# 2005 proposed legislative bills



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Here are some ideas for bill proposals...not my wording.

1. HUNTER PRESSURE:
Hunter numbers determined under HPC II model, as prepared by G&F prior to '03
session. This matches historical hunter numbers (i.e. pressure) matched to May
pond counts consistently taken for 30+ years, to establish reasonable hunter
numbers (pressure) for the upcoming season. Until the late 90's, there was a very
strong correlation between May ponds and Fall hunter numbers. Designed to allow
for enjoyable hunting by all and not prematurely push waterfowl out of ND as has
occurred in recent years. Benefits all interested in ND waterfowling by providing
a quality waterfowl experience.
b Direct Governor to create 8 zones, and allocate NR
licenses to such zones based upon anticipated Fall hunting
opportunities. We need to spread pressure around and
relieve some current heavy use areas.
c. NR's must pick a zone and stay in it for each of their
7 day periods, and may use a zone only once each year. 
Again, we need to spread pressure to be sure quality
hunting maintained in all waterfowl areas of the state.

2. G/O acreage limitation, and freezing their numbers with attrition down to 150
eventually.
3. Court would immediately suspend G/O license on a violation.
4. Prohibited Sale of Game Animal Parts:
Necessary because of Motoya case (AZ elk and deer), where 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals, said that since AZ, unlike some other states, did not prohibit the sale of
game animal parts, the Commerce Clause prohibited AZ from restricting NR's.
b. Same Commerce Clause challenges raised by MN in
it's suit against ND.
c. Need to conform ND law to certain other states
to best defend against Commerce Clause challenges
and ensure ND has the ability to regulate ND hunting
as ND, and not some other state or people, see fit.

5. Exotics
"It is in the public interest to ensure the conservation, preservation, and
condition of wildlife native to North Dakota, by strictly regulating as unlawful,
the possession, importation, exportation, breeding, raising, protection,
rehabilitation, hunting, killing, trapping, capture, purchase, or sale of certain
non-domestic, non-native wildlife, as determined non-domestic, non-native wildlife
by NDGF".

6. Caged Hunts
"It shall be unlawful to hunt, shoot, kill, or wound any wild mammal held under a
wild animal license or permit or any farmed wild mammal for enjoyment, gain,
amusement, or sport, in a cage or enclosure regardless of size. This code section
does prohibit:
a. A licensed veterinarian from diagnosing, treating, testing, or performing other
duties within the standards of veterinary practice;
b.The slaughter of permitted wild farmed mammals in compliance of the regulations of
this state relating to the slaughter of livestock;
c. The recapture and or disposal of permitted wild farmed mammals which have escaped.

7. Repeal law of deer-proof hay yard fence for outfitters.
8. Require G/Os to have written landowner permission by date and species.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Thanks Ken!!!

Well everyone it is *PUT UP *or *SHUT UP *time!!!!!!!!!  Help will be *Required* to get the desired results. Some members here have invested countless hours of their private time so we can have a quality hunting experience, Let's do what we can to pay them back!! If you are asked to help please pitch in and do what you are asked to do! If you want to volunteer contact one of the moderators, or just post up that you want to help.

This is Important to the Future of North Dakota Hunting! Get involved!

*I AM IN*! *How about you*?

Sorry about being on my soap box.

Have a good one!


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

Ken,
Shouldn't "does prohibit" actually read "does *not* prohibit"?


> 6. Caged Hunts
> "It shall be unlawful to hunt, shoot, kill, or wound any wild mammal held under a
> wild animal license or permit or any farmed wild mammal for enjoyment, gain,
> amusement, or sport, in a cage or enclosure regardless of size. This code section
> ...


*BTW - I am also in!*


----------



## PASS SHOOTEM (Sep 29, 2004)

Somethings fishy here... :eyeroll:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

As I said above...this is not my words.But,yes I think it should say not prohibit.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Lets tack on some some legislation for higher fines and pealties for game violations.


