of seasons. Most of my days hunting are weekend days, but I probably spend all or parts of 8-10 weekdays/fall afield in ND too. I can't remember a single day in the last 4-5 years of "I never heard another shot", regardless of where or when.

And some in the ND commercial camps see a flock of ducks or pile of pheasants in one spot two days in a row and call it lost opportunity ($). Critters need a little rest, especially waterfowl, but eventually upland will move short distances to areas of less pressure too (maybe where they can't be accessed, or at least for less than $200/day). It's not such a bad thing not to see hunters everywhere, everyday.

The last time we had waterfowl hunter numbers like we do today, it was in the 70's and the mix was 90/10 R/NR. Now its about 60/40. The birds used to get rest many days a week, and now very little, at least until they escape to SD.

Are you wanting to know when R's pheasant hunt? Depends greatly on the R. The majority of licensed ND R hunters don't waterfowl at all. Some, including many on this board, rarely if ever hunt roosters. Others really get after the roosters, almost exclusively, from beginning to end. I hit the pheas opener (tradition), but then hunt waterfowl until freeze-up except one traditional 4 day pheas trip in Nov. and as incidental to waterfowling. Then I concentrate on roosters. In other words, I think it's all over the board.

Is that what you were after?


----------



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

Yep, Thanks Dan, I was ready to start calling these PLOTS during the first week of pheasant "a closed refuge". They serve a purpose that way no doubt. Unless the residents pound them out. I don't pheasant hunt so that's why I ask. I don't expect anything will be hashed over too heavy to change this restriction. Not the direction things are exactly heading for an NR. Well for a more positive perspective, There is still waterfowl management areas, and private land which I hunt mostly anyway. I do like the user friendly PLOTS maps available at your friendly gas stations.  Motels that let my dog sleep in the room. Beer/pop prices are o.k. I've got no problems with North dakota. :lol: Oh but those zones. :roll:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Hey GP is a member now :beer: 
There have been zones for a long time for waterfowl, I look at them like this. Zone 3 is big water and sloughs, Devils Lake, Sakak, Missouri river a few meium size ponds and pot holes and lots of crop land. really good early hunting locals and early migration, Pretty good boat and decoy hunting
Zone 2, Large sloughs and pot holes with some medium ponds crops but not as extensive not as good for boat but can be done, you need to know how to call them here.

Zone 1 used to be home for me lots of prairie potholes and again some large sloughs not alot of medium to large ponds but there is quality water hunting here crops are about the same as zone 2 but the only tree is a landmark, Just kidding! the terrain here is hills and rocks. if the pressure is not great the birds will hang here for quite awhile.

I guess if i was a NR I would hunt the early 7 in 3 and and the late 7 in 1, and dont worry about the weather it isn't fun until your calls freeze in your mouth. Just kidding again! I never gets that cold in ND  

This hunting thing is just like selling something Know your product and you will do well.

Have a good one


----------



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

:beer: Weather I can deal with. Bring that blowin' snowin' eye waterin' duck weather, I love it!!! I would like to split my trip in half some time. Late seems hit and miss for birds, correct me if I'm wrong please guys. 1 in 5 chance of hitting the migration?? I don't want to come out to the frozen tundra either. I'm torn between early/late yet at this point. 
:roll:


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Well, since I'm the devil incarnate today already, let me toss out a couple of other things that have been bugging me and I've been meaning to tee up for a while - more field hunting for ducks and more late season duck hunting.

Let me pose a question. What are there more of - more roosts/loafs or more feeds? Seems to me, you find a good feed, and the birds are typically coming from several directions, suggesting there are more roosts/loafs than feeds. Staying off the water helps keep them here, for sure, but it's getting rarer to find a feed that isn't getting watched by two or more groups. And, complaints of downwinding seem to be on the rise. So, do we really still need more field hunters?

Many of you will remember the Nelson Plan from last session, ostensibly an alternate capping plan, that was really no cap at all (a/k/a the 10-10-too-many plan). Offered by Nelson as support for that plan, I remember seeing a bell chart that G&F prepared showing the use by NR waterfowlers over the season. Contrary to the thoughts of some, the highest use period is not the first couple weeks, but rather such use peaks about the third week in October. If I can find that chart, I'll email it to Chris and ask him to paste it into this post.

