# Your Input Needed - TRNP & Elk



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

The following request has been made by a legislator who has been very active and helpful on the outdoors issues:

*****

We have been working with ND Game and Fish and National Park Service to open the park to ND sportsperson participation in management for herd reduction.

These meetings are extremely important for outdoors enthusiasts to attend and make sure those that will oppose sportsperson management don't have more input than us. We need sportspersons to be able to manage these rather than many of the silly non-lethal methods that will be suggested (e.g., contraceptives - give me a break) or through professional marksmen handling the kill.

Meeting dates:

November 30 5:00 - 7:00 pm Minot International Inn

December 1 5:30 - 7:00 pm Fargo Ramada Plaza Suites

December 2 5:00 - 7:00 Bismarck Ramkota

December 6 6:00 8:30 Medora Community Center

It is extremely important to get attendance and input into the Environmental Impact Statement, which will form the basis of the Fed's reccomendations on this issue (the TRNP is under Fed control). Please pass this on and get it out on the internet.

*****

Please try to attend one of these meetings and make it known to the Feds that ND sportspersons are more than willing and able to take care of the necessary culling, in a safe manner and at a fraction of the costs of other methods. Win-win.

Canned hunt concerns? I can hear it now - what, ND sportspersons supporting this but are opposed to canned hunts? First, the area these animals cover, even within the fences, is huge. Second, as the area landowners would attest to, the fences ain't exactly keeping the elk in as much as keeping the hunters out. Third, these critters won't come running from a half-mile away when the hear the horn of the pickup hauling the 4:00 pm daily hay or let you saunter to within 25 yards to get a REALLY good shot. And finally, it's a more palatable alternative to 5 marksmen being hired to each slaughter 10 a day for a week.


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

I can attend the Fargo meeting Dan.

This would be a very unique situation if they allowed hunting in a national park, is there any history of this elsewhere?


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

> This would be a very unique situation if they allowed hunting in a national park, is there any history of this elsewhere?


Dunno? You're right this would be very unique. That's why its taking tons of work and time to make it happen (including the laborious EIS process), and why we need to support those that are doing so. Thanks for planning to attend.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Sounds good. Hope th RMEF are listening. If there's time after, how about a short nodacker meeting too? :beer:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Dan
You know I am in

Dick I like the nodaker meeting idea, Lets do it!!!

Bob


----------



## GooseBuster3 (Mar 1, 2002)

Ill be there,


----------



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

I'll be at the Bismarck meeting! :beer:


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Just a quick update. Apparently, there is some precedence for this. "Management" does occur on several National Preserves and in at least one other National Park, Teton in WY.


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

Dan,

I'm out of town, but will there be a provision to submit written comments/support/etc?

M.


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

Thanks Dan, as I understand it, national "preserves" play by a completely different set of rules than national "parks".

I am glad to see that there is precedence in WY.

Curiously, by what standards is TRNP being deemed "overpopulated"? Is this a reaction to surrounding landowners who have had increasing problems with crop destruction or has a carrying capacity value been determined and exceeded?

I am all for responsible sportsmen being used as the tool to manage the population, but only if it is needed. What I fear is that this is a power play by the surrounding landowners who are looking to charge big $$$ to hunt elk on their property. Obviously with the limited amount of elk that go back and forth from the park, the best way for them to cater to a larger number of hunters is to have the park hunted (as additional, not substitute) tags and force some of the animals out of the park.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Mark, I'm sure there will be. Those of us that attend will pick up what information is available and post up whatever written submission opportunities there may be.

Smalls,



> Curiously, by what standards is TRNP being deemed "overpopulated"? Is this a reaction to surrounding landowners who have had increasing problems with crop destruction or has a carrying capacity value been determined and exceeded?