----------



## tail chaser (Sep 24, 2004)

Remember Montana's speeding tickets? What was it 5 bucks during daylight hours as long as you had cash? The point being it was worth the five bucks at least for me it was. If we have poachers coming to this state and doing what they do because the cost is next to nothing for them we need to change that. Speeding in some overseas country's is based on your income. That would be one good reason for millionare Joe coming to ND. If he is cought poaching he can leave some of that coin behind and it will hurt him more than some wimpy fines that are less than it costs to hunt in some places. How about bumber stickers like some states do for dui's or pictures placed on public access. Maybe we could push to double fines and the new money created could go to purhasing land instead of leasing it?

We have a huge resident poaching problem also, its not just the N/R's.
Chances are all of us in this forum know somebody who at one time has done something illegal. The key is don't be quiet about it, let them know your not happy and that your not afraid to tell others. Maybe those found guilty of such violations should be posted on this site? 
tc


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Ken, thanks for posting up. Am custom combining --didn't have time to get it out. The correction should be "does not prohibit" --Dick


----------



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

I'm in as well !


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Well I for one do not agree with parts of the rules that are posted above, if I will be limited to one zone for 7 days and then have to move to another zone for another 7 days I will boycot and would be willing to join any lawsuit brougt against the state of ND for discrimination against my rights. I own a house in ND and pay my taxes and my electric bill, and my gas bill for heating among many other expenses involved with owning property in ND or any other state for that matter. This proposed legislation is like MN telling any NR that they can only fish in one lake for seven days and can only fish here for 14 days total even if they own a cabin or other property here. How many of the NR's would be screaming then? They all would be screaming discrimination!! If the state of ND does not wish for any NR to be there than put an Fing Fence around the entire state and proclaim that the State of North Dakota is now a Soverien Nation!! that will be the only way to keep out NR's with out discriminating. Then when your soverien nation needs something you will then have trade, for your items needed like automobiles, tractors, parts for those items and machinery. They call this a foriegn trade policy and these come with hefty prices. Eventually your state will be screaming to become a part of the USA again and all discriminations will have to be dropped. These proposed rules or legislations are some of the most idiotic ones I have heard yet!! They are the biggest, most arogant discriminations that have been made public to date!! If just one person that read these used thier heads before printing them on a public website and applied a little logic, they would realize that the proposal did more damage than good. Think about it, if I am limited to only one small area for seven days, and that is the only place that I can legally hunt than I am going to shoot everything in one confined area as well as all of the other people limited to that area now there will not be any wild life left to hunt there because it has all been harvested because I could not move to any other area to not over hunt a species of animal or birds or whatever. How long until one area is completely wiped out and then the next one and then the next one, until there is nothing left to hunt at all? This whole stupid NR's VS RES is about one of the most moronic topics that there is. It's old and stale if this is the best topic or topics that can be brought up on this website I will not have any thing to do with this site any longer. Chris Hustad in regards to this matter I believe that you should have a rule that this topic is no longer allowed on your website. It has been redone so many times that there are no new twist that can be put on this topic. I used be proud of the fact that most of my family was from ND and that was part of my heritage but with this topic and the way things look it is embarassing to even admit that I have family that still lives there or that I personally own a house there or anything else for that matter. Everyone that posts any thing in regards to NR'S not being welcome to your state should be ashamed of the way that they have spoken and the way that they act in regards to these matters. It has become an extremly childish piont of view. Think about what if the Canadians said you can no longer hunt here because we believe you might just do some damage to the waterfowl population and so no hunting by any non-resident of any kind. Sounds pretty stupid does'nt it Get over it people!! Chris I will let you know when the time comes to cancel my sign on name.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

I'll give you $53.00 for your house here in ND, and we will really miss you!!! What makes you think these rules are there to make you specifically happy? If you think that fishing would be better if we could only fish there for 14 days then by all means do it!!!!!! You really need to drop the limit on walleyes though, that would make the difference. Let us know when you put your name on the lawsuit!!