The Nelson plan would have shaved about 1,000 NR waterfowlers during this peak period with the idea of encouraging them and more to come earlier and later. There was to be no cap after 11/01.

Talking to a bunch of waterfowlers at the time, it seemed like the last thing prudent was to create a system encouraging more use overall, including more late season use, for a number of reasons. By that time, invariably some parts of the state that had ducks don't, weather related or otherwise. This concentrates hunters. Further, the ducks themselves concentrate into fewer and larger groups the later things get. This also concentrates hunters. Finally, by this time virtually all the birds have been hunted, to various degrees and including the migrators, and they become even more sensitive to pressure and are even more likely to giddy-up when over-hunted.

Is encouraging more hunters to field hunt and come later actually productive? Not trying to ruffle any feathers, just wondering what others think.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I think that would be fine for guys that hunt mallards.But there are quite a few that come here because of all the different species they can hunt....Outside of mallards and pintails...the rest don't feed in fields...divers never do.The only way to hunt them is over water.And for divers it's big water.

As far as cutting the number of hunters during the third week of Oct.....The biggest complaint last year was that Minn. hunters couldn't hunt PLOTS that week of teachers conv....if we cut back the number of hunters allowed that week...I can hear the complaning already.


----------



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

> Many of you will remember the Nelson Plan from last session, ostensibly an alternate capping plan, that was really no cap at all (a/k/a the 10-10-too-many plan). Offered by Nelson as support for that plan, I remember seeing a bell chart that G&F prepared showing the use by NR waterfowlers over the season. Contrary to the thoughts of some, the highest use period is not the first couple weeks, but rather such use peaks about the third week in October. If I can find that chart, I'll email it to Chris and ask him to paste it into this post.
> 
> The Nelson plan would have shaved about 1,000 NR waterfowlers during this peak period with the idea of encouraging them and more to come earlier and later. There was to be no cap after 11/01.


With the late season advantage and first week on the locals that the residents have, I(if I'm a resident) would be doing fall house chores over this convention week that you talk about. If this is in 3rd week Oct., according to The residents last fall, there wasn't a bird in ND then anyway. :huh: I know I won't be burning my vacation over this period. I sure wouldn't complain if all NRs were in ND for this fine week of the month if I were you. Then again this was just last year, and you sure don't need me to tell you what to do.

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/members/ph ... t=pressure


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Open Field I too am very proud of ND as it is part of my heritage as I have stated in other posts over half of my living relatives are in ND anywhere from Harvey to Selfrige and places in between. My mother was born and in raised in Mercer,ND. Yes O.F. it is important to be conservative of the resources that are availabe to us as sporstman, however a reasonable cap on NR's would be understandable, but what you will find is guys like me who own a house and property in ND, spend a good deal of time in ND, getting aces out of lisc. if it is not done properly. I think a good solution would be to give tax payng NR's first chance at the available lisc's as we obviously have a vested interest in ND, my late father and I have had this situation for the last 21 years were we have maintained a NR tax paying status. And yet you will find that this will not sit well with others. There should be a resonable way to work a cap and not have the limited small game lisc currently in place. On the dry years when we have been there that has made up the majority of our hunting on those years. When it is dry in ND you do not see all of the NR's everybody talks about. Which leads me to believe that the majority of NR's are waterfowlers,yes I love waterfowling it is my favorite kind of hunting, but small game is also very enjoyable. You see I will hunt there no matter what kind of year it is, as a matter of fact if given a choice as to only be able to hunt waterfowl and small game in one state and no where else including my home state I would chose to hunt ND exclusivley even for only 14 days out of the entire year!! O.F. if you have any suggestions as to how to please the masses let me know. As I am sure you know you will never please 100% people 100% percent of the time lets shoot for 80% and see where we come out. Oh yah O.F. what do you think of capping off the small game lisc at the same number as the waterfowl or just capping off the small game lisc. period as the entire debate stems off of the use of the plot lands and the vast majority of acres tied up are for upland game anyway, it seems that would eliminate most of the argueing about plots land. Do you or does any body know how many NR small game lisc were sold last year in ND?