I think all of the above. In the past, when the determined carrying capacity was grossly exceeded, these animals were rounded up, and sent all over the place, inter and intra state. With CWD concerns, this isn't an option any longer. No doubt, there will be some who will find a way to benefit from this, but I don't think manipulation is a huge concern - the gratis tags are non-transferable and the other tags are R only, subject to a once in a lifetime draw.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

I can't believe all you righteous sportsman can possibly condon a management hunt in TRNP. "Caged Hunting" is after all immoral. What difference does it make how large the enclosure is. When the non hunting public gets wind of this they are going to take away our hunting priviledges for sure. What should happen to manage this herd is a roundup llike before, only then take the culls to a butcher plant and give the meat to needy families.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Also Mr. Bueide, if these elk have had any supplemental feeding of hay in the past, they will certainly come running if you were to take them a bale tommorrow. Been to the badlands lately? It is pretty brown out there, those elk would probably come running for anything green. Get your gun ready you should be able to get a good close shot.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Mr. 4590,

Can't believe it took you that long. Of course, you understood the last paragraph of my initial post was for you. Didn't figure it would stop you from chiming in, but I did want to beat you to the punch. :wink:

Only those whose Crayola Super Pack is made up of 32 black and 32 white crayons could confuse the proposed TRNP situation to your program. The majority, who understand there are about 7,000 shades between black and white, can easily see the difference.

Yes, I've done my share of stomping and riding in the park. Have never seen an elk. It's on my "life-list" to ride through there someday in September during the bugling season. I'm told you will hear a bunch, but necessarily see many - maybe a little truck horn conditioning would work?

In a harsh winter, I'll bet these elk would come to hay.....as would all of the other WILD hoofed critters in the state.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Hey Dan,

I beg to differ, I think its you guys that have a pretty black and white view of "hunting". I think we are probably in the grey area as "hunting" can mean different things to as many people. I happen to agree completely, and have said for a long time, that they should use a hunting season to control the TRNP herd. I first think they should fix the fence though so they don't just chase them all out onto the local ranchers and cause a hardship for them. I guess I am just intrigued that you see this different from what we do.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

> I guess I am just intrigued that you see this different from what we do.


How many acres are your animals confined to on the "hunt"?

Are your animals wary of your "hunters" and do they have any ability to escape?

Is there even the remotest possibility that your "hunters" won't have an unlimited number of shooting chances or eventually kill an animal?

Your program is as much "hunting" as booting a bunch of barn raised mallards out of the loft and "hunting" them 50 yards away from the barn on their flight path back to the loft.

Shooting, yes, hunting, no, and I don't know many people that would confuse the two.

I think MRN suggested something that made sense to me. Why not just eliminate the word "hunt" or "hunting" from all of your advertising and other literature? Why not just call it live sillouette shooting? And I'm only being about half a smart-*** here, but is there really anything more to it than that from a challenge perspective?


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

I do not see the need to defend what we do but here goes. We have a 400 acre enclosure in very mountainous terrain. Approx. half is heavily wooded. Animals have no human contact for atleast 6 months before the hunting season. They are very wary of a hunter especially on foot which is what we require, unless they are handicapped. Now that you have agreed that hunting on a preserve like TRNP is OK, how are you going to decide what size enclosure is appropriate. After all the elk still are fenced in and are not supposed to be able to escape the hunters. Isn't that what the public has a hard time with, at least according to you folks. If you guys are going to be consistent you better start lobbying for a roundup and butcher the extra animals. I didn't know they made contraceptives for elk.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

4590,

How can you compare 46,159 acres in the South Unit to your 400 acre, high-fenced, ultra-contolled environment? There are hunting areas that have physical/geographical barriers that effectively keep wild animals "confined" to a smaller area than the South Unit.

I ask again, once your "hunter" has ordered his/her particular bull or class of bull off the menu, is there even the remotest possibility that hunter will not have an unlimited number of shooting chances and will not eventually harvest that bull? 100% gurantee, right? Pick one animal in the TRNP deal, what are the chances you can run him all over the 72 square miles and get him pinched into some fence corner?

You don't have to defend anything, other than your program is about as far away as possible from what most folks would consider a "hunt". And, like a lot of other things these days, it doesn't do much to bolster our image among the non-hunting majority, and it negatively reinforces that harvesting an animal is becoming more like a business transaction than recreation.

We've had our fun taking a few shots at one another, but we're not going to get the other "straightened around". I'll let you have the last word.....


----------



## GooseBuster3 (Mar 1, 2002)

Can I get my 400 BC bull released so I can shoot it tomorrow 4590. What a JOKE!! uke:


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

Comparing hunting the south unit with a 400 acre high fence is like comparing hiking up K2 on one leg and no water with climbing a 3,000 bushel grain bin...