:eyeroll:


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

The original topic theme was:



> Well everyone it is PUT UP or SHUT UP time!!!!!!!!! Help will be Required to get the desired results. Some members here have invested countless hours of their private time so we can have a quality hunting experience, Let's do what we can to pay them back!! If you are asked to help please pitch in and do what you are asked to do! If you want to volunteer contact one of the moderators, or just post up that you want to help.
> 
> This is Important to the Future of North Dakota Hunting! Get involved!
> 
> I AM IN! How about you?


*How many are willing to help?*

If so, post up!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

For everyone here...these are only suggestions...I had nothing to do with them.Because of being a mod here...I will not take sides....either way.

JD...you should have read the first line..."Here are some ideas for bill proposals...not my wording."


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

JD/MN

The bottom line is that you have no more right to the game as a landowner than a person who rents.

As far as I know we live in America and we have the right to exercise free speech. This is a public forum but privatly owned and Chris could probably ban that topic. I hang around with Chris alot and as soon as he bans certain topics I will be the first one to tell him that I will no longer be on the website.

Why should that subject be banned because it upsets YOU and YOU think its stupid. Thats crazy.

Another thing people need to understand is that not everyone is going to have similar views on things. Why do people get so upset? Upset rants make you look childish. I always have more fun debating people who get really upset. It shows they aren't in control of there emotions and as soon as you lose control of emotion you don't think logically anymore. Easy targets.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Let me say that I'll be the first one to miss you. The 14 day waterfowl restriction has been in place since the 1970's....nothing new. Why do you think the 14 day restriction was put into place? There was an over abundance of NR hunters buying property, houses and trying to lock out the locals.....let's see, how does that saying go? "History repeats itself". Why buy a house in the first place? It's a lot easier and cheaper to do as the locals do and rent....you can also scout other areas. I've been more successful than ever this year in ND and have never hunted either of the zones.


----------



## cbass (Sep 9, 2003)

This forum is a place for people resident or nonresident to discuss their thoughts freely with one another. This web site could be the saving grace for ND because of all the info that is available here. If you are unhappy with NR restrictions or lack there of, move into your house in ND. It is as easy as that! If this issue is that important to you and others it should be nothing to leave your job and take your kids out of school and move here, hell the house is already bought. Why do you guys insist on telling us what to do when you are NOT A RESIDENT of ND. And who gives a **** about your fish, last time i checked we had excellent fishing and it must be true because there are plenty of SODA plates at Devils Lake in the summer and winter. I guess we could go to Lake of the Woods and catch the mighty 6in walley all year long. No thanks!!!!!!!!!

get over it. :eyeroll:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

jd/mn

*Prairie Provinces of Canada Alberta, Sask, Manitoba *

Total resident (canadian) hunters 2003 26,930 
Total Non-Resident hunters 2003 18,512 
*Total 45,442 hunters*

*North Dakota *

Resident hunters 2003 30,771 
Non-Resident hunters 2003 26,066 
*Total 56,837 hunters*

*South Dakota*

Resident hunters 2003 27,942 
Non-Resident hunters 2003 4,717 
*Total 32,659 hunters*

These a actual numbers, check the stats yourself, compare land mass between Canadian Provinces and North Dakota, Look at the total number of hunters. how long can we keep going like we are and still have quality hunting? can you tell me? Should we do nothing and when the next dry spell comes along all sit around and pontificate that something should have been done back in 2004-05. I do not want North Dakota to be compared to any other place period. We have better hunting and fishing than most places for a reason, we value the heritage we have had passed down to us, or that we have learned from others. There is no doubt that I could be earning more money than I am right now but we wanted to raise our children without crime and with the quality of life North Dakota offers. No other place that I have been can offer this. Hunting and fishing and the outdoors are part of me. I decided what my priorities were a long time ago and I have never looked back.

