# Satrom & Hoeven Q&A from the Bismarck Tribune



## SiouxperDave25 (Oct 6, 2002)

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/30dayarc ... nws02.html

Gubernatorial candidates address hunting issues

By RICHARD HINTON, Bismarck Tribune

Hunting in North Dakota has been among the hot-button issues in the last state Legislature, in the courts, in meetings of sportsmen's groups, throughout many of the small towns and big cities here in North Dakota, as well as across the border in Minnesota.

Many North Dakota hunters are feeling that the quality of their hunting has been diminished by the influx of nonresident hunters, who are crowding North Dakotans off their favorite duck sloughs or bird-hunting fields.

Out-of-state hunters were confronted by new laws and proclamations that set higher license fees and put restrictions on when, where and how many days they could hunt.

Recreational fishing also has been a frequent subject of lawsuits and court proceedings as the state has challenged how the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manages the Missouri River system. Lake Sakakawea, the state's vast fishing and boating playground, continues to recede, with record low levels expected almost daily.

As another hunting season unfolds, the fall walleye "bite" looms and election day draws closer, the Bismarck Tribune e-mailed a questionnaire on hunting and fishing issues to Gov. John Hoeven and challenger Joe Satrom.

The Tribune's questions and their responses follow.

(Reach reporter Richard Hinton at 250-8256 or [email protected].)

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

John Hoeven, incumbent

Did you buy a North Dakota hunting license for 2003?

Yes.

Do you have a 2004 license?

Yes.

How many times did you hunt in North Dakota last fall?

Three.

For what species?

Upland game.

Did you buy a North Dakota fishing license for 2003?

Yes.

Do you have a 2004 license?

Yes.

How many times did you fish?

Several.

For what species?

Walleye.

Does your campaign accept contributions from any organization or business associated with hunting, fishing or sport shooting?

If yes, please list the organizations and amounts.

Yes, we have received contributions from the National Rifle Association in the amount of $7,500.

What is your philosophy for balancing the interests of resident hunters with the demand for hunting opportunities from out-of-state hunters?

To begin with, understanding and mutual respect are the key. North Dakota's natural resources belong to all North Dakotans. We need first to protect the resource for future generations and ourselves, and second, we need to manage it for the maximum benefit of all our citizens. That means making it work for all of our citizens, including resident hunters, landowners and rural communities.

We've put a strong focus on our Private Lands Initiatives (PLI), like Private Lands Open to Sportsmen (PLOTS), Coverlocks and our Working Lands Initiative (WLI) because these programs create more hunting access and they benefit everyone. Already, we've created more than 700,000 acres of public access for hunting, and our goal is a million acres. But even while building the resource, we must have some controls in place to avoid "burning it out." Good management of hunting pressure and building public access acreage is a balanced approach and benefits everyone over the long term.

Business owners in small towns that cater to hunters compare the hunting season to the Christmas spending season for bigger towns. They also said the nonresident restrictions hurt business in 2003. Those regulations remain in effect for this season. What do you say to them?

We had about the same number of total bird hunters in 2003 as we did in 2002. The zones helped disperse hunting, and the good pheasant habitat has been expanded through CRP and our public access programs. As a result we can better accommodate hunters in terms of maintaining a quality hunting experience while small communities still benefit from their business.

Also, the Game and Fish Department is initiating a pilot program to allow hunters, both resident and nonresident, to purchase hunting licenses electronically from local merchants. This program will help get hunters into local establishments to buy shells, supplies and other goods and services. To better help rural communities, the Game and Fish Department is also continuing to work on activities to foster good relationships between landowners and hunters.

Is the North Dakota Game and Fish Department managing the state's wildlife and setting regulations according to your philosophies?

When I appointed Dean Hildebrand to my Cabinet, I asked him to do three things: Develop more habitat and wildlife; communicate what you're doing; and find a balance. We have worked hard to do all of those things, and we want to do more.