You've been asking for a distinction between the south unit and your high fence 4590...does the fence around TRNP keep the elk in? Does the fence around you 400 acre pasture keep the elk in?

sherpasmalls


----------



## Booster (Sep 8, 2003)

How can you consider a "hunting preserve" ok??? I am just curious as to what your opion on the matter is that you call "HUNTING?" Shooting a caged animal is NOT hunting. That is like me going out and shooting a Buffalo in a pasture and saying that I shot it roaming around ND. You are pathetic if you consider what you do hunting. All you are trying to do is make money on something that was given to us to enjoy. What ever happened to going hunting to have fun? 4590 you should change your name to 666! :evil:


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

I see no problems with Park herd reduction, we do that sort of thing right in towns allready. As far as tourism and Park promotion there will still be enuough elk there to please the tourists. What has to be done has to be done.

Where do I sign up??


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Dan,

Just for your info, we do not guarantee 100% hunts. We offer money back gaurantee if the client is unsuccessful. And yes not every client has been successful.

I know I will not convince you to support preserve hunts. I just think its so inconsistent to support the same thing in TRNP. You said there are geographical areas that confine animals to less space than the TRNP. That is true, and a good point I'll have to remember that one, but sounds like you are trying to justify a preserve hunt to me. 46,000 acres, 72 sq. miles, sounds pretty impressive. Thats only an area about 8 miles by 9 miles. Which means those elk are only about 4.5 miles from a fence at any time. Elk can cover 5 mi in a matter of a few minutes, so like it or not they are confined. To say the fence doesn't hold them is a lame excuse to me. I am quite sure the fence will be intact if this comes about so the elk aren't pushed out onto private property or the ranchers will be up in arms and that would not accomplish the purpose anyway. I have a question for you. If in the future if you were to draw the coveted TRNP tag, and while "hunting" you found that awsome 7X7, 400+(course it doesn't matter anyway B&C won't acknowledge it from a preserve) bull of you dreams, and after chasing him around that 72 sq. mi. for abit caught up and had a nice 150 yd shot but realized ooops he is right up against that dang fence, you would let him go right?


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

4590 said:


> To say the fence doesn't hold them is a lame excuse to me. I am quite sure the fence will be intact if this comes about so the elk aren't pushed out onto private property or the ranchers will be up in arms and that would not accomplish the purpose anyway.


That's a completely unsupported assumption. A necessary assumption for your argument to hold any water, which it doesn't. If the caveat for a TRNP season was that an elk fence was erected, I, as well as most, would oppose it. Plus, what would the ranchers have to be ****** about, many of them are already making a mint by charging guys to hunt out there. The more big bulls they have on their land the more potential revenue in their pockets.



4590 said:


> I have a question for you. If in the future if you were to draw the coveted TRNP tag, and while "hunting" you found that awsome 7X7, 400+(course it doesn't matter anyway B&C won't acknowledge it from a preserve) bull of you dreams, and after chasing him around that 72 sq. mi. for abit caught up and had a nice 150 yd shot but realized ooops he is right up against that dang fence, you would let him go right?


 :eyeroll: No, I would shoot it and hang it in my corner office, then tell everyone (after chasing it 5 miles) that I shot it in a 1 mile by 1/2 mile cage with 9 foot high fences. I would then explain how I looked through the photo album the morning before the hunt deciding which bull to shoot. :eyeroll:


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

To even compare a hunting presevre or game farm is absoutly appauling. You gain off the death of an animal. That's how YOU make money. To manage a herd in a national park is something that you can't just go out and float $2000. You have to be selected. I believe that's why it considered once in a "life time"? Now tell me what is so once in a life time when I could book a trip year after year! True I may not harvest a elk in 400 acre lot!!!! But I could be back year after year to only make you money! What you are doing is not preserving a national herd!!!

4590 come on.....let's not really go there. You make a personal profit off of it. Game and fish are offering a 1 time deal to shoot an Elk to help preserve the herd!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Compare:



> Just for your info, we do not guarantee 100% hunts


to:

"...but we guarantee a 100% success rate" (you know where that came from).

I'm not sure how you can reconcile those two statements.



