# ND Cycles



## wi2nd (Sep 11, 2007)

I've been reading a lot of postings the past couple of years talking about all of the hunting pressure and competition for good spots. I've been hunting some areas of northeast ND for 26 years (first coming over from MN, now from WI). That's a long time for some, and the blink of an eye for others. However, from my perspective, the hunting pressure has gone in cycles and right now it seems like it's on an upswing. I'm not too sure that it's much different than past cycles in terms of pressure and number of hunters.

I have to admit that I've missed a few years here and there, but I've seen heavy pressure and almost no pressure. I haven't looked at the license numbers in a few years so I can't speak to that benchmark. Does this jive with what other's have seen, or are the peaks really that much higher?

Perceptions, observations, or random thoughts?

-Mike


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

I think more people are hunting early seasons and with the amount of land being leased up and/or posted....hunters are getting much more concentrated and hunting the birds that are accessible harder and more.... In my opinion, there are many more hunters in the area, increasing every year.....I cant see it get any better any time soon until some very restrictive caps are put in place


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

We need a cap, plain and simple.


----------



## Nick Roehl (Mar 7, 2002)

I agree a cap like SD


----------



## clacy (Mar 16, 2005)

Does North Dakota not have a limit on non-resident hunters set at 20,000?


----------



## bowhunter04 (Nov 7, 2003)

I also agree a cap would be great, even though there might be years I wouldn't get to hunt with friends and family from out of state. It would be worth it when they do come.


----------



## shooteminthelips (Jun 13, 2007)

Yes they do have a sort of cap, but it should be around 12,000 per year.


----------



## slough (Oct 12, 2003)

The pressure has gotten pretty bad but I'm sure a couple years of statewide drought would do a lot to reduce the number of hunters, especially from out of state. I don't really ever see a cap coming so I really don't even bother thinking about it.

I am pretty sure there is no cap right now...I think they put one in at 30,000 a few years ago but did away with it. I think there are usually around 25,000 NR waterfowl licenses sold a year give or take.


----------



## roostbuster (Oct 19, 2005)

slough said:


> I think there are usually around 25,000 NR waterfowl licenses sold a year give or take.


yep, but thats only the past couple of years. So I really don't see that number increasing anymore, especially with the oncoming drought like you were talking about.

The thing that worries me most is the lack of resident hunters. Resident waterfowlers have fallen from about 50,000 a year down to around 30,000 since the '50's. I feel we need to address how to get more people into the sport, not get more people out.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

I am for a cap too. But, it will not happen when money is involved... as long as the NR's are bringing plenty of it when they come, you can kiss the cap adios.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

If (and its a big if) Roostbuster's numbers are correct the following scenario would be a reality.

In 1950's there were 50,000 resident hunters + ??? non resident hunters (I would believe the number would be small) = 50,000 + hunters.

Today there are 30,000 resident hunters + 25,000 non resident hunters = 55,000 hunters.

That tells me that the hunting pressure on the state of ND has only risen by 10% (if that) in 50+ years. If that is the case it could be argued that the increase % in hunting pressure is dramatically less than the increase in % of population.

Am I missing something here? Are the numbers not correct? Is my logic screwed up?

Note. I am not trying to start the same old NR/Resident debate that is on here year in and year out......it gets boring. Many residents and many non-residents will never see eye to eye on this matter. No matter what is argued.


----------



## scissorbill (Sep 14, 2003)

Your math is close,however todays hunter has way way more time, money ,technology i.e. internet mobility etc. People used to have to work and only hunted a few weekends normaly. Today it is enclosed trailers with thousands of $ in gear ,filming ,posting on the internet, pro and wannabe pros killing more than ever before,pay to hunt, these are my birds, and on and on it goes, Apples and oranges IMO, The end is near however.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

I can agree with that logic. But think about a couple of things here.....

1. What were the limits back in the 1950's? Were they more? If so how did that add to hunting pressure? I guess we would have to look at waterfowl harvest numbers. (I would guess it is more now???)

2. If ND is similar to other state, more people lived in rural areas in the 1950's. Meaning more residents had immediate access to hunting. Which would lead to increased pressure.

Just another twist on the pressure debate.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Lets get the facts straight

1. ND *does not* have a cap or any kind of a limit on NR hunter numbers for wing shooting

2. Here are the hunter numbers for ND from 1975

*Dan B wrote*



> Year Res NR Total
> 
> 1975 67,267 6,043 73,310
> 1976 63,660 8,530 72,190
> ...


