# Why so many hunters in ND when we are losing #s



## scissorbill (Sep 14, 2003)

Nice post ,Old Hunter. I agree with all but still have this question and have asked it before,how is it that back in the day, you only would see 2 groups a weekend and are now lucky 2 groups don't beat you to your field, yet we are constnatly told we have no hunters and need every imaginable combination of early season,youth,crippled mothers,left handed hunts ad nauseam to ensure we have hunters? My experience is as is yours, people and hunters everywhere.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

scissorbill said:


> Nice post ,Old Hunter. I agree with all but still have this question and have asked it before,how is it that back in the day, you only would see 2 groups a weekend and are now lucky 2 groups don't beat you to your field, yet we are constnatly told we have no hunters and need every imaginable combination of early season,youth,crippled mothers,left handed hunts ad nauseam to ensure we have hunters? My experience is as is yours, people and hunters everywhere.


It's a combination of things....

First of all back in those days guys were spread out across MANY states that had NUMEROUS available fields to access. As the years have gone by only North Dakota has had a population decline. Every other state has seen their prime duck habitat become some rich suburbanite's dream housing spread. Everyone wants a dreamy little scenic house near a wetland, stream, or "a view" that has slowly eroded the available cover for animals, and with it the vast hunting opportunities to guys in other states.

The second thing is mobility. More than ever before we have guys across the country willing to drive how ever many miles it takes to come to Mecca to hunt. (Look how many drive/fly from South Carolina, Georgia, Texas) every year!

What you are failing to see in the equation is local hunting pressure and numbers vs the overall hunter population as a whole across the US. As a totality of total hunters we are seeing a huge drop in participation.

1. Hunters in their own local states have little/no access anymore. I can give you personal examples of my frustrations here in Washington state. Why would a guy have to go thru all the BS of trying to secure permission for little pieces of property owned by 6 different people and have to worry about being too close to some new housing development?

2. Hunting has gotten too expensive in other states. Everything is largely becoming hunting clubs or pay to play. That sickens me. Why should I have to stoop to that level just to shoot a couple birds? Heck... I get more bang for my buck going to the golf course. It's closer to home, I have a bar to sit and watch the game in afterwards, and I don't have to spend the time, extra $$ on gas to get out there, scout, and seek permission. Rather I can stick closer to home with half the hassle. THAT is what is happening to a lot of young guys who might be interested in hunting, but find it is becoming too much of a pain in the *** time wise for all the stupid extra details.

So scissorbill... what you are seeing, is that the extra pressure is from local MN guys primarily who have little/no access willing to drive a few hours in their cozy vehicles, who have much more disposable income than most ND guys, and are willing to drive up and deal with the "pressure", that compared to what they normally face isn't that bad.

You then have additional guys coming from further away because they have more disposable income and are willing to travel to visit Mecca.

Consequently, North Dakota has an unbalanced higher proportion of pressure than other states because of:


Our large expanses of open prairie

Large expanses of property owned by much fewer people allowing greater overall access once permission is secured

our public access (huge # of WPA's, PLOTS, refuges, Wildlife Mgmt Areas)

posting laws allowing open access unless otherwise noted

over generous NR hunting laws allowing many consecutive days of hunting

low costs for everything from food to free access to bar drink specials.

Wide expanses of open prairie away from the millions of commuters they normally deal with

WHY wouldn't ND see an unusually disproportionate crowd of hunters? :eyeroll: Half of North Dakota residents are passionate rabid hunting enthusiasts, combined with huge droves of the boat patrol rolling thru the state....

What you are seeing is a local phenomenon. It is not the same story in the rest of the country. Just look at the states of people who hunt broken down by state, and you'll understand the trend I'm describing. Hunting participation is way down everywhere there is large urban sprawl occurring.

Ryan


----------



## bandman (Feb 13, 2006)

Dead on post R Y A N!!! Nicely said and it really highlights the frustrations what the "little man" (a.k.a most R's) has to deal with.

:beer: :beer:


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

R y a n said:


> So scissorbill... what you are seeing, is that the extra pressure is from local MN guys primarily who have little/no access willing to drive a few hours in their cozy vehicles, who have much more disposable income than most ND guys, and are willing to drive up and deal with the "pressure", that compared to what they normally face isn't that bad.
> 
> Ryan


Wrong. MN guys have plenty of access. Remember we are water hunters and we do have water. And, it's all public if you can access it. (and much of it is easily accessed.) What we don't have is the numbers of ducks you have.