Our latest initiative to build habitat and create access is the Working Lands Program, which offers short-term, two-year leases to farmers and ranchers to allow public access on their working lands. There are two obvious advantages to the landowners: first, the land can still be productive and second, it isn't tied up for 20 years. The advantage for the resident sportsman is that the program increases access and levels the competition for access with guides and outfitters. Guides and outfitters have had an advantage in securing land because they offer landowners a short-term lease -- one or two years. Our Working Lands Program means landowners don't have to commit their property for decades to gain some value for it. The program also makes it competitive for landowners to lease to the Game and Fish Department and provide more public access.

A second initiative we're working on is electronic retail store licensing. This year we'll launch a pilot project to enable retailers in rural communities to sell licenses to sportsmen locally. Because the licensing is electronic, duplicate licensing won't be possible. At the same time, it will bring more retail traffic to rural businesses.

What are your thoughts about the posting law, which Selfridge rancher Rod Froelich recently challenged?

The current law and regulations are serving the people well. The Game and Fish Department needs to continue to help foster good relationships between landowners and hunters so that there is a better mutual understanding of their views.

What are your thoughts about the lawsuit filed by the state of Minnesota and three of its hunters that challenges North Dakota hunting regulations?

I believe the court will decide that states have the right and responsibility to manage their natural resources, and we will fight to make sure it does. If North Dakota doesn't have the right to manage wildlife, hunting and fishing within its borders, neither does Minnesota or any other state. Attorney General Hatch is arguing for something I really don't think Minnesotans want. Minnesota itself limits nonresident hunters.

What are your thoughts about outfitters and fee-hunting operations in the state?

To answer this, it's important first to get to the heart of the matter, which involves two issues: public access and protecting the resource. There are three reasons that access has become an issue:

* Out-of-state landowners are buying property and posting it.

* Guides and outfitters are leasing land and charging to hunt.

* Landowners are posting and charging to hunt.

All of these developments have taken land out of public use for hunting. That's why we're working so hard to create more public access. The landowner benefits through the Game and Fish Department's Public Lands Initiative (PLI), hunters benefit because more land is made available to them, and the resource benefits because landowners support habitat and wildlife. A first week of resident-only hunting is an additional benefit to resident sportsmen. Collectively, these initiatives are good for everyone -- hunters, landowners and rural communities.

The second issue at the heart of the matter is protecting the resource, and there are several ways to do that. We have chosen to disperse hunting pressure by creating zones. Zoning distributes hunters more evenly around the state so that no single area gets too much hunting pressure. It has the additional advantage of moving hunters into more rural communities statewide, which benefits small businesses like convenience stores, gas stations and motels that rely on hunters for a part of their income.

What kind of letter grade "A" through "F" would you give the state Legislature for its handling of hunting and fishing issues in the 2003 session?

The Legislature made good progress in several areas, (for example in licensing and access.)

Should the Legislature be more involved or less involved in such issues?

The Legislature will continue to be involved, as it is the only body with the authority to pass hunting laws. Legislators must carefully consider the recommendations of the Game and Fish experts, but they also represent a cross section of all citizens and bring ideas and proposals from both rural and urban residents, and others with an interest in hunting issues.

Although access is plentiful and walleye fishing on Lake Sakakawea has been good this summer, the Army Corps of Engineers continues to forecast lower and lower water levels because of drought conditions. Besides building an ark and hoping, can anything be done to protect the state's recreational boating and fishing industry?

The sporting industry around Lake Sakakawea is vitally important to the area and our state. Mismanagement of lake levels by the Army Corps of Engineers has had a detrimental impact on this industry, but has also affected our safety by putting some community water supplies in jeopardy.

We are putting all the pressure we can on the Army Corps of Engineers to better manage the levels on Lake Sakakawea. The first step in the right direction came when the corps released revisions to the master manual to include drought conservation measures. More needs to be done, and we must and will continue to fight until we get higher and stable lake levels. I believe we need to get the Pick-Sloan law changed by Congress to truly solve this problem.

Do you think the corps should be reined in?

The corps has a role to play, but it must be more even-handed in its management of the Missouri River. For too long it has favored the downstream barge industry at the expense of the recreation industry in the northern states. We've seen some progress with new drought conservation measures and a shortened navigation season, but these measures would have helped more had they been implemented two years ago.