The cap on NR hunters has been beaten to death on this site and others. If you do not believe me do a search on the homepage.

Simple dissection of the numbers above tells a tale there were way more hunters in 1975 but the hunting was very different than it is today by both resident and nonresident hunters. It was even way different in the early 60's when I started hunting compared to hunting in 1975.

Voice your opinion keep it civil but most of all find the facts if you do not know for sure what they are.

Thank You

Bob


----------



## wi2nd (Sep 11, 2007)

Bob - Thanks for finding the raw numbers. I find them very interesting, but I guess I didn't look hard enough for them. It never even crossed my mind that this might trigger one of the R/NR debates I've seen, but in looking at the actual numbers and seeing the trends, I guess it's not surprising. Was just interested in the long-term observations of others, regardless of residency status. I do also find it interesting the perceived greater impact of today's hunter and techniques as compared to the past, as per some of the previous posts.

This comes up almost every year in our group (composed of guys that grew up in ND and have since moved away as well "always been" NRs). I now have some other observations and facts to share which will put an interesting twist on the conversation!


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Please re-read my post folks. If you notice that I said "IF (and that's a big if) the numbers were correct." To be honest with you I didn't look up the numbers nor did I care to look up the numbers. I was merely pointing out by the numbers that the pressure seems to be less.

Next re-read my second post. I agreed that the tactics have changed and probably have lead to more pressure.

Pressure is a major issue for some hunters on this site (not me but some). It is a discussion that is worth having and dissecting. This can be done without blaming residents or non-residents or having the same old stupid debate that has resurfaced every single year.

So I will further the debate in spirit of having a productive discussion.

Bob said look at the facts. The fact is that there were signifcantly more hunters in 1975 as compared to today....... Despite the raw data people say that there is more pressure today...... why is that?

For the older hunters on here, how have the tactics and methods of hunting changed that much since 1965, 1975 and today? Use of robo ducks, longer seasons, bigger bag limits, better equipment? Again 25,000 less hunters but more pressure.


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

Its simple, back in the "earlier" days, hunters would only hunt ducks on the weekends for few amounts of days. For example, a hunter and his "crew" would hunt maybe one or two, maybe...just maybe three WEEKENDS in one season, and most would not hunt Sundays. Now todays hunters, they hunt just as much during the week as they do on the weekends, giving the birds no time to rest and feel somewhat safe, thus either forcing them out of the area, or making them almost completely impossible to hunt.So you may have 25000 less hunters today, but those 50000 that are going out are hunting probably 5-10x harder and more than the people in the past,


----------



## shiawassee_kid (Oct 28, 2005)

USSapper said:


> Its simple, back in the "earlier" days, hunters would only hunt ducks on the weekends for few amounts of days. For example, a hunter and his "crew" would hunt maybe one or two, maybe...just maybe three WEEKENDS in one season, and most would not hunt Sundays. Now todays hunters, they hunt just as much during the week as they do on the weekends, giving the birds no time to rest and feel somewhat safe, thus either forcing them out of the area, or making them almost completely impossible to hunt.So you may have 25000 less hunters today, but those 50000 that are going out are hunting probably 5-10x harder and more than the people in the past,


no offense but thats a big assumption on their hunting habits. Your painting with a pretty big brush. I hunted just as hard in the 70's as i do today. Assuming everyone was a weekend warrior back then is just wishful thinking. I think if anything its safe to assume the Non-Resident hunter is more aggressive now and more of a presence than he was 30 years ago. That I will agree with.

I would never agree with a cap on waterfowl in any state. Its a migrating animal....I would never want our state to cap NR's on our fishing just because I want more or better fishing....the evidence is simply not there to prove they impact it. Leasing that forces people to concentrate elsewhere is more likely the issue at hand.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

If you read my last post it gives a hint as to why the pressure index is higher today. The license used to be a combined license for upland AND waterfowl it split out in the early 2000's. Many hunters did not hunt ducks unless the opportunity provided itself.

When I started hunting ducks the migration was an awesome sight compared to today it was mostly water hunting but we always watched the tornados that were so big it blackened the sky in the fields during late harvest, hence our first failed attempts at field hunting by trying to sneak up on them. That was in the early 60's. it didn't take long to realize that the ducks would come back several nights in a row and we needed to be there, hidden in the field when they arrived, no decoys no blinds no dog no choke tubes no calls no camo no insulated boots just an insulated (with red plaid lining:lol: ) chore coat jeans a stocking cap a pocket full of shells and a 20 ga. Montgomery Wards single shot shotgun.