Have a good one!


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I have no gripe with non-resident sportsment but as the saying goes "membership has its privileges". My wife has often commented "wouldn't you like to move to Minnesota?" I keep telliing her "and give up my ND residency,heck no, we have better hunting and fishing right here.


----------



## cbass (Sep 9, 2003)

Very well put Bob. We do not want to end up like the rest of the country. It is funny how after other states have ruined their resources that they feel that it is our turn. When i was young all i heard about was minnesota duck hunting. I have never been to sota hunting ducks nor plan to, but from what i have heard it is no where near what it used to be, and i wonder why that is :huh:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Bump!!!!!!!

350+ views and 3 of us are in???? do i need to get some dancing girls or what?

these will have to do :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin: :jammin:

come on guys the clock is ticking!!!!!!!!!


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Whats the number of these bills?????????? Senate or House side?????????????


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Bob, you know I am in!!! :beer:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Zogman...I believe these are just rough ideas.I don't think they are written in bill form yet.Or assigned numbers.


----------



## tail chaser (Sep 24, 2004)

Of course I'm in Bob, but not untill you get those dancing girl emoticons!
tc


----------



## Drakekiller (Apr 3, 2002)

I am in! (so deep I can not see the suface). I am on the way to the airport to pick up my NR buddies that have been comming here for the last 16 years.They have seen how much things have changed for the bad. We need a NR cap and a lottery for Waterfowl and Small game. BM/ND put that in your pipe and smoke it. By the way if I own a lake place in Mn can I have a fish house on the lake over night? Can I spear fish? Do I have to pay more for all types of fishing licenses than you do in ND?Do I have to buy a fish house license that limits me unlike residents?Can I lease one of your lakes and keep you off?


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Now were cookin  Who else?????? Come on guys it is not like we are asking you to give up one of the "Family Jewels"

A commitment here could be as simple as a phone call or a short letter to your area legislator, Or it could be as exciting as going to Bismarck and seeing Government in action, the legislative process no matter where you are in the world is a numbers thing.

Please get involved in the future of North Dakota!

Bob


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

You know as always I'm in.


----------



## Rick Fode (Sep 26, 2004)

I am in, just let me know who I have to call or fire a letter to. I would like to see a cap on NR's at around 5000 with a lottery. We need to let everyone experience what it was like 20 years ago when you never or rarely saw an out of state plate. Most of the guys on here don't know what it used to be like so they have no reference. I sent off my absentee ballots today and my wife and I both voted for Satrom. Any Governor who let's in the whole country to shoot everything in our state needs to get a wake up call, I just hope the rest of the resident hunters and sportsmen make the same call, if they do it's all over for Gov. Hoeven. I would have voted for anyone that said they will limit the NR numbers to 5000.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

BUMP!!!!!!!!


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

(see Ken's post on LAND)
*These LAND guys are just going to love the Caged Hunts bill.* 

Selected Articles from the LAND Newsletter

President's Report - Truth in Advertising and Government

By Don Berge, LAND President

Professor Chris Borrick of Muhlenberg College, Allentown, PA, stated in his research that "the whole goal of a negative ad is to plant a seed of doubt."

In the June, 2004 issue of North Dakota Outdoors magazine, an article entitled, "A conversation with Valerius Giest" fits the definition of a negative ad. The ND Game and Fish Department (NDG&F) published the article with a disclaimer relinquishing any responsibility concerning the opinions stated in the article. If the NDG&F was actually looking out for the interests of North Dakotans, don't you think it would be willing to publish a rebuttal by the game producers? Apparently not. The elk and deer producers have been repeatedly rebuffed and put off. This type of treatment by a government agency is despicable and should not be tolerated.