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Many of the guys go to Canada during the third week. There are really only two times of the year that I make absolutely sure that I am hunting waterfowl on friends land where we have exclusive permission and the birds are coming off of there property or a roost that no one lets people on. Opener for NR and MN teacher convention. I just can't deal with all the people.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

JD, I believe they sold almost 30,000 NR small game licenses last year. IMO, that is way too many.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

* NR small game licenses (mostly pheasant hunters) for 2003 is 28,678. In 2002 NR number was 22,840.

2003 was the first time that NR upland was more than waterfowl.

jd...I don't feel that NR landowners should recieve any special treatment when it comes to getting NR licenses...afterall...you chose to be a NR.

Plus doing that would encourage NR to buy land out here.That's just what we don't need...outfits like Cabelas,Basspro,Buckmasters,etc would be buying up all kinds of land.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd mn/nd

The question of Tax paying NR's and licenses is very complex, First if you give tax paying NR's first chance at the licenses you will find the "Daddy got rock's" type of NR to come to the state and buy land and take even more land out of the mix. Don't get me wrong here if a NR has the money to purchase a tract of land more power to them, but I think there should be a provision to allow access to the freelance hunters in return for the priority status of the license, and how would it be regulated? could the land purchased by NR's for seasonal use be put into the PLOTS program?

The cap on small game is complex also I think we should have a cap but in a way we do now, you can hunt small game all you want now you just have to buy another $85.00 license and in that respect it is working, however the land available for both upland and waterfowl is shrinking every year due to the Guides and Outfitters expansion. Did you know there are over 400 G/O's in ND right now! and some of them list 10,000 acres+ of land to use. If it is their own land and not leased land, more power to them, it is a free enterprise system, the last thing I want to see is NR outfitters's buying land in ND to take more land out of the system. I personally think and it is only me, that if a NR wants to operate as an outfitter/guide the fee should double or triple from what it is now.

I would venture to guess with the dry conditions we are having this spring there are alot of G/O's out right now trying to lease up water, for their hunters

I am sorry I do not know how many small game license were sold last year, I will try to find out and get back to you.

Have a good one!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

OF...28,678


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Thanks Ken!

jd mn/nd
That is close to the number of waterfowl licenses. that is alot of licenses for non migratory.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Here is something to think about
If a you purchases a small game license and take your limit of, Huns, Grouse, Ruffed Grouse, Pheasant, mourning doves and sandhill cranes. that is 84 birds Possession limit for the most popular birds times 28,678 for a total of 2,408,952 birds!

for waterfowl

Ducks, Mergansers, white fronted geese, canada geese and light [email protected] 20/day (I used 40 possesssion for light geese) that is 72 total possession limit for the most popular birds, times 28,000 that is 2,016.000 birds

That is a total of 4,424,952 birds! that is a lot of birds any way you look at it.

Have a good one!


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Open Field do you really think that it is fair to ace out the tax paying NR's do you know that most of those folks did what we have done which was to purchase property on back taxes owed to the state of ND. Regardless of what you believe I am not rich!! however this makes it very affordable for us to come to ND and be able to have the opportunity to enjoy the resources available to us. You see if you start aceing out NR's they will soon not pay their taxes and once again the state will be out of those revenues. It would seem to me that if the ND res. sportpeople that are making the posts about NR's staying out of ND, that don't want any NR's there. They should not only shut down the G/O's but also buy up any excess land and property even in small towns to keep these folks out. All of the posts that I am reading on this subject are about GREEDY sprots people wanting to have something all to themselves this is a very childish attitude to portray to people. Ken W and you have many times stated that our lisc.'s do not entitle us to any rights in your state, so what good are they? Why should people come to your state? You see if you don't want us there for hunting why should we come for anything else? My other question is out of all of the posts made why have I not read any from owners of sporting good stores or other business owners that the hunting industry effects? If they have made posts they should state sometime that is what they do. You see they know the percentages of business that comes from NR's and I bet if you ask any one of them if they are willing to sacrifice those dollars spent they would tell you were to go!! Just because the state of ND has something better than some place else does not entitle anyone to horde it for themselves. That would be like MN saying we have better deer hunting than a lot of other states so we will only sell 5000 NR lisc. and that's it. Do you have any idea how upset the sporting goods business would be they would be instantly all over our legistlators and congress people to reverse the action!! There hundreds of small business owners in MN that rely heavily on the tourists to make their living every year. Yet we are not chasing any of them away by talking bad about them. Why is it that certain individuals feel it neccesary to bad mouth NR's and state why we are no good or not good enough to come to ND? Open Field I did not chose to be an NR however if you would like sometime I would be happy to explain the circumstances that have keep me here in MN. I am not embarresed to be from MN and I am not embarresed by the way that I have helped to pull my weight in ND. I am not asking for a pat on the back simply to be treated with some respect.