We would always get a few for a meal or two and call it a season because there was field work to do to prepare for winter.

Compare that to how ducks are hunted today and you can see the difference. My hunting style has evolved along with everyone else. I chuckle to myself every time I find a good feed spot because I know for a fact that we probably would not have to put out dozens of decoys. The simple fact about duck hunting that I have learned over the years is this. Find where the birds want to be.

Bob


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

> I think if anything its safe to assume the Non-Resident hunter is more aggressive now and more of a presence than he was 30 years ago. That I will agree with.


That last sentence agreed with everything I just said, I was talking on the part of the resident hunters hunting just a few days out of the season and hanging it up for the year.....just like Bob said he did, like he said, there were chores to be done..... Granted Im sure there were some that hunted just as hard as now.....few and far between

Btw, fish cant fly out of an area, theyll always be there :wink:


----------



## aztec (Oct 27, 2005)

The numbers are very interesting to say the least. But I think that what you are seeing is no different than what we have been seeing in Wisconsin. Although we do not have the high NR numbers, the situation is much the same - more hunter days on less land.

Overall hunter numbers in WI have declined signfiicantly sine the 70's. But the combination of habitat loss and leasing shrinks the available opportunity. No doubt people also have much more time off. At the most popular public areas, weekday hunting pressure now exceeds what weekends used to be. The pressure also extends further into the season due to better gear and clothing.

Minnesota has much the same thing even though many cross the western boundary as you well know.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

One thing about this whole subject that has not been brought up is they types of pressure.

If you look back in the 60', 70', 80's and early 90's there was no early goose seasons or youth seasons. Now states have both. These seasons are putting pressure on birds before the regular waterfowl season.

Read some of the posts about the early goose season. People were stating mallards were diving into the decoys while people were setting up.

Is this not educating birds? Is this not pressure?

Yes they are not getting shot at but they are seeing people and spreads. They are getting smarter. They are getting harassed. So they move out earlier. Especially after resident opener and then NR opener!

Yes I agree that hunting styles have changed. People are more mobile. People do have more free time, it seems. Also more land is being posted or leased. So again hunters are getting concentrated in certain area's.

But still the one thing that gets me is when people bring up caps. I just don't agree with them on migratory waterfowl. But again I have stated my feelings in other posts. I think there are better ways to help lesson the pressure issue but again I posted them many times before.

To recap.....pressure from Early goose and youth. Then you have the two openers....that is almost 1 1/2 months worth of pressure and only 2 weeks of the regular season has passed. And NR's only factor into 1 week of the pressure. It is just something to think about.

Chuck


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Someone mentioned that fish can't leave the state like birds..... Fish also can't be replaced with the next north wind like birds. It is definitely a more permanent resource :-?

Good points about the types of hunting leading to increased pressure. The next question is what do you propose we do to limit pressure? (don't just say caps, that is easy and boring).

Some suggestions, not have early seasons? Would that not help increase the quality of hunts during the the 60 day season? I have seen the early goose season in MN totally ruin our hunting in SW Minnesota. It is really too bad, we went down there during the regular season for decades, now b.c of the early season, we don't go at all.

Another, eliminate hunting of waterfowl on Mondays and Thursdays.....for everyone (calm down residents!)


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I would hate to eliminate any early seasons or youth hunts. But maybe have the early goose season not as long.

I love the idea of eliminating a day or two during the week. Pick a day that the majority of R don't hunt. Think about it the season could last another 8+ days. That could be some great late season hunting in warmer years.

or

have it during a certain time you can 't hunt past noon or 1 pm or what ever time frame for a couple of weeks. That way birds can get a rest during the evening and they will not turn nocturnal.

or

Have a split season. Have the season open for a month or so. Then take 7 - 10 days off (or what ever) and start it up again.

All of these limits constant pressure applied by all hunters.


----------



## dgyer (Sep 10, 2004)

GREAT JOB! posting it by the numbers. That was really interesting to read and I would be interested to see how that compares in other states as well. Thanks for doing the research. Thanks!


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

MN used to have a prolonged time cap on hunting waterfowl. It used to be that you couldn't hunt after 4:00 until MEA weekend (October 20thish). We used to have some banner hunts. Of course this could be for a variety of reasons, including the time cap.