The ND game producers use the utmost care for their animals and produce the safest product. Testing for chronic wasting disease (CWD), for example, is routinely administered, and they're proud of their herds. The standards followed by the producers are exemplary wildlife management. Ask anyone if the NDG&F has good management of the deer population. Mother Nature will undoubtedly have to intervene to correct the mistakes of the NDG&F.

Private enterprise is what made this country great and strong. Allowing individuals the opportunity to take risks and grow is an economic engine that must not be maligned by innuendo. These producers are economic development in the purest form. The NDG&F knows government can't compete, so they resort to these tactics.

NDG&F Commissioner Hildebrand's arrogance on this issue should not be tolerated. Any replacement would show respect for the office and the public for which he serves. The time has come to review the finances of this organization. Legislative review for all wildlife programs must be put in place. Accountability is a two-way street.

Let's not allow the use of negative ads (articles) to become a common practice in North Dakota.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

LAND was a co-sponser-contributor of the ND Farm Bureau tresspass suit against the state and front for NDFB. They are strong supporters of Hoeven and his hunting non-policy.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Thanks to everyone that have posted to help  549 views? we need more, lots more

But those of you that know me understand that I will not quit. quitting is a part of me that does not exist!!!

I would not be asking for help if it was not needed, we are all busy, I understand being busy, but is writing a 2 paragraph letter licking a stamp and mailing it going to take up that much of your time? or would a 30 second phone call to a legislative office to voice your opinion be that much of a commitment?

There are 3800 members here that signed on for a reason, for most the reason is hunting, quality hunting that they can not find anywhere else. We need help to try and maintain quality hunting. North Dakota is not going to remain one of the "Last Great Places in the Nation to Hunt" unless
you get off the bench and get into the game!

Join the E-Tree, if you don't know how to do it Look up a post from Dick Monson it is at the bottom of everyone of his posts.

Thanks for your time!
Bob


----------



## wiscan22 (Apr 4, 2004)

Field Hunter said:


> Let me say that I'll be the first one to miss you. The 14 day waterfowl restriction has been in place since the 1970's....nothing new. Why do you think the 14 day restriction was put into place? There was an over abundance of NR hunters buying property, houses and trying to lock out the locals.....let's see, how does that saying go? "History repeats itself". Why buy a house in the first place? It's a lot easier and cheaper to do as the locals do and rent....you can also scout other areas. I've been more successful than ever this year in ND and have never hunted either of the zones.


Fieldhunter,

Not to dispute your reasoning but the 14 day restriction was put in place long before NR's were even remotely a problem. As mentioned in previous posts I've been hunting ND for 27+ years and actually the 8 zone plan is nothing new. That's the way it was. the only problem I see is the loss of not being able to hunt the 14 days. Way back when each zone was designated a certain number of licenses with the intent of relieving hunting pressure in the more heavily hunted zones. It worked well however none of the zones ever sold out of licenses, mostly because not all that many hunters came to ND to hunt, a fact that can be proven by some of the "numbers" posts that have been on this site.

Regarding buying property, we also own a house in ND and yes we pay alot to hold the house. Why? Renting is sometimes cheaper but the places we use to stay in were.... let me put it this way, our house is much nicer. It's also easier because we can leave our ND specific gear out there. I'm a bit confused on your claim that NR's "lock out the locals". I find this to be a slight stretch of the imagination as in all my years in ND no NR has ever attempted such a stupid feat. The bottom line is all we do is own the house. We pay taxes, utillities, insurance and the like but when it comes to being involved in any of the city/government functions, we have no rights. Personally I think the biggest problem that ND faces is G/O's leasing up land. Obviously the "plot across the street" is no longer accessable for Mr. Resident to hunt anymore and it pi$$e$ you off. I know... the same thing happens in Wisconsin. The NR's not being familiar with hunting in ND take the easy way out and hire..... you guessed it, a guide or outfitter and I think alot of would do that the first few times we hunt an area that we are unfamiliar with. Throw the massive amount of publicity ND has received over the years in regards to it's great hunting and the results are what you got.... G/O's and NR's using their service. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan at all of comercialized hunting as a matter of fact it kind of sickens me to hear it called "sport hunting" but that's what we made it.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

HeY Wiscan How is it going?