My lake, for example has 6 or 8 huntable points. I'm usually the only one on the lake. Go figure.

I don't mean to hijack this thread like this but it's statements like yours that fuels the entire anti NR idea on this board.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

R Buker said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > So scissorbill... what you are seeing, is that the extra pressure is from local MN guys primarily who have little/no access willing to drive a few hours in their cozy vehicles, who have much more disposable income than most ND guys, and are willing to drive up and deal with the "pressure", that compared to what they normally face isn't that bad.
> ...


Wrong. MN hunters do not have access. You put words in my mouth as to my definition of access. Access is having the ability to hunt where there is a reasonable chance of seeing enough game to have sufficient hunting opportunity at harvesting a limit(I realize it is not all about limits this is just an example). It is not simply being able to find a puddle to put your john boat onto. For the type of hunting you do with that boat, each group of hunters needs several thousand acres to not scare the birds off the water and/or to be able to not be near enough to another group to scare their hunt.

You see... you have a problem because your state can't manage a duck to save it's hunting economy, and the fact you hunt water thereby chasing the ducks off the very huntable spots you use, is not being able to see the forest from the trees.

Your state has WAY too many hunters for the available *resource* within your state's borders. Let's face it. You aren't fooling anyone trying to make a blanket claim that there are 5,000 lakes in Minnesota that have birds, _*and*_ access to handle the pressure of all Minnesota waterfowl hunters. If you did ND wouldn't see the tremendous over pressure it does. All those guys would day hunt from their homes.

I'm not sure what your point overall is with your reply. The point was that pressure from too many guys on a finite amount of resource is causing strain to everyone trying to compete for it. You are now going down the lines of describing why Minnesota does provide that added pressure because they have over stressed their finite resource in their state with too many hunters, who are now moving up into North Dakota and stressing out the resource that exists here.

As you mentioned we shouldn't be hijacking Old Hunter's wonderul thread. If you wish to continue this line of discussion, I'll split the thread and create a new one.

Thanks

Ryan


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

Ryan,

By all means, split the thread. You appear to think you have a handle on this issue but you simply don't understand enough of what goes on here.

I'd love to debate some of your ideas.

Randy


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Randy

I split the thread. When replying please make sure you are specific as to hunting from an overall standpoint in MN, and don't generalize the experience based on your specific hunting locations, etc... E.g., make sure you reply based on looking at MN as a whole state and not a 20 mile square portion of the state.... as that is what MN residents consider when deciding to hunt at home or abroad.

Thanks

Ryan


----------



## Triple B (Mar 9, 2004)

i have to agree with Ryan on this issue and if all you others (resident or Non-resident alike) can't see the truth in his statements then chances are you have no idea what is really going on.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

One thing Ryan is forgetting is the out migration of people in ND. So some of the NR hunting group is people who grew up in ND and are coming back to see friends and family. SO when they are back....they hunt.

Also Ryan to say MN does not have access is very incorrect. And also access is getting onto land or water. Now oppurtinity to harvest game is totally different.

In MN you can gain access to the Mississippi River (Great Flyway)...but will you see ducks. Yes.....will they be with in range....maybe. In MN can you gain access to LOW or Leech or any other big water.....yes.....will the birds be in range.....no.

You see access is not the big issue for waterfowl.....but oppurtunity is totally different.

You see my point. Access is easy. Oppurnunity is not.

But yes access compared to ND is different. Because if land is not posted in ND you can hunt it. In MN you need to find the land owner. Again the view of access in this situation is different.


----------



## bowhunter04 (Nov 7, 2003)

Hunting in Minnesota and hunting in North Dakota are two different animals. I grew up in Minnesota and I'm currently a student at NDSU who plans to stay in North Dakota. When we hunted in Minnesota we went out on land that we had access to and hoped the birds showed up. We scouted but it was very difficult to gain access unless you were good friends with the land owner and no other "good friends" had already asked. Often times we hunted the same two or three ponds or fields week in and week out. In North Dakota, on the other hand, we go where the birds are. Find the birds and that's where we're hunting. We still run traffic from time to time but it's much different than running traffic in Minnesota. I think that's the kind of access Ryan is talking about. The ability to move to where the birds are in almost an instant. That is NOT possible in Minnesota. Too much land is already locked up. Especially for high volume hunting times like openers. Don't believe me, try getting access to a grain field the third weekend in August in central Minnesota.