For Gov. Hoeven: If you could do it over again, would you change any decisions you made on hunting-, fishing- or outdoor-related issues? If so, which ones and why?

Initially, we didn't realize the input required before proposing to try something new for hunting and fishing. We proposed opening the pheasant season a week early on a trial basis for one year out of three. That is, we would try it for one year, and then go back to the regular opener while we evaluated it. That's the basis on which we proposed to do it, but it obviously didn't go over well. In response, I asked the advisory board to hold public meetings to get additional input on the proposal. There was considerable opposition, and we withdrew it.

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

Joe Satrom, challenger

Did you buy a North Dakota hunting license for 2003?

I did not buy a 2003 hunting license.

Do you have a 2004 license?

No, I do not have a 2004 license.

How many times did you hunt in North Dakota last fall?

I did not hunt during the fall of 2003 and will probably not hunt this fall. I think it has been more than 10 years since I last hunted; however, it is important to understand that I have had a lifelong, intense interest in the outdoors, wildlife and all aspects of nature. For example, during calendar year 2003, I spent nearly a month of professional and personal time hiking, studying the prairies, exploring wetlands, walking ravines and familiarizing myself with various habitats. In addition, I have spent the last 25 years of my life very involved in public policy and conservation policy and field work.

For what species?

I am interested in virtually all aspects of nature, but I particularly enjoy seeking out and familiarizing myself with the habitats of waterfowl, upland game and grassland nesting birds.

Did you buy a North Dakota fishing license for 2003?

Yes, I did buy a 2003 fishing license.

Do you have a 2004 license?

No, I will not be buying a 2004 fishing license because of the time demands of entering and aggressively working to win the race for governor of North Dakota.

How many times did you fish?

I believe that I fished three or four times in 2003 in North Dakota. I have not fished in North Dakota this year. I have enjoyed fishing throughout much of my life and have fished in many parts of North America. In addition, I enjoy boating, canoeing and other water sports, particularly on the Missouri River.

For what species?

It is most common for me to fish for walleye and northern pike, but I enjoy fishing for any species and particularly enjoy the sense of freedom I realize being out on the water.

Does your campaign accept contributions from any organization or business associated with hunting, fishing or sport shooting?

No, I have not solicited and I have not received contributions from any organization or business associated with hunting, fishing or sport shooting.

What is your philosophy for balancing the interests of resident hunters with the demand for hunting opportunities from out-of-state hunters?

I believe that North Dakota is one of the very best of the last great places remaining on this continent for hunting and fishing for people of average means, including young families, and I want it to stay that way. As governor, I will challenge, empower and support the professionals at the North Dakota Game and Fish Department in their efforts to manage, sustain and enhance this unique, excellent hunting, fishing and outdoor heritage. While I believe there is significant potential for the development of business around North Dakota's hunting and fishing resources, I will encourage and provide leadership in support of the North Dakota Game and Fish Department in their professional efforts that prioritize providing a quality experience for residents of the state through public and private habitat programs, with an additional goal of managing these resources so that hunting is available to nonresidents as well.

There are many ways that North Dakota can lose our unique, nationally significant hunting, fishing and wildlife resources. These risks to what we have include politicizing the management of the Game and Fish Department or the processes of effective management; taking our wildlife resources for granted; inadequate and misguided conservation efforts; mismanagement of seasons, species and consumer pressure; lack of leadership and commitment to building partnerships with the key stakeholders, farmers, ranchers, private landowners and local communities, lack of attention to quality habitat, and other factors.

North Dakota hunting opportunities for the general public, including young people, can also be lost to exploitation by commercial interests who control or gain control of critical habitats and price these experiences outside of the reach of people with limited means. As governor, I will encourage and support efforts by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department to protect and enhance public hunting opportunities for citizens through rules and regulations that show preference to residents. I believe that effective, creative, professional management of our hunting and fishing resources can be successful with a preference to residents and still allow for very significant numbers of nonresident hunters.

