# Anyone have any debate left in em ???



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

see this post at the refuge http://www.refugeforums.com/refuge/show ... adid=46712


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

sure. It's for a good cause....
But the refuge was a tough place our last legislative session.
M.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

I'm about puked out on the topic myself. uke:

Let them enjoy another round. :eyeroll:


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2002)

Fetch,

I've debated this topic so many times. . . . It's not worth it almost to me anymore. :eyeroll: I think limiting nr's in terms of a cap should be the last step and it appears to the first. I hope I'm wrong. I think the GnF should look at alternatives like; separating the pheasant and duck license, way more zones, cap the zones east of Missouri and keep the zone west of the Missouri unlimited, in terms of zones create them around some of the larger Federal 'fuges, DL, the Canada Border etc.

For me and my experience in North Dakota. . . I have nothing but good things to say about my time there. People are the greatest, friendly, kind and the hunting is good. I've acted with as much respect as possible, never been turned down when I ask for permish, often being asked to come in and talk. Certainly I don't hunt in a "hot" area, away from Canada or DL. Yet I still get good ducks. I'm a freelance hunter only, usually going in small groups of 4 or less. Usually hunting with one other guy and a dog in our groups. In the years I've hunted in north dakota I almost never see other groups, other than in town.

I hope they don't place a cap, if they do, I will not return. Maybe thats what ya'll are hoping for.  From my perspective, a cap will only create derision between hunters.

Full Force Five


----------



## bioman (Mar 1, 2002)

You know one aspect about these issues that constantly amazes me... is how absent the commercial interests are on the topic pages. While numerous sportspeople will spend countless hours debating these topics in forums, the commercial interests will actually get out and spend the floor time with whomever will listen to their side. Too bad the sporting community never united on some of the most important issues that the commercial side has fought for and won decidedly. I guess that will never change, because the sportspeople don't have any financial interest at stake.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

The average freelancing hunter is a working man. Taking time to lobby, engage in public debate, or run for office on this issue is time consuming. Family and work commitments take up most people's time. Bioman you are correct, the outfitter is financially tied to the issue so he takes time to work the issue (part of his job).

Also do not forget that most people tied to these outdoor sites are hard-core hunters. I would like to see a survey show how many waterfowl hunters actually hunt more than say 10 days per season. Bet it is a relatively low number.

The average licensed, resident hunter in ND hunts waterfowl in their home state about 5 days per year. I believe the NDG&F data shows this value. If you average in the hard-core hunter efforts there are many ND hunters who probably hunt waterfowl only twice each fall. The average nonresident visiting ND is more likely a hard-core waterfowler. Why else would they spend vacation time and money traveling to shoot ducks.

So the "average" ND guy gets together and hunts ducks on opener, chases geese a few days, then may be pheasants and deer. They take what comes their way or quit if they perceive reward is no longer worth the effort (ie. when duck limit drops to three - hunter numbers plummet).

How much time will these people spend worrying about the future of waterfowl hunting ? If these so called average hunters would take time to write politicians they may chose to write them on taxes, education, health care, school consolidation, the list can go on and on and on. These issues may be much more important than recreational hunting.

If the duck limit drops to three I would predict that less than 15,000 nonresidents will enter ND this fall to chase ducks. States with large commercial hunting interests (LA, AR, MS, TX) loose huge numbers of nonresident hunters when the limits drop to 3 ducks vs the 5 or 6 bird limits. Land lease values plumment, many go on sold.

I would also guess that the resident waterfowl hunters will drop from about 34,000 down to 30,000 maybe as low as 25,000.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

Do you know what sucks the most about that truth Prairie Hunter, is that "shooting" seems more important than "hunting". So if the national trend is to see that few of hunters when numbers are down, it kind of makes you wonder how many true sportsman are out there, and how many will be there in the end when we need them the most.

Another reason to remind all of you to take out a rookie this fall. :wink:


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Hey there are too many different activities that compete with our time. Most people on this site really love hunting and will chase game no matter how poor the forecasts are. It is the experience of hunting in ND. You do it because you can not image not being out there.

Many hunters (ND people included) follow the hype. Just like following the winning pro team.