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

R y a n said:


> Randy
> 
> I split the thread. When replying please make sure you are specific as to hunting from an overall standpoint in MN, and don't generalize the experience based on your specific hunting locations, etc... E.g., make sure you reply based on looking at MN as a whole state and not a 20 mile square portion of the state.... as that is what MN residents consider when deciding to hunt at home or abroad.
> 
> ...


Ryan,

First off, I can't debate you if you lay down all kinds of arbitrary rules. To say I have to include all corners of Minnesota in order to make my claims is like my saying you have to include all corners of ND. You know as well as I do that all of ND is not created equal just as all of Minnesota is not created equal.

But, I'll talk in generalities if that is what you want.

I'd like to address some of your points in the note that first fired me up.

First, you said that Minnesota doesn't know how to manage ducks. For the most part, I agree with you 100%. As a small example, they'll never have the ducks back if they don't limit and reduce the number of potholes that they allow minnows and walleyes to be raised in. But, that's a whole other can of worms we won't open now.

But, Minnesota can't be managed like North Dakota can. And, Minnesota will never have the ducks that North Dakota has had in the past few years simply because ND is in the area of the country that actually makes the ducks! Minnesota has a very small part of the prairie pot hole region. The attempt to compare the two is like comparing an apple to a hippo. Two totally different things.

Our habitat is very different from one another too. If you draw a line from the NW corner of Minnesota to the SE corner, you have very poor duck habitat for the most part (At least for the same species of ducks commonly seen in ND) Mallards, for example, need grasslands to nest in successfully. The land east of that line we just drew is woodland and forest. It'll raise some ringnecks and mergansers but it won't grow the mallards that most of North Dakota will.

Anyway, my point with that is that Minnesota and North Dakota are hugely different. No debate there so let's not try to compare them on all counts.

Now for your comments on access. I take great offense at that. Minnesota has a ton of water and it's all public. If there's any road right of way that the water meets, a public access, state or local public land or any other public easement to it you can get on it.

If the pond or lake is surrounded by private land, typically all you have to do it knock on a few doors and ask. It's really not much different than out there in ND. I've hunted ducks in a few different parts of the state and have found people very good about giving you access to their land if you just ask nice. Same thing for the fields. When we do set up for field goose and mallard hunts, I have seldom been turned down. Usually it's just if they are saving it for family or friends. Minnesota land owners aren't the grumpy old men you saw in that movie!

Now, before you talk of busting roosts and imply that we should all hunt fields like you folks do, let me remind you of the differences again. Minnesota has a long heritage of water hunting. We like it! Sometimes it's not about killing a limit of ducks. Sometimes it's about watching a sunrise over the lake or the smell of a wet dog after she makes a retrieve.

And, it's really hard to kill my two canvasbacks, two redheads and two scaup every day over a field. I'm primarily a diver hunter because I like they way they come in, the way they decoy and generally how fast they fly. It makes my blood boil more than a flock of mallards coming in. But, I'll kill some mallards too from time to time.

Now lets talk about roosts. We simply don't have too many of the type of water the critters "roost" on. This flock will take this lake over here and that flock will take that lake over there. They have a lot of water to choose from and they typically don't get carried away all going to the same one.

Case in point. I have a pond on my property just off the main lake. It has wild rice in it and we all know ducks love the stuff. And, I've made it my own refuge for the ducks. Early this season I had about 200 wood ducks, 200 teal and about 100 mallards using this pond for a "roost." I have never shot near it. As the weather chilled, the teal went away. There are none now. Then the woodies went away, there are none there now. Most of the local mallard have been chased away even though they have a safe place to stay. As of right now, the flock varies from 20 to 30 mallards that spend the night. This has been a very safe "roost" for them all season. It just doesn't work here like it does there. Even our refuges don't work like it does there. I have a refuge 1/2 mile from my house. The canada geese use it and there's always a few mallards that use it. But, even though it would be a completely safe place to sleep, there is almost never a diver duck of any kind on the lake. Go figure...

I think Chuck Smith said it better than I ever could. Access and opportunity are two different things. We have access, we don't have as much opportunity. We can't because we don't have as many ducks.

I didn't like the tone of your post where you talked about the guys from Minnesota who get in their comfy vehicles and drive a few hours who have more disposable income....

Now, I may have inferred the tone as it's hard to get it right all the time from the written word. But, not everyone who comes to ND every year has more "disposable" income. My son in law goes out there each year with a group of friends. He's a young guy with a 3 year old and a new baby on the way. He scrimps and saves each year so he can go. It's the only hunt he goes on! I'm the old fart with a bit more ability to spend money on hunting and I've never duck hunted in North Dakota simply because I have duck hunting on my own land. I own about 2000 feet of shoreline on a great diver lake. I have a point that goes into the water almost a hundred yards.