Business owners in small towns that cater to hunters compare the hunting season to the Christmas spending season for bigger towns. They also said the nonresident restrictions hurt business in 2003. These regulations remain in effect for this season. What do you say to them?

I am not sure what the negative impacts were on hunting related businesses from the new regulations that were put in place for the 2003 season. It is my perception that the 2003 hunting season included major changes in pheasant hunting pressure because of dramatically improved pheasant populations in the south-central and other parts of the state. It seems likely to me that much of the discontent over regulations boiled over from the rancorous debate and political rather than professional dialogue that occurred involving the governor and state Legislature.

In the Natural Resources and Hunting Position Paper that I have on my www.satromforgovernor.com Web site, I outline an idea that I think can engage communities and local landowners in a habitat and access program that will attract hunting and recreation business to a specific area. I believe that habitat and access programs for the general public are the key to building both quality hunting experiences, consistent access and year-to-year hunting business clients. I believe that the PLOTS program has met some important needs, but that it is only a beginning in terms of meeting needs for both habitat and resident and nonresident hunting access. Furthermore, I think that it is very likely that an additional habitat and access program should be developed in key waterfowl areas where there are serious issues related to hunting pressure, habitat and access.

Is the North Dakota Game and Fish Department managing the state's wildlife and setting regulations according to your philosophies?

I believe that the North Dakota Game and Fish Department has a remarkable staff of capable professionals and it is my perception that the management policies and regulatory decisions are generally in line with my philosophies. I have had ongoing concerns about departmental policy and plans for reducing the size of the state's deer populations, and it is my understanding that more aggressive management strategies are being implemented. I do, however, have overall confidence in the professionalism, training and remarkable commitment to service of the department's core staff, and I believe they are willing to respond to questions and input from citizens about any and all of the wildlife issues facing North Dakota.

I believe that the state Game and Fish Department will need to expand efforts to provide communications opportunities, including forums to build relationships with their varied stakeholders.

What are your thoughts about the posting law, which Selfridge rancher Rod Froelich recently challenged?

I support the rights of private property owners to control access to their property and believe that North Dakota's current law, which requires posting, has worked. I realize that the requirement to post may be a significant imposition for large and off-site landowners and support efforts to provide compensation to landowners who want to open their property to public access hunting programs. Perhaps something can be done to further assist landowners who want to post their property.

What are your thoughts about the lawsuit filed by the state of Minnesota and three of its hunters that challenges North Dakota hunting regulations?

First and foremost, the lawsuit reflects the accuracy of my earlier comment that North Dakota's hunting and, I believe, fishing are among the last of the very best hunting and fishing on the continent, and our neighbors know about it. The lawsuit also reflects the significant increase in interstate issues related to wildlife management.

Lastly, I think that the lawsuit reflects the mismanagement of hunting season issues by the Hoeven administration. When John Hoeven decided that the pheasant season should be opened early to satisfy special interests, misled resident and nonresident hunters on his decision and then decided to politicize the management of waterfowl hunting, the message to our Minnesota neighbors became clear: North Dakota has a governor who doesn't know what he is doing. The lawsuit is the political outcome of Hoeven's mismanagement and will go away when the process of managing seasons is returned to the professionals who know what they are doing.

What are your thoughts about outfitters and fee-hunting operations in the state?

I believe that there are major, important business opportunities in North Dakota for high quality guides and outfitters and that the North Dakota Game and Fish Department needs to assume a proactive role in licensing and regulating these entities. I do not believe that it is in the best interest of North Dakota resident hunters, nonresident hunters, local businesses and communities if guides, outfitters and fee-hunting operators control excessively large areas of land. I would look to the North Dakota Game and Fish Department to develop regulations and support existing and new programs to ensure that the state and local communities have competitive and successful habitat and access programs to assure both quality experiences and access for the hunting public. I also believe that there are important business opportunities available involving these same natural landscapes for birding and other outdoor recreation activities.

What kind of letter grade -- "A" through "F" -- would you give the state Legislature for its handling of hunting and fishing issues in the 2003 session?