The ND tourism board succeeded in hyping ND hunting to the masses. TV shows, magazine articles, and internet sites hyped the easy hunting, the guides, etc... People rushed into the state and numbers ramped up fast and furious. High limits (6 ducks) did nothing but push the shooters and game hogs into the state at faster levels than seen before.

In Minnesota the ruffed grouse populations move on a 10 year cycle of highs and lows. On the years of high populations a person can barely hunt on public land on the weekend without running into other hunters or running into a bunch of road hunters. As the cycle moves to the low side, hype by the press goes way, the large chuck of hunters looking for easy pickings are gone, and you may barely see another hunter let alone have someone get in your way.

I have not missed a duck season in ND since the year I started hunting in the mid-70s. Every year is different -- makes it fun. Some of the wettest / high duck population years have not always been the best hunting. Weather (not just in ND), crop conditions, hailed out areas, etc... all have as much impact in the fall on hunting opps as spring nesting success.

Let the shooters find their next hotspot (ouside of ND hopefully). Let the hunters that scout hard have a good fall chasing ducks.


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

Good Call Chris. If guys stay home and don't hunt because the duck limit drops then they are missing the whole point of the hunting experience. During the last drought we still traveled to Westhope 2-3 times in the fall because it was about getting out and being with great friends and family. They could cut the duck limit to 1 and I would still go out. THINK about this as well: they cut the duck limit to 3 and a lot of people from out of state quit coming, now the small town suffers because they set aside resident interests, to cater to those from out of state. Guides fold because business has dropped, now what is rural ND going to do to keep afloat?? 
Instead of trying to attract business and bring jobs, it easier to rape a resource for the quick buck. 
Don't worry though, there are SOME people from out of state who are going to tell us how things should be run here, but then they stay home if the duck population drops. Please notice I said SOME......


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

In ND, the number of waterfowl hunters have varied greatly with water conditions and bird populations. In the late 70s over 50,000 resident ND hunters chased ducks and geese. Competiton for good spots was fairly intense then and posting common. One difference between then and now was competition was a weekend thing. Hunt a week day and you were on your own. Not sure if you can say that is true anymore. :lol:

In the late 80s and early 90s, the number of ND people hunting ducks and geese barely topped 20,000. Drought, steel shot (?), aging ND population I guess all took there toll.

Both residents and nonresidents alike will stop visiting these small towns when the birds are not around and/or the hype is gone.

Eric, many of the snow goose guides in Westhope and other areas along the Canadian border have scaled-back their operations, folded, or have diversified to ducks. The guides that offer strong efforts, have large commercial/business client bases will survive, but many that formed riding the boom wave will fold quickly if and when the dry cycle returns for several years straight.

*Oil (wildcatting) in western ND, internet stocks, red lake crappies, duck hunting in ND. People (the masses) flock to easy, sure things. They dissappear as quickly as they arrive once the opportunity to make money fast or fill the creel fast is gone.*


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

Some good points. My best memories are the trips we took to Westhope in the fall. This was my favorite time of the year. We always ate at Mcdonald's in Grand Forks, Ice Cream in Devil's lake, Gas and snacks at Rugby, dad's cheese in Towner, Listening to the birds on the refuge at night so of Westhope. I loved going there. We did this trip even through college till the snow geese quit coming down and the competition became too much. The last year we were there we had to pay to use a grain field. The last straw. It was really hard to find new places to hunt and put an end to the Westhope trip ending a 13 year father-son tradition with our group. The hunting boom is just that, a boom. A short-term fix to long term problems. I think the leaders of communities should be held accountable when the boom ends and towns struggle. Instead of bringing in real jobs, they focus on making the quick buck. On top of this there are now hard feelings among those of us who live in ND. Because I live in Fargo I am no better than a non-resident in some peoples' eyes, just like a person from Mott is a non-resident in some people's eyes here in Fargo.
Sad....