> And yes not every client has been successful


How? Someone gets there and isn't pleased with the menu selections or breaks a leg falling off the four-wheeler or flails away and runs out of bullets or what? How can you not harvest a bull confined to 400 acres?

As for the rest, if you want to try and leverage some level of acceptance for your operation by making the leap of all leaps from the TRNP deal to yours, good luck. A pig all dollied up with lipstick is still just a pig. It's ALL relative, and 400A does not compare to the South Unit in any way, shape or form, fence or no fence. 400 Acres and a 0.0 chance to flee is what it is - a shooting gallery, not a hunt.

The South Unit, on the other hand, is a big, big, place, with extreme and varied terrain (much of it even more "mountainous" than yours), and if you're even remotely familiar with it, it's very disingenuous to suggest a hunter would have ANY chance to chase an animal around and around within it to finally pinch it in a corner. You could walk for days on those rises and plateaus on the West side. And the Painted Canyon, the only way you'd know an elk was nearby would be to come around one of a zillion corners and dang near be staring it in the face - the maze that complex is would make finding an animal there almost impossible. I wouldn't worry about too many 400's standing still and panting with their *** up against a fence corner, resigned to take the 180gr death blow. :wink: They have way better options than their 400A high-fence rele's.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Dan,

Well you might not worry about it but it could and would happen. I realize the question I posed put you in a difficult "corner" and I suspect that is why you didn't answer it.

Maverick,

You are absolutely right I do gain off the death of MY animals. News flash, thats what livestock producers do. So let me see if I got this right. If I charge someone $4500 to shoot a bull in my preserve its immoral. But if the US government gives you a once in a lifetime tag for say $20 to manage its herd in their preserve then its not immoral. GOT IT!

Smalls,

Your logic escapes me. There already is a an elk fence aroung TRNP. If there were a hunt and many of the elk were pushed out of the fence onto the Badlands what would be the point of the hunt. It would not reduce the herd and I am saying the local ranchers would not want all those elk in their hay supply the next winter. I can just hear it now, hunters complaining because they got a once in a lifetime tag and most of the elk were chased out of the Park and they have nothing to hunt.

May be you guys can explain something else to me. I post an article about a new organization with 97 million in assets that is going to try to outlaw bowhunting and it gets no response. I mention preserve hunting and the board lights up. You guys better wake up and smell the coffee as to where the real debate is going to be.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

We smell the coffee (it's more like a stench) The stench is from YOU 4590. You are the problem and you are the ammo that is going to be used to outlaw hunting. The 97 million in asset crowd is smiling knowing that people like you are not smart enough to see the big picture because you only care about the money you can make.

Bans on hunting are not going to happen in your lifetime and you know it. But you are fine feeding the anti-hunters all the ammo they need to change the minds of the rest of the non-hunting public to their side. The consequences of what you do will be laid to rest on future hunters and sportsman of this country.

Sleep well my friend. :eyeroll:


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

4590, alot of things escape you...


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

How many of you would be up for a get-together after the meeting, I would.

Bob


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Shameless bump - hope guys in the area will make the meeting tomorrow night. A get together would be good. Can't make it, but hope you guys can do it.

4590,



> Well you might not worry about it but it could and would happen. I realize the question I posed put you in a difficult "corner" and I suspect that is why you didn't answer it.


I thought I did answer the question in that I stated by belief that it is highly, highly unlikely in the context of the South Unit that it could ever happen. The scope and terrain of the South Unit simply will not allow you to push an animal into a fence corner. That's the difference between the South Unit and your deal. Uncertainty and fair chase versus 0.0 escape opportunity and certain death. Two townships versus a little over two quarters. It's ALL relative.

But, just to play along, I'll answer your highly improbable hypothetical, head on. I would shoot. I wouldn't find it very satisfying and I wouldn't do a mount or brag about my mighty slay, but I'd shoot since part of my "contract" with that license is to cull the herd. I'm getting the opportunity to hunt only in exchange for the expectation I'll do my part in the necessary culling. Quid-pro-quo. To do otherwise would be irresponsible in the context of why I was there in the first place.

Now, you answer mine, head on......