I am going to jump in here sorry FH, I see the lock out problem as NR's buying large tracts of land that locks out the residents. There are several tracts of land that I have heard of that are owned and hunted by NR's, the rest of the time they lease to outfitters this is second hand information to me and I am still trying to verify the stats. the other "lock out" is the local farmers, when a piece of Ag land is sold for Recreational Ag purposes it raises the land values in the area and the farmers can not justify the cost of expanding on their spread sheets. A house is one thing I personally think it is Great! another possible Resident!  But buying tracts of land? I am just not for it!

Bob


----------



## Old Hunter (Mar 8, 2002)

wiscan22 I have been hunting ND for 49 years as a resident. Let me correct you on a couple of your statments The 14 day restriction WAS put in place because of non resident pressure. This was done in the 1960's The reason was nonresidents and out of state corporations were leasing all the good goose hunting areas. Oaks ND area was leased by Schmidt brewery and Pabst Blue ribbon. The Devils Lake area was getting taken over in the same manner. The residents of ND got angry because out of state comcerns were taking over the good hunting opportunities. Thus came the 14 day restriction.
Last week talking to a farmer he told me of his neighbor selling his land to eastern people. They bought about a half section. I know of 2 large sales and one large 20 year lease in the last 2 months. Your statement about nonresidents buying land not being a problem is wrong.
I have a lot of nonresident friends that own hunting houses in ND. I have been hunting with many of these guys for over 30 years. They are some of my best friends . Buying a cheap house and paying a pittance in taxes does not give them the right to set hunting and fishing policy. 
The resident sportsmen and the ND Game and fish have done a good job of providing hunting for everyone. The controls that have been put in place help everyone in the end. good luck


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

wiscan22...Old Hunter is exactly right.I too have hunted in ND for the past 40 years....first time in the 60's as a high school aged NR.The 14 day limitation was put in back there because of the heavy leasing around DL and Ludden.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

wiscan,

I really have no problem with your group or others buying the houses in the small towns. Those houses probably would have sat and deteriated over time if you had not bought them. If you are using yours for storage and a nicer place to stay and also are just basing out of it as a freelancer...good for you. The first problem is that many don't just hunt 2 weeks for ducks and one or two for pheasants....they rent the houses to friends which continues to bring pressure on the quality and source of the resource through out the year. Where I have the biggest problem is when the above happens and then the new owner runs around the "neighborhood" and begins to get locals to post just for them, purchase tracts of land for their exclusive use, and basically "lock-out" the resident and the NR hunters. Happens time and time again. You have to admit that the above senerio really doesn't involve outfitters and guides...it illustrates another problem we have in access in ND. As far as renting over purchase....what are you and others going to do when the next major drought comes. I'm old enough to remember what the huntng was like in the Kulm, Gackle, Streeter areas when the last drought was in full force....you could drive for miles and miles and never see a duck. The other problem stated above is, the never ending of supply of NRs who because they own property and pay taxes that feel they should have resident rights in property ownership. Can you imagine the laughs ND property owners in MN would get in the MN legislature if we tried to assert resident status when it comes to fishing issues in MN?


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Bob Kellam Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:58 pm Post subject:

BUMP!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to everyone that have posted to help 549 views? we need more, lots more

But those of you that know me understand that I will not quit. quitting is a part of me that does not exist!!!

I would not be asking for help if it was not needed, we are all busy, I understand being busy, but is writing a 2 paragraph letter licking a stamp and mailing it going to take up that much of your time? or would a 30 second phone call to a legislative office to voice your opinion be that much of a commitment?

There are 3800 members here that signed on for a reason, for most the reason is hunting, quality hunting that they can not find anywhere else. We need help to try and maintain quality hunting. North Dakota is not going to remain one of the "Last Great Places in the Nation to Hunt" unless 
you get off the bench and get into the game!