----------



## MN Fisher (May 12, 2004)

The easy way to settle this is to have the Federal Government step in and make the fishing and hunting rules the same nation wide. Same rules, same prices, same seasons, same everything.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd mn/nd

I can not find anywhere in my post that i stated anything about aceing out NR hunters, I made a suggestion, and maybe it was not clear that, if a tax paying NR wants a priority status for the license there should be a little give and take. You own land in ND and use it for a short period of time, does that land sit idle when you do not use it, or do you allow hunting if people ask permission? Do I get priority anything from MN for paying taxes on my lake property?, and i never said anything about you being rich! my comment about "Daddy got rocks" was aimed at corporate land ownership, like Cabelas, Gander Mountain etc. these companies have the big dollars to come in and turn ND into Texas in a heartbeat.

The majority of the posts that deal with NR hunting do not say a Damn thing about keeping ALL NR freelance hunters out of the state, There may be a few but hey it is there opinion and they are free to express it just as you are.

All i want as a ND Resident freelance hunter is to be able to keep the quality of hunting in ND at a high level. I am trying to come up with ideas on how to balance this to keep the quality of hunting high. I would like you to point out to me where I stated that "you do not have any rights when you buy a license" Buy your friggin license hunt whaterver you purchased your license for, get your posession limit and go home just like I do. And by the way you as a NR can purchase more than one small game license which lets you get another possession limit (Thanks Ken) I can not do that as a resident, now who is getting crapped on????

It seems that you read my posts and read into them what you want to hear
if I sound like I am a little pi$$ed off it is because I am, you talk about ND people wanting everything for themselves and yet you want to be a NR with Resident status, Please point out to me where else in the U.S.A. this is happening?

And Give me a break Sporting goods stores? Do you purchase all of your sporting goods in ND when you come over to hunt? or do you buy them where you live? If you buy all of them in ND Thank You! And I am sure that many NR hunters do probably buy some, but I would venture to guess that if you are a NR and spending the money to come hunt, you have done your homework and are prepared for the hunt.

You should be proud to be from MN it is a great state! I mean that! it has it's own unique hunting. I hunt Ruffed Grouse every year in the Grand Rapids area, and there is no place in ND that is like the Boundary Waters, I vacation there every fall, I think I have treated you with a great deal of respect, i get angry when words are used that I did not say.

Have a good one!


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

jd, pull up Nicks condensed expenditure file under "who spends what where". Besides a host of solid information, you will see that NR waterfowl hunters dropped $21 million in ND. Sounds like a lot? Consider that just 9 new residents per legislative district at $12 per hour, would replace the whole NR duck dollar contribution to North Dakota.

North Dakota is not marketing our resource as a quality of life asset, but as a short term throw-away for instant dollars. Move 9 people here year round and the state has done something long term positive for our social fabric.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

jd mn/nd,

You have completely missed the boat. In fact i'm not sure if we are even in the same ocean. The idea is not to keep people out but to protect a resource from overexploitation and preserve the quality that so many people enjoy about hunting ND.

You say that if Minnesota cut down the number of deer licenses then the sporting good industry would freak out.

*This a hypothetic situation used to help me explain this concept* What would happen if the deer population in Minnesota drastically dropped for natural reasons and the DNR decided that they could not give out as many tags to anyone, Resident or Non. Then obviously the sporting goods stores would lose money. Now imagine that the sporting goods industry lobbied the state and the state said to the DNR well you have to give out more tags or else we will lose a bunch of money. This despite the fact that the resource cannot handle the pressure. Would you support this knowing full well that the this is not sound biology?