----------



## wi2nd (Sep 11, 2007)

As much as it pains me to say so, I really like the idea of placing a time limit on how late in the day you can hunt. We used to have some really great evening shoots - no longer. Now, if we stay in the field that late it's because we either are enjoying the weather or don't have any more scouting ideas to pursue. So, might as well just let them get some peace and quiet.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap cap.
We need a cap!

Why is it all the NR's jump on ND residents on this cap issue, but nobody says anything about SD and its what?......3,000 NR cap?

Why is this?

A cap would improve hunting. Less people in the field means less pressure plain and simple. Yes some locals hunt hard all week, but the VAST majority still hunt weekends and long weekends when they roll around. NR's however are here for 7-14 days blasting away most every day, all day.

Last years duck hunting in the area I hunt was terrible due to pressure. I talked to NR's who were having their worst hunts in years in ND. I asked them, "your spending alot of money to come here, would you rather be able to hunt every year, and have mediocre hunts, or come maybe every other year and have great hunts"?

Make it a lottery or something, and cap it.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

SD raised its cap this year!


----------



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

I have also been hunting NE N.D. for 20 plus years. Back in the day, the only busy weekend was the opener. Still, it was unheard of to have somebody set up in the same field as you. You could go out during the week and not see another soul. It has definatly changed over the years. It may go in cycles, but I don't think it will ever be like that again...The days of little competition are gone!


----------



## scissorbill (Sep 14, 2003)

Eliminate all early seasons and youth seasons period. The early season was supposed to be one weekend long now it goes right to the regular opener . As far as youth seasons they are a total joke. Take the kid with you on the regular opener and teach them the ropes ,just like thousands before. This special this special that is having a profound long term negative impact. There is absolutley no good reason for these feelgood silly youth seasons. I like kids as much as anyone and kids can learn to hunt the same way we all did whether by Dad,uncle ,mentor,friend whatever,just do it within the confines of the normal season. This spring goose season is a load of crap as well.


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

> This spring goose season is a load of crap as well.


Huh?


----------



## 4grnhds (Sep 8, 2007)

One idea for the youth season would be to move it to the end of the season instead of the beginning. We do that down here in AL and MS and it seems to work fine, sometimes produces even better hunting than in the regular season. I know it might be shotty up your way depending on the weather... might be froze up already. Just a thought.


----------



## diverboy (Jul 5, 2007)

Last year was a tough year in terms of pressure just for the fact that much of the water was gone due to the drought. I think a lot of people are thinking back to last year on this issue when people were forced to compete for the remaining water that held ducks. I'm not trying to stir the pot, but what equates to more pressure? Residents with 60 days of hunting or non residents with 14 days of hunting. I don't know but I would have to say that in the end they are pretty close to equal pressure. There is no one smoking gun to this problem.


----------



## shiawassee_kid (Oct 28, 2005)

diverboy said:


> Last year was a tough year in terms of pressure just for the fact that much of the water was gone due to the drought. I think a lot of people are thinking back to last year on this issue when people were forced to compete for the remaining water that held ducks. I'm not trying to stir the pot, but what equates to more pressure? Residents with 60 days of hunting or non residents with 14 days of hunting. I don't know but I would have to say that in the end they are pretty close to equal pressure. There is no one smoking gun to this problem.


yep.

For those that want the cap, go ahead and cap it. To be honest I could care less, heck i might send in for that permit or might not....kinda just as easy to jump the border and goto canada to hunt.

I don't think it will help the problem, you still will have alot of hunters migrating to the spots with water and birds. Low water season and u will be cramped.....high water season and u will have great hunting but miss out on tons of revenue. damned if you do, damned if you don't.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Eliminating the youth hunt will do nothing to help with pressure.
There needs to be s cap in place. HPC where the cap is dynamic and corresponds to the water levels made so much sense. If there was a lot of water around there would be a larger cap, less water, less hunters.

The majority of NR's I hunt with seem to like the idea of a cap that would allow for better hunting, just maybe every other year.


----------



## averyghg (Oct 16, 2006)

Yes this has been beaten to death and if im correct, a good solution came up that everyone agreed on was.........

cap the NR's and raise their license fees to make up for the missing money. Now everyone that matters will be happy

haha im expecting to get murdered for saying that


----------



## wi2nd (Sep 11, 2007)

In getting back to what's changed over time, my observation as a NR is that the farming has changed as well. There is a lot of land in CRP and the type of crops have changed (more corn for instance). I think with the change in the crop type may also come a slight deviation in harvesting patterns, such as pushing the corn harvest to the absolute limit to get the required number of growing days.