I would give the 2003 North Dakota state Legislature a C+ rating for their handling of hunting and fishing issues during the 2003 session.

Should the Legislature be more involved or less involved in such issues?

The state Legislature, because of its constitutional role in lawmaking, appropriations and audit and fiscal review, has significant authority and prerogatives related to policy making and financial matters. I believe that the state Legislature must resist the temptation to manage or micro-manage the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, and as governor I would work to define what I believe can and must be a balanced relationship.

Although success is plentiful and walleye fishing on Lake Sakakawea has been good this summer, the Army Corps of Engineers continues to forecast lower and lower water levels because of drought conditions. Besides building an ark and hoping, can anything be done to protect the state's recreation, boating and fishing industry?

This is a very serious, potentially catastrophic situation, and as governor, I would do everything in my power, in the short term, to gain the attention and favorable consideration by the president of the United States and his key advisers of proposals that would bring about major changes in the corps' management of the Missouri River system. I would also work aggressively in support of legal remedies to the problems caused by the current river management policies and the drought.

In the longer term, I would work with the U.S. Congress and the president on permanent solutions that would elevate the priority of recreation and upstream uses in the management of the Missouri River.

Do you think the corps should be reined in?

Yes, I think there are a number of areas where the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be more responsive and accountable for their management practices and projects. As governor, I would work with North Dakota's congressional delegation and the administration to bring about a more productive, satisfactory relationship with this major federal agency.

For candidate Satrom: If you were governor for the past four years, would you have done anything differently on hunting, fishing or outdoor-related issues?

In addition to what I have already mentioned in this series of questions, I would provide leadership and support to the North Dakota Game and Fish Department in their efforts to plan both in the short term (three to five years) and the long term (10 to 20 years) for maintaining and enhancing the state's hunting, fishing and outdoor heritage. We have remarkable natural assets, and I believe that it is critical that we do the planning and program development necessary to assure that wildlife resources and quality hunting, fishing and outdoor experiences are available for the young people of today and for future generations.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

SPD, thanks for posting up that great interview. Wonder how many other states convinced their gubernatorials to print hunting positions? I seem to remember a quote from a Janell Cole column in the Fargo Forum that "this controversy driven by a few malcontents" and would "disappear before election". Hummm. Apparently not.

Get involved. You are making a difference, but it won't happen if you are on the sidelines with your lip zipped. Get your legislator educated with your viewpoint. Rest assured the other side already has done so.


----------



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

Thanks for posting that Dave, I am in the twin cities the next three weeks so keep posting !!!


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

I don't know who to vote for now. Satrom seemed like the guy but after reading this interview I don't think he cares enough about hunting and fishing to warrant my vote. He believes guides and outfitters have a place in ND? NOT ME. I think maybe Hoevan has learned a lesson over pheasantgate and he may be the guy for me. Afterall he did direct the G&F to expand PLOTS and coverlocks.

Satrom hasn't hunted in 10 years. Hoevan hunted 3 times and we all can figure out it was with the Cannonball co. last year which sparked pheasantgate. What a decision to make. I think I'll cast a write in vote for Dick Monson. Why can't we have a decent cantidate?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Lets go down memory lane here swift. 
1. Satrom worked for two of the big conservation groups for years.
2. Hoeven worked in his family's bank for years.

Which of the two would understand hunting/natural resources better?

$. Hoeven attempted to sell an extra week of pheasant season (gate).
4. Hoeven attempted to pass it off as a NDGF idea, when Dean and department personel had recomended against it.
5. Cannonball Co, the large pheasant outfitter, would have made $100,000 for that one week.
6. Cannonball throws a fund raiser for Hoeven and he keeps the money.
7. Hoeven uses the threat of all resident hunters being "posted out" if his plan is not approved.
8. Hoeven pulls the plug on the plan after only 3 of the 8 advisory meetings were held.
9. The ND legislature splits the NR license, raises the price, and mandates funding for increased PLOTS.
10. Hoeven takes credit for it.
11. The president of the ND Professional Guides and Outfitters says Hoeven is doing a good job. 
12. Cannonball Co manager tells NDGF at a public meeting to "keep PLOTS east of the Missouri".
13. Cannonball confesses in the Bismarck Tribune that they pay $17 per wild bird to landowners, in violation of the ND Century Code.
14. Cannonball has never been cited. 
15. Cannonball shareholders are heavey contributors to Hoeven's campaign.
16. The man who nominated Hoeven for governor tells the Fargo Forum that Hoeven has "grossely mismanaged wildlife issues".
17. At the same time pheasantgate is arising, the ND of Commerce wants to put NDGF under Commerce's control. (it probably is today). West River Tourism minutes.