One of the things that I believe gets overlooked in the great NR debate on this board is this. Minnesota has the second highest number of duck hunters in the nation. Only California has more. (these are the latest numbers I have). Now, take into account that all those people LOVE duck hunting and are sooo close to a completely different experience (ND). You bet they are going to come visit. Heck, duck hunting is fun no matter where you do it. But, don't believe the only reason they come is because they have no hunting at home.

A person in Minnesota who wants to kill a limit of ducks in Minnesota can do it on a fairly regular basis. All they have to do is scout, scout scout and take some responsibility for networking and knocking on some doors. Sound familiar?

For the rest of us, one or two ducks a day, watching the sunrise, hearing the rush of divers' wings in the morning darkness, the smell of a WET dog and sound of the waves lapping on the front of the blind is enough of a duck hunting experience.

Now, I've watched the responses of certain people on this board for a few years now. I'm not here to debate the angry hoardes who think all NR's should stay home. Ryan offered to debate me on a few issues and I accepted his offer. I'll not argue till we are all blue in the face.

Thanks
Randy

PS, I think my fingers are bleeding.


----------



## Triple B (Mar 9, 2004)

first off congratulations on the longest post ever written in the history of this website! :beer: :lol: . I'd also like to say you both have some very valid points.


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

Thanks. :beer:

(my fingers still hurt though)


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

Triple B said:


> first off congratulations on the longest post ever written in the history of this website! :beer: :lol: .


How true. But soon to be broken I bet!  just givin ya grief R Y A N


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Shu said:


> Triple B said:
> 
> 
> > first off congratulations on the longest post ever written in the history of this website! :beer: :lol: .
> ...


Lol ok ok I deserve that (or soon will)

I have a few important meetings today... so won't reply soon... however I'll get back to it when I have time to fully devote dedicated effort.

Thanks for the good thoughts Randy..

Ryan


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

I'm leaving tomorrow morning for deer hunting. I'll check back when I return!

Have a good weekend all!


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> You bet they are going to come visit. Heck, duck hunting is fun no matter where you do it. But, don't believe the only reason they come is because they have no hunting at home.


I respectfully disagree. Almost every NR group that I have spoken with has time and time again said they can't get on land in MN or Wis. They even come on here and say it (one was discussing how he can't get on fields to hunt early season geese around Rochester just recently).

Two of my closests friends chose money over their hunting privileges and moved to MN. The one says the money is too good to move back, but he comes out every year for a hunt. The other decided money isn't worth loosing the hunting he once had. Unfortunately the closest he got was SD. He said that is going to have to do. So we swap hunts each year.

Both agreed the hunting access is so much better here than in MN. They couldn't hunt anything.

I had a buddy come from South Carolina. He couldn't believe the access. Said you would need deep pockets in SC to get into the duck hunting we did and he said they got ducks everywhere!

Ryan is right on.

And if MN is so duck crazy, why on earth do I not hear you complaining about caps in SD. I have gone onto many SD outdoor websites and yet not once can I find a MN or Wis. resident ripping on SD for their waterfowl restrictions.

Many of our ducks end up in Arkansas. Why aren't people flooding to Arkansas to shoot ducks like ND? Access maybe?? The opportunity is there.


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

I have one word for those who say they can't get on land/water in Minnesota and that word is "LAZY." You may not get on the field or lake you want to get on but if you aren't lazy, there is a ton of hunting options here. That's plain and simple.

I've lived here all my life. I've hunted everything from deer to squirrels in this state and the only thing that its really difficult to get on for is deer. But, there's a ton of public land that produces year after year. There's deer hunting to be had if you want it bad enough.

As far as the caps in SD, that's another issue that doesn't relate to this topic. I won't get into that any more than I'll get into the restrictions ND has placed on non residents.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Access is not the issue in MN.......lack of birds, lack of habitat.

Also in ND if you see a flock of 50 in a field you don't think that is a huntable number. In MN i knock on a door and get permission.

The rochester area during early goose has crops up everywhere. The land that is open is canning land with is hard to get permission because they don't want the liability.

Again access in MN and ND is two different animals. Look at the trespass laws. Look at the liability issues....the state of ND waives the liability on the land owner if land is not posted. MN......not so much.

Again access in ND.....if I see birds in a field on a slough and it is not posted.....I can hunt it. In MN you need to knock on doors. So is access denied, no. But is access difficult to get....yes, because you have to do some leg work. Two different animals.