Now imagine you live in ND and you like to hunt ducks. That is what we face in North Dakota today. People are coming from all over the country to get the best of whats left. The pressure on the resource is too much. The biologists know it. They came up with a plan to address it. The hunters know it because they aren't seeing ducks. Take a look at the harvest statistics of ND and look at the trends. It doesn't take a biologist with a PhD to figure out that there is going to be an effect on the resource. For once it would be nice for us to be a little conservative. The government officials of ND have tied the hands of our biologists (a gag order on our game and fish and trying to open seasons whenever they want). Its been made very clear that our officials want money and don't care about sound management. The only place left to fight the money interests and G/O against exploiting the resources of this state is in the Legislature right now.

Yes I know it sucks from a personal level that you can't hunt whenever you want. But now is not the time for this. We are at a crossroads right now that will change the future of hunting and wildlife management in ND and the rest of the country(think lawsuit) far into the future.

If you don't support states having the right to manage their natural resources free of political contraints you are a fool.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

From out of the mouths of babes (read: young men wise beyond their years)........... Good post Jed.

I think there's two things you either get or you don't:

1. In order to preserve what most us understand and appreciate as ND's world-class wingshooting huntery, less is more. Both from a competition (and rush to exclusivity) and pressure standpoint, we just can't keep operating over the red line and think there aren't huge and permanent adverse consequences. Only one example, how long will it take for the ducks and darks, through incessant piss-pounding, to go the way of fall snow geese in ND? Have they started that pattern already?

2. The restrictions are not a personal attack against any one NR, but since the increased pressure has almost exclusively come from NR's and because of all the other reasons frequently stated, NR's as a group should bear the brunt of pressure/competition mitigation efforts. Some guys with long-standing connections to ND like jd see this as a personal attack; others like Perry know it's the only hope.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Open Field let me start with sometimes the way that we word things in writing leaves it up to a persons interpretation of how it sounds some of the comments that have been made may be not what you ment to say however it sounded different to me. As for the property that I own it is not posted to anyone, it is left open for use. In regards to corporate land owners there is nothing anyone can do to stop them they have as much right to buy land as any one else, no matter what state it is in. Also the comments posted where not soley directed at you Ken W. has made posts that implied the comments posted by me. As well as a few others. However I never asked for resident status and I have not complained about the lisc. fees charged. As for Gander Grinder no MN did not reduce the number of tags sold when about 8 years ago we had little or no deer in northern MN due too 2 sever winters back to back.They simply limited it too bucks only no doe tags to anyone not even a resident and we all understood why they had done that. I did not complain about only be able to hunt for 14 days as it has been that way since I have been hunting in ND. Something everyone should consider is that some where on this web site someone posted the number of lisc sold over the last several years I could not find it however as I recall the number of resident lisc's sold has also dramatically increased over the last several years as well, so no the problem is not soley the fault of NR's some of it also comes from res. too. As for Dan Bueide Do I take some of this as a personal attack YES, however if I did not care about the quality of hunting or the status of the populations of wildlife. I would not be trying to get all of you to look at it from a stand point of walk in my shoes and see how it feels. I do care about preservation of the wildlife as well the quality of hunting not just in ND, MN, WI, but in all states as sportspeople of the hunting nature we fight battles against various groups everyday to preserve our right to hunt and bear arms. However I do consider ND my home away from home and when people make conotations to the fact that I just come there to rape and pilage the resources it makes it very personal I can not remember a time since the late 90's that our group has taken home a pocession limit of anything, its not that we don't hunt hard but that when we feel we have enough to enjoy for ourseleves we usually pack up and go home, we will share some of our bounty with the older folks in town that enjoy wild game but are no longer able to hunt, man do they ever enjoy that. We have a great time hunting in ND and yes we could probably really hunt super hard and take home our limits but that is not what it is about for us. We just enjoy the enviroment of a good hunting trip and shareing it with great friends both NR's and res. Maybe a way to help make sure that you can get a NR lisc. is to set it up on a lottery like deal, so if you have hunted there in the past you have a preference in other words if some one has hunted there for 25 years they have that many preference points they get a lisc. over someone has only hunted there for three years. Then you can limit the number of lisc. people know that when they apply they are possibly not going to get a lisc. when someone quits hunting in ND even for one year they lose all of their preferrence and drop to the bottom of the list. This would probably statisfy hunters like my self that are NR's and it would keep the res. happy as they know they are only going to a limited number of NR's that have hunted there in the past. Which should keep the quality of the experience high for everyone.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

jd mn/nd said:


