# Joe Satrom Speaks On Hunting Issues



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Early last fall former state senator Joe Satrom announced for governor. Since he has a conservation background, I took the liberty of emailing him directly about hunting issues in North Dakota. I was pleasently suprised to get an immediate response. Mr. Satrom willingly agreed to meet with representatives of three wildlife organizations and two of "our" Grade A legislators to hear what was on our minds. He was a good listener. We listed our concerns with G/Os, leasing, some NDGF policies, etc. We also presented a list of 7 hunting related items for his consideration.

1 Institute the Public Trust Doctrine along with ND Constituational and statute law pertaining to wildlife policies. Both items must be guideing principals.

2 The Director of NDGF must be a visable, vigorous advocate for NDGF and it's mandates, both to the citizenery, the media, and to the legislature.

3 All NDGF advisory meetings, includeing the advisors advisory meeting, must comply with the open meeting law and be open to public scruinty and the media at all times.

4 All NDGF funds should be DEDICATED to NDGF use, with no additional outside department programs slipped into the NDGF budget. (Such as Wildlife Service, Project Safe Send, State Veterinarian inspection of commercial exotic animal, the state radio system, etc). The NDGF budget will be under continuous assault to fund other programs.

5 Involve the ND Landowner-Sportsman Council as a moderator between local Chambers of Commerce and local landowners to facilitate more voluntary access for hunting in communities that are graced by sportsman's expenditures. Communities that benifit must take responsiblity for some access program efforts.

6 Current full season regulations for NR hunters encourage the purchase of agricultural land for hunting to the detriment of farmers, ranchers, and businesses. Consider split seasons, zones, and lotteries.

7 Neither of the traditional waterfowl and pheasant belt areas provide any funding for PLOTS, yet they are the primary recipients of sportsman business activity, and to a great degree limit access through leasing and outfitting in these areas. A directed hospitality sur-charge in these counties , dedicated to PLOTS funding would help mitigate this situation.

Mr Satrom listened politely, said he understood our concerns, was not a hunter but had worked in the conservation field, he wanted to see balance on wildlife issues and would have a policy in place in his campaign soon. He made us no promises and we did not expect any.

Today, Dec 17, 03, I found the "ISSUE PAPERS" pertaining to hunting on Mr Satrom's web page.

*Hunting and Natural Resource Management - Let the Professionals Do the Job 
Our State needs a Governor who will appoint a professionally prepared and experienced natural resources administrator and empower and trust this leadership with responsibility for the management of wildlife resources in North Dakota, relying on professionals to re-establish the State's stature as a conservation-minded, hospitable place for resident and non-resident hunters. Effective, creative leadership and management will protect and enhance our wildlife resources, rebuild relationships with private landowners and communities highly dependent on recreational clientele, increase habitats available for public hunting, enhance private landowner participation, deter or regulate the large-scale leasing of land by guides and outfitters, improve the management of the public lands, meet the needs of North Dakota's taxpaying, resident hunter population and be a tool that demonstrates the open and friendly nature of our state and its citizens. In a Satrom administration, if there is going to be land leased for hunting it should be leased for public use by the State Game and Fish Department, rather than by out of state hunters. *

All I can say is


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

His ideals sound good, and he has my vote if he gets that far. However, I listened to him on the radio one day, and he could certainly use some enthusiasm when speaking on the radio, he sounded a little dull. That won't affect how I vote, but I am not sure about the majority of people.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

If Bueide won't run, he, so far, is the leader in my eyes!!


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

It would be a 100% inprovement over what has happened the last few years.

To bad Hoven has been sooo stubborn on all this :eyeroll: - Helped create & Got caught in a mess & really tried to let the least informed (Not professionals) try to solve it :eyeroll:

Without change ND will end up just like most other States & will eventually only be a memory of what it was, or could be.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

So far I like what I hear.

Good post Dick.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

May my father forgive me if I pull the lever nest to a D at the ballot box!


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

It sounds good! We'll see!


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

Dick,

I'm glad you're doing what you do. Helping to educate him early was excellent.

He listened, understands the issues, has a reasonable position, and he's not Hoeven. Good enough for me. Now I gotta get all that stuff done so I can at least vote...

M.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

It will be interesting to see if anyone else runs for governor from the Democratic party.We will need delegates to the Dem. convention next spring to push our agenda.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

What is "our agenda"??????? :withstupid: Let one of you problem solvers sum it up for the rest of us. :huh:


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Okay, if you feel stumped you have time I'll be gone for a week. Define an agenda or are we a bunch of whinners who only complain. Prove me wrong. Remember no complaining just set an agenda.


----------



## Powder (Sep 9, 2003)

You want an agenda??? Isn't that exactly what Mr. Monson outlined in the first post????? Zogman you've got me stumped. Mr. Monson and I have had our good natured differences posted in other topics but I really have to give him credit for doing exactly what you asked for.

The NR/R thing gets a lot of attention on this board. But putting that aside, I think all any group can ask of an elected official is to put the right people in place who can make an informed decision. That seems to be EXACTLY what Mr. Monson asks for.

But I'll stop here because he is one person who definitely doesn't need me to defend him.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Mr. Powder,

Dick Monson's points are good. No disagreement here. However if we want "our agenda" (Ken W) to have merit someone needs to start getting with a legislator and start composing changes. Let me give you my views on Dick's 7 points
1) Great will be good to legislate.
2) ? Why
3) No Brainner
4) Great will need to legislate
5) OK but cannot legislate
6) OK but need to present legislation
7) Sorry but this will never pass
Satrom's statement mostly political warm fuzzys. And his veiw on leaseing will never get to first base.

Any legislation that is wanted for 2005 has to be worked on NOW!!!! Not at the eleventh hour if we want to maintain any crediblity. Printing your/our wish list on a web site is NOT "doing" much. Handing your favorite legislator hard copy drafts of good sound legislation and getting him or her to sponser it is "DOING". Time is NOW next hunting season will be too late.

Sorry didn't mean to get your powder wet.

Give me good hard copy and I'll obtain support here in good ole GF

So let the games begin!!!!!


----------



## Powder (Sep 9, 2003)

Sounds to me like zogman just volunteered to put together a 'hard copy' list! :wink:


----------