So again.....access is not the issue.....lack of birds is.


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

Chuck,

You continue to say it better than I can. I think I'll just let you take the ball and run with it.

:beer:


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> So again.....access is not the issue.....lack of birds is.


So why aren't the MN and Wis. duck hunters going to Arkansas?

Almost all of our ducks end up there. There is no lack of birds because they were here and now there are there.

So why aren't MN. Wis, SC, Georgia, Tennesse, Kentucky duck hunters flocking/flooding the state of Arkansas to duck hunt?

Access.....That is the they come to ND too. Lack of birds contributes to why they come here, but access is the big issue.


----------



## deacon (Sep 12, 2003)

Chuck Smith said:


> Access is not the issue in MN.......lack of birds, lack of habitat.
> 
> Also in ND if you see a flock of 50 in a field you don't think that is a huntable number. In MN i knock on a door and get permission.
> 
> ...


You guys are right on, access is not the issue in MN. I see more and more drainage being put in all the time.

Good luck on deer this weekend, my son and I will be in the Henning area for his first deer hunt that he can use a gun!


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

live2hunt said:


> > So again.....access is not the issue.....lack of birds is.
> 
> 
> So why aren't the MN and Wis. duck hunters going to Arkansas?
> ...


No, access isn't the big issue. Read what I wrote. There's plenty of access.

But, why don't we go to Arkansas instead? HA HA HA HA... It could be that it's only ten hours farther than it would be to go to ND.

The cost of the gas alone on a round trip for me would be an additional $360.00. Seems like that might be a good reason to go to ND rather than Arkansas.


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> No, access isn't the big issue. Read what I wrote. There's plenty of access.


You and Chuck claim there is access, but I have heard from 2 close friends and probably 100 NR's from Devils Lake to Napoleon that say otherwise.

Who should I believe? :huh:


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

Think about some of the things I've said. For example: ALL water in Minnesota is public. Most have some way of getting on it. Those that don't, have landowners you could ask if you weren't too lazy to knock on doors.

I'd venture a guess that I know more hunters from Minnesota than you do. And, I know they hunt. Do you honestly think they come to ND for one long weekend a year and then put their guns and labradors away for the rest of the year until they return to ND the following year? Like I said, Minnesota has the second highest number of waterfowl hunters in the nation. (based on state license sales!)

But, you can certainly believe who you want.

There are other Minnesota boys on here. It would be interesting to hear what they had to say.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

L2H.....

I have talked with many people from ND on my travels and have visited ND on many occasion for hunting and in business. The people I talk to don't mention the problems that I read on this site.

Who should I believe :huh:.

I have driven the back roads of ND and have not seen the pressure that many talk about......What should I believe.

I will agree that in some parts pressure could be a huge issue. But have I seen it.....no. But do I believe that is exist.....yes. So don't be close minded.

Access in MN is not the issue you make it. Access in MN it is totally different than in ND. Please re-read my posts......I am getting sick of saying it over and over. If you want to hunt birds in MN you can find a place to hunt.


----------



## Triple B (Mar 9, 2004)

isn't SD alot closer to some of you from the east? why then do you not dispute the cap they have??? why aren't hunters flooding into SD, they have just as many ducks and geese???? ACCESS, and a CAP.


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

You get the duck hunters, they get the pheasant hunters.

Interesting isn't it that even though access is more limited in SD, there are far more pheasant hunters in that state than in ND. Even though in some areas of ND the pheasant hunting is VERY good.

So, maybe it's NOT about access. Maybe it really is about opportunity!


----------



## bowhunter04 (Nov 7, 2003)

Some of you are correct. Access to land to hunt isn't terribly difficult to come by. There is plenty of water and it's all public. HOWEVER, access to GOOD hunting in Minnesota IS difficult to come by. This is coming from someone born and raised in Minnesota and plans on living in North Dakota. I put in my time when it came to getting access. I worked as a bee keeper for 7 years while I was in high school and one summer while I was in college. I was in a truck driving around every day from April until October. We covered 3 counties with our bees. I carried around a plat book and marked small grain fields every time I found one. Then I would go home and contact the land owner. 99% of the time I was told that they either don't let anyone hunt, they hunt themselves, or they had someone that they let hunt their land every year. I was lucky to have 1 good field with geese on it by the time hunting season rolled around. Sure I had a few fields to hunt but most of the time in Minnesota it is about getting land and HOPING that the birds decide to be there. If access wasn't a problem I would be moving back to Minnesota. In May I will be graduating with a degree in Electrical Engineering from NDSU. I could make a lot more money in states other than Minnesota. In fact, I've had the job offers. But I can tell you I will be staying in North Dakota BECAUSE the access is better here. If that ever changes, there won't be anything to keep me here. Access IS better in North Dakota.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

R Buker said:


> But, you can certainly believe who you want.
> 
> There are other Minnesota boys on here. It would be interesting to hear what they had to say.