> Something everyone should consider is that some where on this web site someone posted the number of lisc sold over the last several years I could not find it however as I recall the number of resident lisc's sold has also dramatically increased over the last several years as well, *so no the problem is not soley the fault of NR's some of it also comes from res. too. *


This may be the first time I've ever heard residents are the problem. :eyeroll:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd mn/nd

OK now we are finally getting somewhere, I agree with the lottery Idea but if you read "gandergrinders" post we are dealing with a money is everything administration, this is the first thing that needs to be changed, will the next administration be any different? who knows. All I know is that it is not working the way it is now! (my opinion)

I disagree that you can not limit the purchase of hunting land by large corporations, with the proper legislation it can be done!

I guess I have a hard time dealing with people that are complaining about restrictions for hunting right now, today, it is the law. I have hunted and fished in Mn, SD, MT, Ontario & Manitoba and I am restricted by some of there rules, but it is their law that governs it and if I do not like it, I will not go there.

I can see further restrictions to NR hunters down the road, and from what I have read in these forums there will probably be a larger revolt than there has been with the current issues.

I would like to point out to all NR's and R's that you are either part of the problem or part of the solution, jd if I read your posts correctly you may be one of the NR sportmen that is part of the solution, others need to GET INVOLVED in the Conservation effort and just accept the fact that ND has Laws governing hunting and fishing, and if you do not like the laws GET ON THE ETREE and get involved!!!!!!!!! there are probably going to be more restrictive laws and regulations down the road, the excessive pressure on the resource is going to require it to be limited, and any conservation minded sportsperson can see that.

There are some in ND that want all NR's kept out, I do not (my opinion only) as I have said in past posts I just want to be able to keep the hunting quality in ND at a high level. is that being selfish? I do not think so I call it Conservation.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

jd, I've emailed three charts to Chris and ask that he paste them into this post that show licensing trends over the past 20-25 years, through '01. Best info I have - will see if I can get updated charts.

Seems many want to extend some sort of NR+ status or quasi R status to some class of NR's. I haven't heard much if any major complaints about any system to do that, if it relates solely to some preference on caps, except as relates to any prefernce based upon land ownership (recipe for accellerating exclusivity trends).

The hard part is where to draw the line? You idea works great for you, but what about the 25 year old life long ND native who's hunted with dad and brothers for 15 years and didn't hunt only last year because he just moved out of state and started a new job and couldn't get away? Aren't these "favored sons" more or equally deserving?

For any "favored son" status, based on what? Birth certificate origin? Hunter's safety certificate origin? ND tax filing status for a number of years? High school graduation? In each instance, you can think of many examples where those who you're probably trying to target would be exluded and those likely outside the target group would be included.

Then, as to those who aren't "favored sons" but who have had a long standing connection to ND. What about our immediate neighbors to the East with whom we have the closest ties (i.e. the ones in Collin Pederson's congressional district)? Give special status to those residing in border counties? Not real fair to the guys living in Otter Tail County. Special status to all MN's? Not real fair to those living in Hudson. All MN's and those WI's living in counties that border MN? You get the idea.

In each instance of trying to create special considerations for certain NR's, inequities and arbitrary line-drawings arise. So, at least until someone comes up with something that makes sense and isn't going to create greater division and angst, we fall back to traditional deliniations, state borders.

And if you want to talk straight economics, it should remain so. I know hunting brings and keeps ND residents. Make it easier for people to have their cake and eat it too, they will. Stop giving away free milk, and more will buy cows. As Dick and others have alluded to, it doesn't take many sold cows to dwarf the economic impact of NR hunting tourists.


----------



## administrator (Feb 13, 2002)

Here you go Dan.