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Good points...I have a feeling that less ducks or even lower limits may not curtail the number of hunters.Even in our worst years it is still probably better here than in most places.Plus as you've said people like coming here.It is a vacation and a good time to get away from home and renew friendships.I fish in Canada every year[in fact I am leaving for Sask. tomorrow morning]and we don't bring any fish home.We keep only what we eat there.A lot of hunters from out of state will feel that way.It is a great experience to be out here in ND in Oct.Plus our upland hunting will match anyone elses,and there should be a good upland hatch if we don't get too much rain next month to kill the chicks.See you all in 10 days.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

One thing I noticed reading that link for the duck refuge web site is that the nonresidents keep stating that you can't limit or shouldn't limit nonresidents since it is a migratory or national resource. Well this is true, but if you are going to use that ananogy, hunt the ducks when they migrate through your state, utilizing your habitat, nesting and producing ducks in your state. The whole rest of the country benefits from the ducks that are raised in the prairie pothole region. Why some nonresidents want to allow this state to become what has happened in their own states (too many hunters, too little access, etc.) is beyond me. When ND has been turned into another Texas, there will be no reason for anyone to come and hunt here. It seems that they should be on the same page as us and want to preserve the hunting quality and tradition so when they do get to come here it is a moment in life to cherish. And if they want to savor that moment, they should think of relocating to God's country.


----------



## Guest (Jun 13, 2002)

Muzzy, Relocating to North Dakota :eyeroll: not interested. What's the population of North Dakota compaired to Texas. What's the ratio of both states in terms of res vs. NR's.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Full Force Five, we are not like Texas or any other of the pure commericial states and desire to remain that way. You can still come here, probably not just every year. Or if nonresidents are so adamant about coming here every year, maybe the state needs to sell only 2 day licenses and let everyone come? You probably wouldn't want to do that either. As far as the argument that federal duck stamp and PR funds that come into the state, that has so little to do with actual duck numbers. If ND is in a wet cycle and the people don't drain wetlands, we will have ducks money be dam*ed


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

Have a great trip Ken and tight lines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good Points Muzzy. North Dakota and Texas????? How many ducks does ND produce that migrate south???? Federal funds should be going to where the ducks are raised. ND is a duck factory so it doesn't it make sense to protect wetlands in the state???? This shouldn't even be and issue. I would prefer to hear about how important ND is to the fall flight and thanks for taking care of the waterfowl........


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

According to the Forum this morning and an article pertaining to the limiting of non-resiedents, it states that the advisory board is thinking about a cap of 25,000 non-residents or less per year. The game and fish department appears to be leaning towards using the yearly water index as a guide to set caps on a yearly basis.

After traveling the pot hole region of southcentral ND this week I can see that there is going MANY DRY marshes this year. I'd predict that the WPAs are going to get pressure like we've never seen before. There may be a lot of frustrated NR hunters when they arrive to hunt ducks as they are going to be crowded. Next year this will have the effect of dropping the # of NRs as many will start to drop off if the dry cycle continues. The caps will only help to provide a quality hunt for BOTH the residents and NR duck hunters. By the way alot of residents will quit also if the marshes dry up.

If you're a serious waterfowl hunter and not after just a limit of game at any expense then I'd suggest that you get a license early. I really think that there will not be anyone turned away with 25,000 available. The only ones that will have a problem are the guys that wait until the last minute.

Finally, hope there aren't more big money guys that are going to try to lease more of the good areas again this year. I'm hearing this already in some traditional spots. Most of us residents are glad to have the NR hunters around, just don't mess up our areas by trying to make them exclusively yours.

Just a quick note . . . . the crappies are starting their summer patterns. Troll a small white beetle spin early or in the evening at the deep weed line. Works great until mid July.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Have at it guys. Here is the article from the GF Herald. Looks like the season will open early if the Feds allow it.

http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/3466838.htm


----------



## cancarver (Apr 6, 2002)

What I have been hearing down hear is if the feds go to anything but a liberal season the early opening would be taken away. The early opening was to apease northern states, for the southern states wanting to extend their season to the end of Jan. Both would only happen if their is a liberal season. Some rumblings on other sites have said Feds may go all the way to a resctrive season. That means hear in WI we would be looking at 30 days with 3 ducks. Probaly the same with ND, That is one way to limit NR'S. My quess is that the will go to a moderate season 45 days 4 ducks, but the early opening wouldn't be allowed. I don't think WI is going for the early opener even if it is offered.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Cancarver,

I agree that lower limits will really curtail the number of visiting hunters to ND. I also feel that unless we have another national crisis, more hunters will return to Canada this fall. Last year - with everything going on after 9-11 and the very long lines on the border crossings - I believe that many hunters shortstopped in to ND.