Any thoughts on how some of these things may have an affect? Probably more of an impact on the migration pattern of birds coming through from Canada.

Speaking of which (may have already been addressed), but much of the discussion of numbers and type or pressure can also be applied to Canada, and the ripple affect that has as the birds come down through ND.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

Thanks to everyone who posted for being civil. Let's keep it that way on these topics, the majority go south pretty quick.

Anywho, thanks.


----------



## aztec (Oct 27, 2005)

averyghg said:


> Yes this has been beaten to death and if im correct, a good solution came up that everyone agreed on was.........
> 
> cap the NR's and raise their license fees to make up for the missing money. Now everyone that matters will be happy
> 
> haha im expecting to get murdered for saying that


The positive economic impact of NR's is more than just license fees which tend to be a relatively low percentage of the total dollars spent.

If there is to be a cap (which I agree might not be all bad) you can't totally forget the tourism interests in the equation. South Dakota's cap reflects a lack of concern for tourism dollars. However, it should be noted that they don't cap pheasant hunting - only waterfowl. Could that be because they get so much money out of the pheasant hunters (and other tourism) that they don't care about waterfowler dollars?

I'm not sure that ND has that luxury.


----------



## Honker Hunter 1 (Jun 24, 2007)

Make it a noon closing for ducks. Weekends for residents only

Ducks will be able to rest and feed fewer hunters will come for only 1/2 day hunts. NR will stop buying land and posting.

And ban guides especially non resident/out of state backed guides this is where alot of posted land comes from. If you can not hunt waterfowl in ND without a guide even if you are there for a few days you are not a hunter you are a shooter. (Exception to this is handicap or seniors)


----------



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

Honker Hunter 1 said:


> Make it a noon closing for ducks. Weekends for residents only
> 
> Ducks will be able to rest and feed fewer hunters will come for only 1/2 day hunts. NR will stop buying land and posting.


I'd be in favor of this, but to get this to work, you'd need to compromise and allow Saturdays for NR's... Res only hunting for Sunday and Monday only.. and to have the closing be similar to what the goose hunting regs are with 1PM closing in the early season, and 2PM later..

You'd still have plent of people coming up, as they'd just combine it into a upland package and hunt ditch parrots and grouse in the afternoons....

But something like that is a darn good start.

:thumb:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

*wi2nd*

Canadian pressure on waterfowl resources is quite different. Figures from 2 years ago said there were 43,000+ total waterfowl hunters in the Canaadian prairie provinces combined. That is a huge area. Now think about 53,000+ hunters in ND and compare the area to hunt vs. in Canada and it is an apples and oranges situation. I am sure some of the ducks that come into ND prior to the migration are here in response to pressure but I think weather is probably more of a factor. They stay because there is feed IMO.

Pressure is a relatively unprovable theory because there are no studies that have been done. There are only raw numbers and comments from hunters Resident and Nonresident to base it on. I have seen it first hand and i just moved to an areas where there are very few if any hunters.

I have said it before that ND is all about scouting.

Bob


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Bob Kellam said:


> *wi2nd*
> 
> Canadian pressure on waterfowl resources is quite different. Figures from 2 years ago said there were 43,000+ total waterfowl hunters in the Canaadian prairie provinces combined. That is a huge area. Now think about 53,000+ hunters in ND and compare the area to hunt vs. in Canada and it is an apples and oranges situation. I am sure some of the ducks that come into ND prior to the migration are here in response to pressure but I think weather is probably more of a factor. They stay because there is feed IMO.
> 
> ...


EXACTLY!!! Last year the large northern flights of mallards stayed in Canada till December. Why?.....less pressure. Why do all our ducks leave here the second week of season......pressure.
We're trying to cram to many hunters into to little time. Last year was exceptionaly bad due to low water, this year at least in the area I hunt, isnt going to be much better.

The youth hunts I dont think have much affect towards total pressure, its one weekend guys. The early season I think can have ill effects in certain areas. As for the spring season, ya, it is creating a "super" snow goose, any bird that survives his first year is pretty tough his second fall, but its needed due to much lower fall harvests on this species.