And, I'm not being a smart-*** here, but do you guys sell any elk meat that isn't involved with the shoots, and how does it compare in price to beef? Are you guys set up to ship or does someone pick it up? I love elk steak and would like to know the specifics of getting some (as long as you can guarantee it wasn't whacked by one of the paying shooters :wink: )


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Hey Dan,

I knew you would shoot, and I think most of us would. Thanks for being honest. But its still a preserve hunt. You talk about how much easier it would be in our preserve. Consider this: We have on average 25 bulls in the 400 acre preserve. As stated before the terrain is very rough similar to TRNP. However it is also at least half heavily wooded. Any one who has hunted elk, ar anything else for that matter, knows woods give elk a greater advantage to escape. So do the math on average we have one bull for every 8 acres of wooded cover. TRNP is 46,000 acres and I would guess about 10% wooded at the very most. There are currently about 600 elk in TRNP. So again do the math and you get one elk to every 7.7 acres of actual cover. I know I won't convince you but it is still a preserve hunt and it will not be difficult to get an elk in TRNP. If I had 45,000 acres of badlands fenced for our hunts would that make you favorable to what we do? I think not, you see I don't think size or difficulty of the hunt has anything to do with your opinion.

We have elk meat for sale at Hope Quality Meats in Hope, ND. (about 60 mi. nw of Fargo) The elk butchered at Hope are done so under State Inspection and have nothing at all to do with our hunt operation(actually not even the same ownership). Most of what is butchered there is cows and the meat is wonderful. "Little Fields" restaurant in Fargo is serving our steaks as well. We have many cuts available on a regular basis but call to check it out. 945 2470 ask for Byron the plant manager. Also ask about delivery to Fargo as they do go that way quite regularly. If you want another real treat try their elk jerky, smoked brats, burger, and 100% elk summer sausage. I think you will find we are priced very competitively with beef for a more healthy lean product. Thanks for your interest.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Bump. Can do a meeting after. Hope to meet some of you guys for the first time. We can rally in the :beer: Dick


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

4590



> Maverick,
> 
> You are absolutely right I do gain off the death of MY animals. News flash, thats what livestock producers do. So let me see if I got this right. If I charge someone $4500 to shoot a bull in my preserve its immoral. But if the US government gives you a once in a lifetime tag for say $20 to manage its herd in their preserve then its not immoral. GOT IT!





> Maverick Posted: 24 Nov 2004 02:53 Post subject:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> To even compare a hunting presevre or game farm is absoutly appauling. You gain off the death of an animal. That's how YOU make money. To manage a herd in a national park is something that you can't just go out and float $2000. You have to be selected. I believe that's why it considered once in a "life time"? Now tell me what is so once in a life time when I could book a trip year after year! True I may not harvest a elk in 400 acre lot!!!! But I could be back year after year to only make you money! What you are doing is not preserving a national herd!!!


'

Where in my post did I ever say whay you were doing was immoral, because I can't? Somehow you must have conjured that up in your mind?
You said it best!!!!! Can't really compare a livestock producer to a once in a lifetime chance? Oh and it wasn't a news flash!!! I hope you got it?


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

4590,

Nice try on the "wooded acres" analysis. Space is still space, and the South Unit is NOT a series of fenced in 400A enclosures. How do you think it will work to run down an elk after the first volley in the Painted Canyon? :wink:

You're right, even if the "hunt" aspect were apples/apples (which they are by no means even close), I wouldn't find acceptance in your version of "hunt". Once you accept a program where for $10,000 you're are "100% guaranteed" a 400+, all elements of a "hunt" for how 98% of the public defines a "hunt" are gone. Yours is the poster child for commercialized and manufactured "hunting", for PETA and everyone else who will decide for the non-hunting minority whether or not the next generations get to share our outdoors passions.

Success rates for the management hunt will be high as compared to the national average (where in the world did you come up with 4% - that's dramatically lower than anything I've ever seen), but still well less than half of your "100% guarantee".

It's ALL relative......

I'll give Byron a call for some steaks - thanks for the info.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

TRNP/Elk Reduction
*December 1, 5:30 - 7:00 pm Fargo Ramada Plaza Suites*

I hope you Fargo Nodakers can make this hearing and stay for a quick one after. The meeting after the hearing is going to be important and won't take long. The session is only a month away. Dick


----------