Regarding seasons. The states in the Central Flyway gets more days than the states in the MS flyway. Bioman and myself have posted information and I have posted the link to the US F&W website before. The current format is :

USF&W have established 4 types of duck seasons based upon spring and summer surveys. These seasons types are :

Central Flyway

Liberal: 74 day season, 6 bird limit 
Moderate: 60 day season, 6 bird limit 
Restrictive: 39 day season, 3 bird limit 
Very Res: 25 day season, 3 bird limit

Individual species can be controlled within this overall framework (ie. pintail, hen mallard, canvasback limits or season length can be even more restrictive).

Note the Mississippi flyway season lengths are shorter for each season framework type. Moderate season is 45 days.

*Of course this is a government agency and they may not stick to the guidelines above and mess with bird limits, etc...*

Here is the link again.

http://policy.fws.gov/library/02fr12501.pdf


----------



## cancarver (Apr 6, 2002)

I know that by shortening the season it is better to control the amount of ducks killed vs smaller bag limits. But I think when you reduce bag limits, more of the "Shooters" and riff raff don't hunt as much which would be benefical to us all, especially the NR's going to ND. I would be willing to bet( if limits are around 22,000-25,000 next year that they will not be filled if there is a poor hatch and drier conditions. I think alot of people will stay home when they read the "bleak outlooK for ducks" in their local newspapers.

I have read that in dry years of ND, duck breeding and migration shifted to MN western lakes and potholes, because of the more permanent wetlands. That would make fetch Happy as during teachers weekend that will shortstop ND and hunt MN.

as far as the feds, they are proposing to reduce the long term population goal of Canvasbacks by 100,000, just to continue with an open season. Whoes interests are they concern about, surely not the ducks.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

See if we have any southerners lurking this site.

Northern boys are taught to hunt. Southern boys are taught to kill.

The southern politicians typically have more impact on wildlife laws and regulations because they tend to get involved. I have hunted in three southern states, often with locals, sometimes with guides. For the most part laws were strictly followed, but it was duck killing not duck hunting.

I suspect the Southerners want to kill more ducks; thus higher limits. Guides, outfitters and wealthy lease holders lobby and get their way.

Biologically six, five, or four duck limits may not matter to populations at high levels. Still, I have never understood why the limit was bumped to six ducks, five was fine, four was more than adequate. In ND a limit of 4 drake mallards would be an excellent goal on a good day. Higher limits make many normal hunters become very greedy.


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

PH,

Don't know abot the northern/southern hunting/killing thing, but their
dogs sure don't work well (joke!!!)

The issue of limits is a interesting topic. I might be inclined to believe that greed moves limits, not high limits reinforcing greed. It's funny way to declare the success of a hunt, as if lives and happiness depended on a full bag. I'm with you that a few greenheads is a fine day, any day not skunked is great. Do I really want to take more? But the flip side is that we can't stockpile ducks - so you might as well "harvest" a sustainable number. Even more, what about hens? Taking 1 or 2 won't affect the resource, but a hen in the freezer never produced a brood. I'd expect some interesting ideas from the thoughtful crew on this board.

M.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

This part of a PM I just sent to MRN

I know things will change (& already have) But I feel someone needs to play the role of the extreme from the otherside. Then hopefully things won't change to quickly, or totally, in favor of the commercial efforts & what they want. But I'm afraid most (residents) will react instead of be proactive in whats best for us.

If our G&F Director comes out being to fair to the commercial interests - it will be tough to convince the Legislature to not follow his lead ??? Unless there is a public outcry to remove the director & get someone who is more in tune to what & why ND has been so special to residents & hunting.

If a No Tresspass Law is ever passed in any form - ND will be lost & will become like all the rest.

What is too bad is there is not a clear group that is respected that can lobby & fight for these things before they become a problem. The G&FD should be this group & many have been lulled to sleep believing they are. (the residents watchdog.) But I don't have a good feeling about Hildebrand ??? Plus the next one - appointed by the Govenor may be worse or slicker at promoting the tourism & economic development & commercial interests. It ( the Directors position) should be a elected position. Then it would be tougher for Politicians to change or side with commercial interests. I don't think the voters in ND really want that to happen. Or have to always be looking over our shoulders. Worrying about what they are up to - ???