A cap on amount of acreage a G/O is allowed to tie up would help, a total BAN on NR leasing of hunting rights would help, and a cap on total number of available NR licenses would help.

The birds are getting smarter, they stay in canada longer and longer every year, pretty soon ND will be a total fly over state for a majority of the northern populations of birds.


----------



## Mary (Apr 4, 2005)

The state of ND can charge whatever they want to for an out of state license and I'll still spend the money to enjoy the hunting, the people and the unique beauty of your great state. If they set a quota, those of us who are the most serious, spend the most days afeild, and most likely shoot the most ducks will buy our licenses the first day they go on sale.

Although I do not think it would ever happen , I honestly think I would get some satisfaction from a little quid pro quo. For example, a Minnesota NR fishing license costs $35. Why not create 3 fishing zones in Minnesota and charge NR like $120 to fish for a maximum 14 days?


----------



## justund223 (Aug 28, 2006)

because there is better fishing in ND :beer:


----------



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

Mary said:


> Although I do not think it would ever happen , I honestly think I would get some satisfaction from a little quid pro quo. For example, a Minnesota NR fishing license costs $35. Why not create 3 fishing zones in Minnesota and charge NR like $120 to fish for a maximum 14 days?


North Dakota has better fishing. Minnesota has 1,000,000 jetskis and pleasure boaters putt putting around their lakes.

Mary I hate to break it to ya... noone west of Fargo really cares about Minnesota fishing. They have tons of options in the state.

But that being said.. Please endorse that! Then we wouldn't be having the silly comparison, and you'd see that most people who drive east into Minnesota for their little resort cabins aren't fishing but rather pleasure boating and BBQ'ing...

Like I've said before.. I'll compromise.. you ban NR fishing for Mn, and let ND ban NR hunting... who will scream louder?

Putting extreme pressure on birds and locking down access in North Dakota (which the large influx of so many wealthy NR's now do), is _nothing _comparable to fishing.

For example...A whole bunch of guys can fish a *public access* lake and float across the _same_ point holding fish and never spook the fish away... everyone gets a piece of the pie ..

However with hunting only one group can hunt a specific location... therefore the need to restrict access (which causes the wealthy to purchase land, lock down the access and ensure their piece of the pie)

By putting caps in place, it is similar to the deer lottery.. you don't draw every year, but when you do draw you won't be fighting to get out into the field at 3AM just to ensure you get the spot, and your overall hunt will be higher quality, as the pressure will be less...

make sense?

Ryan


----------



## wi2nd (Sep 11, 2007)

Right, Wrong or Otherwise, This NRs Perspective:

Lots of thoughts on caps for NR. I am a NR that lives 11 months of the year for my two weeks of hunting in ND. Been going up there since I was 14 as father/son/friend hunting trips, and now have a daughter that is starting to ask about when she can go. I am also willing to make some sacrifices to keep the bird population and behavior favorable - [stage set].

We don't go to ND to shoot each year. We enjoy the total hunting experience. That ranges from seeing old friends and family, to taking in the rural ND way of life for a few days, to enjoying the countryside while scouting, laying in the field while the wind rustles the grass around you.....to bagging a few birds. No laptops, no cellphones, no meetings, etc. Real hunters will not only get an appreciation of the quality of hunting possible, but also the other things ND (and it's people) has to offer.

Shorten the shooting window during the day, exclude certain days of the week, set aside more preserve land from higher fees - do whatever needs to be done to help. But to get selfish for just one time during the year, I wouldn't be able to support a policy that could take that away for an entire year.

It may indeed be selfish, but to take this tradition away, or make it unreliable, would truly be heartbreaking for many NRs.


----------



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

wi2nd said:


> I am also willing to make some sacrifices to keep the bird population and behavior favorable - [stage set].
> 
> We don't go to ND to shoot each year. We enjoy the total hunting experience. That ranges from seeing old friends and family, to taking in the rural ND way of life for a few days, to enjoying the countryside while scouting, laying in the field while the wind rustles the grass around you.....to bagging a few birds. No laptops, no cellphones, no meetings, etc. Real hunters will not only get an appreciation of the quality of hunting possible, but also the other things ND (and it's people) has to offer.


wi2nd

Thanks for the perspective. I'm right there with you. I'm super glad this hasn't turned into a R v NR debate, and the conversation has remained civil.