Join the E-Tree, if you don't know how to do it Look up a post from Dick Monson it is at the bottom of everyone of his posts.

Thanks for your time! 
Bob


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

BUMP!

Thanks to all who are in  

I hope the rest of you are not getting sick of me even though I know you probably are. But it is like I said this is important. I know there are more of you out there that think so as well. Quality Hunting is worth keeping isn't it?

Thanks for your time!
Bob


----------



## wiscan22 (Apr 4, 2004)

Hey Guys,

Thanks for all of the answers to my post. There were many good points brought out by all of them. Alot of the problems you refer to we hardly ever experience in the areas we hunt. Generally speaking, it's really not too difficult to find a noncrowded place to hunt. We are seeing an increase in leases by G/O's but even most of them grant us permission to hunt the land. Most private landowners are more than willing and very helpful in assisting you with hunting. We did however experience the corporate lease thing, most of that land was encircling the staging areas that geese primarily used and that was and still is a major problem.

Coincidentally, I dug really deep into my files of memories and found an application for ND waterfowl license from 1984. The state was divided into 8 zones with a limited amount of licenses available in 7 of those zones. Approximately 2/3's of the state was unlimited license sales. The seven remaining zones had a combined total of about 11,000 NR licenses. Funny thing about it is the licenses never sold out, at least not in the areas that we picked and those areas use to be really hot goose hunting areas. You could drive to ND a week into the season and get a license in Bismarck. I remember you were given a book of tags but don't recall exactly what the tag/species ratio was. It did include ducks, geese and small game. Anyway, the system that is being proposed is almost a mirror of how the season was regulated back in '84.

In regards to land purchases, 99% of me agrees with you but there's that 1% that says "hey, I'm an American". We atually looked into it once ourselves but the bottom line is it didn't make a bit of sense to do and the price was really reasonable. First off, we're 800 miles away and can only hunt for two weeks. Secondly, we all felt that we had a good relationship with the landowners and residents of ND, why open a new can of worms.
Anyway, we just didn't think it was a good idea.

There's no doubt that ND is probably one, if not the best state to hunt in and yes, even though we pay taxes and this and that, the credit for the successes that ND experiences regarding their natural resources has to go to the residents. You've got alot to be proud of. I've said it once and I'll say it again, the quality of hunting in ND has got to be one of the best things I've ever experienced. Your concerns about land purchases are more than likely not without merit either. We experienced a huge buyout of land in northern Wisconsin from many Illinois NR's and that changed alot of things. Some good ( land prices sure went up) and some bad (lost hunting opportunities). One things for sure, it ain't the good 'ole north woods of the 60's.

One more comment and this is for Bob K. regarding his view on house purchases, maybe a new resident..... just give me a chance and I'd be there in a heartbeat! Hey I know most of us don't have alot of time to be punching keys on keyboards so I'll close this one by wishing everyone a safe, enjoyable, memorable hunting season. Regardless of where we are when we type this stuff one thing is fact. This is our time of year, the time we all waited for, worked for and one that leaves the best memories. I won't be out this year but trust me, this is one Wisconsin resident that carries ND with me 365 days of the year. Good luck and hunt safe!


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

You take care bud!!
if you ever need help movin give me a call!  

Be safe!
Bob


----------



## wiscan22 (Apr 4, 2004)

Bob Kellam said:


> You take care bud!!
> if you ever need help movin give me a call!
> 
> Be safe!
> Bob


You got 'er Bob!

:beer:


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

I have read a lot of remarks on this sight by sportsmen who object to land owners and g/o profiting from the "publics" wildlife. Now you want to propose legislation restricting what a producer can do with his own livestock on his own property, ie. "caged hunts". Hmmmm, something smells in this debate.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590
I was kind of expecting you to speak up. How is the Elk herd doing?