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/media/Scan0013.pdf


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Dan B. in regards to "favored sons " theroy if you had followed the point that I was making is that anyone has purchased a lisc builds a preference so if they move away and had been buy a lisc as a resident than they would have a preference in the case where you stated a 25 year old that individual would then have a 9 or 10 preference point status built up which would excell them a head of many other NR's that only had a 3 or 4. however as a resident they would not need the preference points they would still be able to buy over the counter unlimited lisc. of course for residents only. In regards to the last paragraph of your post I am not sure of the piont that you were making please be a bit more explanatroy. If I understand your point you are saying add more residents and forget about the NR's? You see the lottery idea is still a very good idea because it still works the most fairly for everyone even residences that are leaving for employment reasons, however as someone stated in an earlier post to me why does matter the reason they are leaving if hunting in ND is important enough they will find a way stay. You see now that logic does not seem to apply as well does it? And I am not saying that I agreed with that comment just that when it was made it did not matter why I was a NR but now that it would be someone family that you know the rules should change to apply to a situtation only would be pertenant to a very small percentage my way with the lottery covers them. Dan thanks for the charts they were very interesting I was amazed at the tremendous increase of small game resident lisc. sold, and very surprised at the decrease of of resident waterfowl hunters over the last ten years or so. It would also be interesting to know why these changes occured. I wounder if there is any research that has been conducted by a nuetral third party as to why these dramatic changes have occured. I have to admit that I personally thought it would be the opposite of what I saw I thought the waterfowl would be way up and the small game would have only a slight increase if any. Thanks again for the charts.


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

Ken: yes, ND does have the right to make its laws, but as you clearly state thats your right, OTHER STATES have the right to contest it in a court of law.

What smacks me in the forehead time and time again, reading the posts on here, is that the locals/res, want the good and easy shooting, and then those that pay, are welcome to the tougher shoots. Anyone that hunts, anything, ever, knows, that opening weekend is the weekend to shoot your game.

Of course, yes, after a few weeks, and an influx of migrating birds, then the hunt is on again, or after the shot up birds calm down...

Maybe you have the right to be pissy about it, because you all surely are...but lets be perfectly clear about game: you dont own it, the USA does, regardless of the fact that the Feds allow you to manage it....and, regardless of your rebuttal stating its State property, its not. Its Federal property.

Its ok if you dont agree, but I have grown weary of this ITS MINE attitude that todays selfish "sportsman" display. Whatever happened to manners and respect? People have gotten so all fired shallow its disgusting.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Your'e wrong willie....We are being perfectly clear,the feds and the rest of the USA don't own the game...our state constitution says the wildlife belongs to the people of the state of ND.But you are right about being pissy...how else can we DEMAND that WE have those rights and we don't want them taken away from us.

Migratory waterfowl do not belong to us...but the feds say we have the right to make laws that are not made by them....ie...shooting hours,number of shells in your gun,limits,hunting season dates,etc.

Sometimes it takes being pissy in order to keep what we have....especially after going threw the last legislative session...where the only compromises made were by us resident hunters.


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

I think the key phrase in your whole statement can be summed up by: our State constitution.

In other words, by Nodakkers, for NoDakkers would be how that might be summed up. But, just because your constitution says it, doesnt mean that others cant contest it in court. And don't be too surprised if they win, eventually.

Everybody wants something for themselves. Very few want something for everybody. In this case, one might surmise that you want the good shooting for yourself. Federal courts might well find that greedy and unrealistic, but time will tell.

I am only here to make you all think about the very neutral and un Minnesota perspective, that of another type of NR hunter that sometimes visits your state...whats happening is game numbers of some species are shrinking and hunters (fishermen, archers, etc) are getting VERY POSSESSIVE of what they perceive to be theirs.

Is it theirs? Where do your rights end and mine begin? Where do your rights start and where do my rights start? Does it matter? Evidently so.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

willie click your heels together three times :idea: . you seem to be missing alot here, conservation is about controlling a situation to create what is assesed to be the appropriate results. Whether it be by tighter or looser control does not matter. The outcome is the ultimate goal, and it just so happens that all conservation land, water, waterfowl and wildlife is geared to increase accessiblity to a constantly growing number of outdoor enthusiasts.