Those points are documented facts.

18. What I find unbelievable is that a banker, who should be able to understand the flow of money in the state's economy, ignors CRP payments, FSA payments and cash rent payments flowing out of state from his policies. Farm land sold out from under young farmers because of his treatment of NR hunting laws. Also ignoring any contributions by resident hunters, either social or economic. We are dust on his shoes.

Go back to read the gubrernatorial positions and you *know* it is no contest. One is going to sell it and one is going to save it. Satrom has the background and will to save it. And he has a very good plan, fair and balanced. Satrom has been endorsed by county and state wildlife organizations for his good plan. There is no doubt in my mind, it is the public trust or commercialization.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

I almost forgot Hoeven's *GAG**ORDER* uke: on NDGF folks just before the last session, imposed so they couldn't testify. A classy little piece of work. :wink:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Good History lesson Dick, Thanks

Swift
I am about as anti O/G as you can get but like it or not there is a place for O/G's, there is, like it or not, a certain percentage of the population that can afford pretty much anything they want. if they want to hunt they will, clueless or not.

If O/G's operate on their own land and do not lease all available habitat there is nothing that can stop them from doing so, they do own their land.
I do feel that to be a O/G it must be mandatory that you are a North Dakota resident. and per the PTD (Public Trust Doctrine) they should be required in some form, to compensate the public that actually owns the wildlife they are selling.

I feel from what I have read from Joe is that he will appoint people that are professional and let them do their job, that is good Management, not the psudo dictatorship that we are currently experiencing.

Mr. Hoeven appears to me to be a micro manager, usually this management style IMO is the result of trying to keep everything close to maximize the possibility for personal gain. I think that pretty well describes the Incumbent.

Just my two cents.

Have a good one!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I agrere Dick...I've seen what Hoeven has done...Satrom can do a lot better.

Bob...it is against Interstate Commerce laws to not allow non-res. to guide.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Thanks Dick, sometimes I need a refresher of history. The worse thing on the list is the Gag order that was instituted. I am huge for acoutability and I guess Hovean is not. The other things on that list are pretty bad as well. Satrom will get my vote too I hope he isn't camoflaged in the conservationist clothing. I guess it's only four years.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Satrom TV ad: 'bad for politics good for ND'....I hope it's true 8)


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Ken

Did a little research

From: Michael j. Bean's "The Evolution of National Wildlife Law."

Bean concludes that "... Thus, while the constitution provides no specific authority for a Federal role in wildlife conservation or management, these three areas of clear Federal authority-- the Treaty Making Power, the Interstate Commerce Clause and the Federal property Management Powers --have provided a firm basis upon which the Congress and the courts have established the role of the Federal Government as a full partner with the States in the *conservation and management of wildlife and the habitats upon which they depend." *

He references Supreme court cases Missouri v. Holland, Douglas v. Seacoat Products, Inc., Andrus v. Allard and Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources.

He also goes on to cite Federal Register (48 fr 54) v"Fish and Wildlife Policy: State-Federal Relationships"

Do Guides fall under "conservation and management of wildlife and the habitats upon which they depend"

I printed all of the mentioned material I can fax it to you if you would like.

or am I missing the point?

Have a good one!

[/b]


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

No that's OK...I just know that the GNF was probably going to be sued by out-of-state guides that wanted to come here....Sheldons boys I believe.

So to not get sued the legis. passed a law saying they could guide here.I don't recollect which bill it was.


----------