Well... let's see...



bowhunter04 said:


> Some of you are correct. Access to land to hunt isn't terribly difficult to come by. There is plenty of water and it's all public. HOWEVER, access to GOOD hunting in Minnesota IS difficult to come by.
> 
> *This is coming from someone born and raised in Minnesota and plans on living in North Dakota.*
> 
> ...


Interesting thoughts...


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ryan.....access is there. Habitat and birds are not.

I personally have 6 fields I can hunt water fowl on. I have 6 fields I can also pheasant hunt on. That is 12 fields. I also can go to the Mississippi river and hunt. I am also born and raised in MN.

Two different sides. You could get this same comments from two people from ND as well.

Also I have had to explain how I hunt fields.....most farmers think you hunt just water for ducks and geese.


----------



## bowhunter04 (Nov 7, 2003)

That's my point though. You have SIX fields to hunt for waterfowl and another SIX to hunt for pheasants. I've been out 20 times this year and have hunted 20 different fields. I also had several fields that I've found that I haven't gotten a chance to hunt because the birds left before I got the chance to hunt them. Six fields doesn't seem like access to me. It seems like a restriction.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

bowhunter04 said:


> That's my point though. You have SIX fields to hunt for waterfowl and another SIX to hunt for pheasants. I've been out 20 times this year and have hunted 20 different fields. I also had several fields that I've found that I haven't gotten a chance to hunt because the birds left before I got the chance to hunt them. Six fields doesn't seem like access to me. It seems like a restriction.


Agreed

6 is not access... go read my definition of access again Chuck. I can get access to hunt WalMart parking lot. Doesn't mean I'll see a bird there. I know you get the point we are trying to make, you are just being stubborn trying to argue it based on your criteria. Let's move along to a new idea...

Gotta run for the moment ... be back later

Ryan


----------



## R Buker (Oct 29, 2005)

HA HA.. Ryan, you are picking nits.

If there are birds working one of six fields and you go there, you'll have a hunt.

Just for kicks tonight, I saw some small canada geese milling in the distance. I drove over there and found them. I then went to the farmer's door and asked if I could hunt them. Guess what... I have access to those geese tomorrow morning if I want them! Real tough. It took about fifteen minutes of visiting with the farmer.

How in the world is that different than what you do in ND other than you don't always talk to the farmer. Personally, I didn't mind it a bit.

Guess what else.. . If the geese move, I'm betting I can likely get permission for that field too. If not, there are other geese and other fields.

I stand by my statement that anyone who doesn't have access in Minnesota is lazy. Anyone who whines about it is a lazy whiner. There is simply no excuse not to hunt if you want to.

I don't suppose it's ok to tell about another board but there's a Minnesota board out there and if you go to the waterfowl section, you'll read all kinds of stories where people are going out hunting waterfowl. And, I can assure you they aren't all hunting their own land.

Come on guys. It's like anywhere. It is what you make it.

I'll even tell you about the hogs, white tailed deer, varmints, snow geese and various other hunting I have done in Texas on a variety of ranches. There is no state in the union where "access" is harder to get than Texas. And, through networking and making friends, I was able to hunt on numerous ranches there and have standing invitations to return. So, I'll not accept whining about not having places to hunt in Minnesota.

The thing I'll give you is that you have more birds and fewer hunters.

Randy


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

R y a n said:


> You see... you have a problem because your state can't manage a duck to save it's hunting economy


The Dakotas have done NOTHING to save the habitat that they have; the habitat that is the sole reason the ducks are here. If they had topsoil like MN and IA, they would look the same and would have the same amount of habitat loss...and a lot less ducks, and crappy hunting too.

The ONLY reason why there's still good habitat here is becasue the soil is crappy enough where it's not worth it for the farmers to plow it. Farmer's can make a profit letting it sit idle in programs like CRP...

...or use to.

With the changes in Ag practices and the Ag economic landscape we'll see what happens here. The future doesn't look bright IMO.