I am also a NR. I too wish for a quality hunt. I come home each year to hunt with my family, see the countryside, hear the birds, see the sunrises... I'm willing to sacrifice a license every other year if it means there will only be 15,000 NR's on the years I also draw a license.. great. It means I will get to see the great ND prairie the way it used to be when I was growing up.

Even right now I'm a little wistful...

The point is something is going to need to be done. I see this season as a watershed season. With the increases in corn, the resulting later harvest as farmers will wait until the snow flies to harvest, the increased number of NR's each year, and the increasing land being locked up will create a firestorm of competition and problems.

Until caps are put into place to hold back the onslaught wave of huge numbers of NR's nothing is going to get better. Ever.

Maybe it's time for a citizen referendum on a non resident waterfowl cap ?

Just thinking out loud....

Thanks for the thought provoking thread everyone.

Ryan


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

Just an observation, not a judgement. Back in the 1970's when total hunter numbers were at their highest on the chart posted earlier, there were very few posted signs, very little to no hunting land leasing, and guides were virtually unheard of. In short there was just more room for all those hunters to spread out. The same could be said of upland hunting in the same time period.

Just an observation.


----------



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

Horsager said:


> Just an observation, not a judgement. Back in the 1970's when total hunter numbers were at their highest on the chart posted earlier, there were very few posted signs, very little to no hunting land leasing, and guides were virtually unheard of. In short there was just more room for all those hunters to spread out. The same could be said of upland hunting in the same time period.
> 
> Just an observation.


Yep agreed. However now we have super affluent "hunters" who have the latest gadgets, modern technology, internet and free time.

Today's NRs are hunting harder, longer each day, and most over a period of several consecutive days. That didn't used to happen. Additionally, these affluent types have slowly been removing formerly "open" areas from use by the average joe. This has had the cumulative effect of squeezing lots of people into very small remaining areas. Year over year there is less and less opportunity...


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Yep agreed. However now we have super affluent "hunters" who have the latest gadgets, modern technology, internet and free time.


Is this just NR or is it both R and NR hunters.

Because to say most or all R hunters only hunt weekends is kinda false. Look at the numbers people post at the end of the year. A R hunter can't shoot 100+ ducks a year without hunting more than weekends otherwise they are breaking the law.

That is why to put the total blame on pressure on the NR is false. I have stated that in earlier posts. (early goose season, youth season, resident opener, then NR opener.......5+ weekends/weeks of pressure and only NR are apart of 1 week/weekend.) But again I don't want to get into a huge debate on that.

That is why if ND hunters (R and NR) want to help lessen the pressure they both need to be restricted in some way. Like shooting hours, having certain days that people cant hunt, make more refuges (use lisc $$$), have split seasons, lesson the early seasons, have youth hunt earlier in the year, etc.

I also would be in favor of a shorter NR lisc. Like 10 days or something to that effect. Give people a chance to hunt two weekends.

IMO a cap would be like putting a band aid on a gunshot wound. Other things are need to be done make things better..


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

I thought this thread was about hunting pressure? Not NR/Resident debate.

Lets try to get past the resident and non-resident biases here and talk about what is good for the resource.

Some general points.....

1. NR are buying up land and locking it out to other hunters. NR can only hunt 14 days out of the 60 day season. Doesn't that set up a place where birds can rest a majority of the season without ANY hunting pressure? If the land wasn't bought there may be much more pressure on birds.

And yes I am aware that you will come back and say, less available land means more pressure on other land. All that I am saying is that from a bird pressure standpoint, couldn't it also lead to less pressured birds b.c they have a place to avoid constant gunning

With that being said, I can totally see why residents do not like land being locked up from a hunting access point of view.

2. People bring up the fishing in MN / hunting in ND analogy, while I believe the two can be compared, I also know from reading these debates every year that people from both sides will rarely agree on this issue or any other NR issue.

3. If the goal is to release pressure from the birds, both the Non-resident AND residents should sacrafice something. "No NR on weekends, only hunting to 1:00 for non residents......" but residents can hunt all day and every day doesn't seem to fairly eliminating the pressure of a resource that we all enjoy.

You have to ask with plans like that is the goal to really relieve pressure on birds in general or push other biases......

Before this explodes, take a deep breath and consider a different point of view.


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

I think instead of picking 5 or 7 day blocks of time to hunt NR's should be allowed to pick 2 or 3 day time blocks. Actually I'm not really in favor of limiting days at all (cause I don't want it to happen to me in MN or MT where I'm the NR), but if we must limit days then more choice is certainly in order.


----------