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

I agree you can not stock pile wildgame. Wild game populations (incuding ducks, or especially deer and pheasants in ND) are more a function of winters, spring nesting conditions, pond counts, etc....

You could establish a limit of 10 roosters/day and probably not harm the pheasant population. Would a large portion of the hunting population be dissatisfied because they could not obtain a limit very often ? Would other hunters look at successful parties as game hogs ?

At the Monday morning coffee break, the guy talking limits of walleyes or pheasants, gets the attention of many. Especially "younger" hunters.

Most people have read about the stages that a hunter moves through. Unfortunately many are in the "limit" stage and many can not get past it.

Lower limits equalizes the numbers game. Those that still need to brag can claim bag limit types (all greenheads) or weight.

While lower limits may not impact next years population of birds, does anyone think that it may make a difference in the amount of hunting pressure an area gets ?

example
A four bird limit (vs 6) may decrease the overall hunting pressure on birds in an area. Once limit is obtained - hunters head home.

Jumping every slough in the area for that "fifth or sixth" bird may just add that little bit of extra pressure that moves birds to somewhere less intense.


----------



## bioman (Mar 1, 2002)

All you wanted to know about the proposed fall 2002 waterfowling season and more... Important to note that comments will be received from the general public on this issue until JUNE 21.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced today that it is
reopening the public comment period on its proposed duck-hunting regulatory alternatives for the upcoming 2002-2003 season. An announcement of the reopened comment period, which will extend to June 21st, was published in the June 11, 2002, Federal Register.

The regulatory alternatives represent four levels of hunting
opportunity - very restrictive, restrictive, moderate, and liberal - one of
which is chosen each year depending on the status of duck populations and their habitats.

The extension is designed to allow the public additional time to
comment on the proposed alternatives, in light of new assessments
concerning the level at which hunting opportunities can be offered without
adverse impacts on duck populations. These changes may ultimately have an impact on season lengths and bag limits approved for future migratory bird hunting seasons.

"Hunters need to be aware of changes in the way the Service estimates the effect of harvest on duck populations, and recent recommendations from the flyway councils on how to respond to changes in waterfowl abundance. The additional comment period will give the public time to examine these issues and give us valuable feedback," said Tom Melius, Assistant Director for Migratory Birds and State Programs.

Annual monitoring programs, including population, habitat, and
harvest surveys, help guide the Service's waterfowl conservation programs under authority of the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Service works in partnership with State representatives from the four flyways - the Atlantic, Mississippi, Central and Pacific - that waterfowl and other birds use during their migrations, to establish hunting season lengths, dates and bag limits.

In an effort to deal effectively with the uncertainty about effects
of regulated hunting on waterfowl populations, the Service instituted a
process called adaptive harvest management (AHM) in 1995. The AHM process recognizes that understanding of waterfowl populations and of the effects of harvest are incomplete, and provides a framework for making objective decisions in the face of that uncertainty. The AHM process also relies on a repeating sequence of regulation planning, implementation, and evaluation to help increase knowledge so that future regulatory decisions can be improved.

A working group, composed of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state
wildlife agency employees tasked with the technical development of AHM,
recently reviewed elements of the process that have been in place since
1995. The working group concluded that in general, the AHM process has
been a significant improvement over past efforts to manage the sport
harvest of waterfowl. However, the group also recommended some changes after discovering that survival and/or reproductive rates of ducks may have been over-estimated due to problems with monitoring programs.

Record waterfowl populations and good habitat conditions have enabled the Service to approve liberal waterfowl hunting frameworks for the past five seasons. Correction for the estimation error does not suggest that regulations should have been different during the last five seasons, but does suggest that hunting regulations may need to be more restrictive in the future, particularly as duck populations experience periodic declines due to drought on the breeding grounds.