Which is why we should be thankful for what we still have and enjoy it while it's here. Sitting behind a computer and *****ing about something as trivial as hunter numbers isn't going to accomplish anything. As sportsmen, we like to think we play a much bigger role than we do. In reality we have very, very little say in what goes on. Ag dollars will always be much more important than hunter's opinions.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I wish I could find the data, but if you look at hunter numers in ND over the years they have not changed that much. As a matter of fact they are a bit down even WITH 25-30 K NRs. The only thing that has significantly changed in those numbers is the balance of NRs to residents. Unfortunatey due to outmigration ND is no longer growing. While we are getting a huge influx of NR hunters they are really doing nothing more that replacing the loss of resident hunters. When I went to school 1/3 of my class were hunters. When I recently asked my son how many hunters were in his clas he wasn't aware of more than a handfull.

Before we judge the impact of NRs and lower caps I think the G&F needs to do some in depth studies to determine exactly what that impacts is. From the comments one hears it is easy to make assumptions. A classic one is that all NRs spend an entire week or two pounding away at birds. If we have 25K NRs I have to wonder if more than about 10%-20% (2,500- 5,000) are spending that much time afield. The balance probably come for a couple of long weekends if that. If that is true will a 10K cap really have any significance??


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Year Res NR Total

1975 67,267 6,043 73,310 
1976 63,660 8,530 72,190 
1977 63,117 7,933 71,050 
1978 64,081 9,044 73,125 
1979 59,053 8,682 67,735 
1980 55,508 8,262 63,770 
1981 52,079 6,931 59,010 
1982 52,565 7,615 60,180 
1983 48,575 7,085 55,660 
1984 45,814 7,111 52,925 
1985 41,470 6,380 47,850 
1986 42,048 7,507 49,555 
1987 40,890 7,505 48,395 
1988 26,838 4,222 31,060 
1989 29,394 5,778 35,172 
1990 27,529 5,522 33,051 
1991 27,857 5,928 33,785 
1992 22,816 8,175 30,991 
1993 30,271 9,534 39,805 
1994 35,329 10,316 45,645 
1995 37,054 11,997 49,051 
1996 39,009 13,750 52,759 
1997 36,953 15,561 52,514 
1998 39,513 19,191 58,704 
1999 39,118 21,873 60,991 
2000 35,992 25,165 61,157 
2001 35,310 30,029 65,339 
2002 34,138 29,992 64,130 
2003 30,771 26,066 56,837 
2004 28,336 24,375 52,711 
2005 28,331 25,455 53,786

the 2002 and prior years numbers are overstated or the 2003 and later years are understated, depending on how you wish to look at it. We probably had no drop or even a moderate increase in 2003, becasue the license split in 2003 eliminated almost all of the "just in casers" - those who bought NR waterfowl licenses but were not active waterfowlers.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Matt Jones, "Crappy Soil" ? Tell that line to someone else. You live in the Red River Valley some of the richest farmland in the world and you call it "crappy"? Or could you only be referring to that what lies west of I-29? You know the area's you guys like to hunt. FYI we have excellent soils in the majority of the state. Rainfall my friend has a lot to do with it. Along with genetics, round up ready beans and corn. We are seeing 180 bu corn and 50 bu beans in SC ND, on "Crappy Soil". Lift the restrictions on draining and watch how fast the wetlands would disappear.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ryan.....those six fields have produced birds everytime I have gone out. So what is the problem.

Again access in both states is totally different.

Here is an example. There is a unposted field holding 500 geese. As a hunter you go get permission from the farmer. Now this is where everything changes.

In MN I don't have to worry about another group getting there before you or a group getting there late and setting up right next to you. In ND you do!

So that type of access is easy. See the other hunter did not have to knock on doors, track down the land owner. That is why people say access in ND is so easy or better.

If people can not concede that point then I am wasting my breath.


----------



## northdakotakid (May 12, 2004)

What is the definiation of access?

I hear two types on the MN issue...

First I ehard that there is no access problem because they have 10,000 lakes

then I heard that access is hard because of the hoops you need to go through...

I would have to say you have an access problem either way because the average hunter has a problem either finding birds (habitat) or getting permission = an access problem right??? But not in as many words as others??

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

On the North Dakota habitat issue... I am sorry but as a family of farmers... you are going to farm it ditch to ditch if it is good crop land for an "average" farmer.

And to refresh the memories of some people... the Red River Valley was a giant marsh prior to settlers buring and draining it... hence the depth of the topsoil... that is the reason that the waterfowling hunting is nothing compared to the sand hills of the states central regions... if you want an example of where they have destroyed habitat recently... just follow the potato irrigations... not going to be any top soil left in a few years... maybe then it will be returned back to wildlife


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

NoDaka kid.....access is not hard....