You must also note the Guide Outfitter repercussions that we all as resident and non-resident share.


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

You are right, I am missing alot, specifically the meaning of most of your posts. None of them seem to coagulate much for me...and in turn, I might add that you seem to be missing the point of MY posts.

So, then, as I interpret your latest statement, the resident controversy is over conservation of game. I have seen nowhere here that this issue is about producing more game so NRs have better shooting...not once. I have heard argument after argument that res are sick of NR's, I have read time after time about the great shoots the res have on opening weekend, and sharing with each other where the birds are...

I see nothing in this that points to economic concerns, tourism concerns, etc...it all just sounds plain selfish from everything I am reading. Enlighten me, since I am missing the point here and since I am wrong and you are right.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Geez willie.... we live right here and know what we have to do to CREATE and PROTECT hunting opportunity for resident and nonresident alike. HUNTING is conservation, I can't say it any simpler.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Willie,
Long term management of the resource for the best interests of all involved is the ultimate goal.

Now what we have right now is two forces pulling at each other from both extremes. On one side you have the G/O and tourism industry trying to maximize use of the resource. On the other you have the sportsman of the state who can see what this "maximization" of the resource is doing to the resource.

From an economic standpoint putting a hunter in every slough would maximize economic output in the short term. Long term, the putting a hunter in every slough theory is not gonna work. The nature of the resource, especially waterfowl, will not allow this to go on.

Now as you can imagine like any good economic enterprise the tourism industry and the G/O are looking for profits. Which means more hunters. But wild game is not in unlimited supply. We need to be on a sustainable harvest plan. We are on the overharvest plan currently. That is why the resident sportsman have to fight so hard the other way because the commercial interests will not stop untill the supply has all been used up. It is the nature of the economic animal.

What I cannot understand is that most people can't seem to grasp the concept that we can in fact overharvest waterfowl. We are doing it with our oceans how is it so difficult to make the connection to land based animals. Yes there is game here in ND but I don't think it can sustain the assualt upon it that it keeps getting.

You can sheer a sheep many times but you can only slaughter it once. Think long term and I think you will start to understand what is trying to be done.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

gg.... :bowdown: :thumb:


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

ok...if there is that much pressure on your game in ND, I might suggest the Res dont hunt opening weekend either.

A few years of closing your seasons might take some of the res/NR pressure off, too, eh?


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

WW
So your position is to have Residents of ND not hunt in ND because there is undue pressure on the resource on opening weekend.

WW I am going to try to explain it from my point of view.

Hunting pressure in ND is Political right now, Mr. Hoven thinks that allowing a high number of NR hunters into the state is economic development, and to a certain degree it is, however with all of the loopholes in the ND hunting proclamation it provides a window for NR's to extract the maximum amount of game from the state. For instance Upland Game, NR's are not "locked out" of the state for opener, they can not hunt PLOTS or any G&F lands on the opener, they can hunt all of the private land they want, all of the State School land they want, all of the US Fish and Wildlife land they want, plus they can purchase another $85.00 small game license and they are able to harvest another possession limit. ND Residents can not purchase another license and harvest another possession limit.

For Waterfowl you have a little different situation, opener is for hunting local ducks, the migratory flight is usually not even close to the season opener, and duck hunters in general are very good at what they do. So most people time their hunt to the migratory flight, now put 60,000+/- hunters in the field, the result is the birds move, now the small pockets of migrators are bunched up the word gets out and they get pounded, and like is said duck hunters are very good at what they do and a ton of ducks are harvested.

I think there is some confusion as to what some people see as as "Selfish ND attitude" and Conservation of the resource, in my life time I have witnessed an abundance of the resource and also a decline in the resource, and I think we are in a decline cycle right now contrary to Management Surveys. I think that the number of NR's should be reduced greatly, not because I want the hunting all to myself but because the Conservation of the resource demands it.

And in answer to you query about Residents not hunting on the opener one week of less pressure would be a short time fix, it would be like putting a one of those little round bandages on an arterial wound.

Have a good one!


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

GG, You have said so well what I am usually unable to put into words. :bowdown:

You had to bring up a sheep reference though didn't you!!!! :wink:


----------