The flyway councils also have offered a number of recommendations to the Service on how to modify the set of regulatory alternatives. For
instance, several councils have recommended that annual changes in the
regulations be limited to one step up or down among the regulatory
alternatives (such as from liberal to moderate, rather than from liberal to
restrictive), in order to reduce the chance that season lengths and bag
limits would fluctuate dramatically from year to year. Another
recommendation involves changing the criteria for closing hunting seasons
in the case of declining duck populations.

At the same time, the Service is attempting to settle a long-running
dispute over late-season framework extensions. The dispute centers on the desire of some southern states to extend their seasons into late January, believing that a later date offers more opportunities for their hunters. For the past three years, Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee have been allowed to extend their seasons to January 31, with a corresponding reduction in the total number of days the season is allowed to be open, from 60 days to 51.

Last summer, the flyway councils submitted a proposal through the
National Flyway Council that would give all states a framework opening date of the Saturday nearest September 24 and a closing date of the last Sunday in January, with no penalties in days or bag limits, if duck population and habitat conditions warrant selection of "moderate" or "liberal" harvest alternatives. The Service proposed to implement this change in October 2001, but ultimately withdrew its proposal after concluding that more discussion was warranted. After meeting with a working group representing a cross-section of all flyway councils and states over the past winter, the Service proposed to implement the framework extensions in its March publication of preliminary migratory bird hunting regulations.

"Any of these changes in themselves would represent a significant
change in how we manage waterfowl populations. The fact that they are all under consideration at once represents a major challenge for the Service," said Melius. "We remain committed to maintaining and expanding waterfowl hunting opportunities, consistent with maintaining healthy waterfowl populations for future generations."

Comments will be accepted until June 21. They may be sent to the
Chief, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior, ms 634-ARLSQ, 1849 C St., NW,
Washington, DC 20240.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Thanks Bioman. You could also post the USF&W link to this report.

The big three (Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas) southern states shoot a lot of ducks. *Louisiana often shoots more birds each winter than all of the central flyway states combined. *Now they want to add the last days of January to their time slot without paying a penalty. Louisiana has not participated in the late January time frame - they kept more days.

The states above along with Texas begin shooting teal in September. Duck hunting is good from November through January. They have off times too when the flights are not in - but they still kill alot of ducks.

Ducks often spend as much time in the South as they do on the Northern breeding grounds - still the harvest is out of whack.

Yeh, ND can open early for those small, drab colored ducks. Suspect longer slow time in mid-October unless we have better migration weather out of Canada. Southern states will benefit much, much more ... especially if they cut the season length down to 45 days in the MS flyway.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz wake me when it over :-? Yep ! PH & FFF & CC what would we do without you :roll: Tell us once more how you really feel ???


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Boring - I guess. Hey its summer.

So you want me to open myself up for another pummeling just to keep you amused and this site active enough to support advertizing growth. How about:

The north-south debate belongs on Waterfowler.com. Waterfowl issues are much larger than just the ND issues.

I am guessing there are only 20 or so active visitors to this hot topics page right now and many (Thorvig, bioman, FFF, CC, PH) are NRs. Many of the locals have not hunted in ND long enough (young pups) to see one drought cycle let alone several. Need to move to where the action is.

What do you want me to say to keep you on your computer vs fishing on DL ? :wink:

How is this:
Hey I moving back to ND. My father in-law and his three neighbors have just formed a hunting lodge for ducks and pheasants. We have over 20,000 acres set aside and posted. Not only am I a lead guide, but the business and marketing manager too. 
Ye ha I am moving home. :beer: :wink:

Just kidding. :wink:

Now I must decide to a buy ND land or is it more economical to have a guide buy my license in 2003. :wink: :wink: :wink:

Hey you tried ... I tried ... MRN and Bioman tried. Where is everyone else.

PH


----------



## Urho (Apr 20, 2002)

It seems to me that all this talk and pressure to limit out of state hunters from hunting 5-10 days per season is doing the same thing that you criticize some who post and charge a lot to hunt on private land. The difference is you're limiting hunters throughout the whole state.

It's funny how easy it is to pin our perceived problems on someone we don't know, instead of everyone taking responsibility and sharing the pain, when need be. What will you do when there are fewer hunters nation wide when they get tired of being turned away and they no longer write their Congressmen and Senators to make policy that helps all hunters?


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)




----------