Let me break it down again....

In ND you spot a un posted field that is hold 500 geese. YOu can hunt it with out getting permission from the farmer.

In MN you see that same field you need to talk to the farmer.

See that is the difference about access between the two states. One you need permission to hunt. The other you don't (if not posted).

So when people state access is easy in ND.In MN you still can get access. You just have to knock on doors.


----------



## bowhunter04 (Nov 7, 2003)

Chuck, unfortunately I don't get permission every time I ask for it in Minnesota. All to often the answer is one of the following:
1) We hunt
2) We know someone we let hunt
3) We don't let anyone hunt
4) Give us $XXX.XX dollars per gun

Honestly, I get permission from land owner in minnesota about 1 in 5 times during the middle of the year. For early goose season, that number drops to about 1 in 20. It's almost impossible to get permission for early goose. I have absolutely no problem tracking down land owners. I have plat books for every county around us in Minnesota. The worst the land owner can do is say no. But that's often what they say. I can count on one hand the number of times I have been told no by a land owner in North Dakota this year and most of those instances were due to other groups securing permission first. There IS an access issue in Minnesota. That's why I am leaving.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Thanks Bob, that was the information I was trying to find.

Year Res NR Total

1975 67,267 6,043 *73,310 *
1976 63,660 8,530 *72,190 *
1977 63,117 7,933 *71,050 *
1978 64,081 9,044 *73,125 *
1979 59,053 8,682 *67,735 *
1980 55,508 8,262 *63,770 *
1981 52,079 6,931 *59,010 *
1982 52,565 7,615 *60,180 *
1983 48,575 7,085 *55,660 *
1984 45,814 7,111 *52,9*25 
1985 41,470 6,380 *47,850 *
1986 42,048 7,507 *49,555 *
1987 40,890 7,505 *48,395 *
1988 26,838 4,222 31,060
1989 29,394 5,778 35,172 
1990 27,529 5,522 33,051 
1991 27,857 5,928 33,785 
1992 22,816 8,175 30,991 
1993 30,271 9,534 39,805 
1994 35,329 10,316 45,645 
1995 37,054 11,997 *49,051 *
1996 39,009 13,750 *52,759 *
1997 36,953 15,561 *52,514 *
1998 39,513 19,191 *58,704 *
1999 39,118 21,873 *60,991 *
2000 35,992 25,165 *61,157 *
2001 35,310 30,029 *65,339 *
2002 34,138 29,992 *64,130 *
2003 30,771 26,066 *56,837 *
2004 28,336 24,375 *52,711 *
2005 28,331 25,455 *53,786 *

You will notice NR numbers were pretty stable through 1992 while resident numbers started dropping about 1988 but after 1994 *overall numbers stayed close to the 75-87 average*. That would help discount the argument of pressure due to numbers of hunters. Note that 75-87 NR numbers are at about the level that have been suggested as a cap. That would leave currently put us at the overal numbers similar to that of the 88-93 period which I should mention , was a period when the waterfowl was at or near a low point. I can just about assure you that if that happens the next complaint will be that there are not enough hunters to keep the birds moving around. That is why we did a lot of "jump shooting in 88-93. Also note that in those early years (75-87) I do not recall we had the 2 week limit on the NR hunters.

The information gleaned from a link on another posting indicated that NR's averaged 6 days of hunting, 1/2 of what they are allowed. I believe the number for residents is very close, meaning that if you have 53 thousand hunters and days afield is the same for either and the pressure, in terms of numbers, has been consistent throughout the years. I will grant that weekday pressure has likely taken a slight increase but it's probable that there are only 1,600-1,800 NR spread over 1/4 the state ( or roughly 18,000 sq miles) on any given weekday (calculations based on 1/2 of the total NR numbers divided by 7 weeks). If what some are claiming is true then very few residents are hunting this same period, the hunter density and pressure would seem pretty light to me. Put those NRs in groups of 2 or 3 then you would average a group every 30 sq miles or so. Yes you will have heavier concentrations but you also will have lighter ones where birds that are pushed out may find refuge.

A note on habitat. While in many states farmers have learned to develop their habitat that is just catching on in ND. This is predominantly an ag state and in all honesty if it doesn't *directly* benefit farmers it's a "hard sell". That is one of the reasons ND is behind the nation when it comes to industry other than farming, if the majority ag sector doesn't want it, it isn't likely to happen.


----------