What would be wrong with processing an elk like any other animal that is slaughtered for food? or do your clients only want a trophy? we have been down this road prior and I think we agreed to disagree.

Why does something "smell" here?

Bob


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Hey Bob,

The elk are doing great. We weaned 35 calves from 34 cows. I am amazed how well elk do under domestic management. Quite a contrast to Yellowstone where they are lucky to get 10 - 15 % calf crop.

We actually are doing a considerable amout of butchering and are having a number of repeat customers. Meat of course doesn't make this business work. Trophy harvest "hunts" does, and yes that is what our clients want.

My smell test was in regard to the fact that many sportsmen want a say in how and who profits form "their" or at least the publics property, ie. wildlife. Even though it is not on their own property. Now some of the same sportsmen also want a say in how I dispose of my domestic livestock on my own private property. If the sportsmen of this state want to battle over the "caged hunt" issue, you will have a battle. We have already begun the process to alert the Ag Coalition, which involves nearly every ag related group in the state. I think you will find that ND will not be any thing like Montana, and most ag related folks will understand that this is a property rights issue and really has nothing to do with hunting or sportsman. My advise to the sportsman of this state is that there have been several devisive issues that have driven a wedge in landowner - sportsmen relations in the past and this will not help your cause. You will be much better off to propose issues that relate directly to wildlife and not further cause devision. What does it matter to the hunters on ND anyway if a few folks come here each year to shoot one of my livestock, even if what we do does not appeal to you???

Haven't been following the forum for a while, been finishing up on the never ending harvest. I imagine this will get some action going again.


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

4590,



> I imagine this will get some action going again.


You are right, it will. Why?



> Meat of course doesn't make this business work. Trophy harvest "hunts" does, and yes that is what our clients want.


Because you are passing your product off as something it is not. Just how in the hell can you equate shooting one of your tame elk in a pasture with a trophy harvest hunt? Haven't you ever heard of a concept called the rules of fair chase? Shooting an animal in a fenced enclosure can not be considered "hunting", regardless of what your clients want.

I think the following statement you made nails it down pretty good:



> ...and most ag related folks will understand that this is a property rights issue and really has nothing to do with hunting or sportsman.


*Bravo! You are right - it has nothing to do with hunting and it has nothing to do with sportsmen! *

One of my concerns is that you still want to call it "hunting". I will bet that you don't advertise "tame elk available for shooting in my pasture, heads may be considered as "trophy" when taken by fair chase methods. We won't tell if you won't". I don't expect you to understand, but the rest of us here have no problem determining where the "smell" comes from!


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590

I guess I am looking at this with a different slant. Most businesses abide by a set of rules and regulations that were imposed upon them by others. In your industries case the 100 plus elk ranchers of North Dakota were able to pretty much make up their own rules to follow. Don't get me wrong here I have thanked you in the past for your industries efforts in the CWD testing arena. and I will say THANK YOU again! North dakota is still CWD free.

Property rights? what do you consider Your property rights? Are they any different than my little piece of the world in town?

As we have discussed in the past, the preception that the Non-Hunting public gets from "canned trophy hunts" is carried over to all hunters and all of a sudden we are all painted with a broad brush.

I feel we have a right to say what happens to the "Wildlife" of North Dakota because the Century Code and the Constitution of North Dakota both reference that Wildlife is property of the state, Public Trust.

Bob


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I don't know all the particulars about canned hunts but I guess I would have to agree with 4590.Those Elk really aren't wildlife.

If some one wants to pay 1,000's of dollars to shoot an animal inside a pen...have at it.No different to me than shooting a steer and having it hauled to the butcher shop.

I do however think the gov't has to have some laws similar to other domestic livestock if that is what they are.But what's the difference if the elk is shot in a pen or the cow is shot at the slaughter house?

I know someone will say...but elfk are wildlife....any one seeing elk standing in a fenced enclosure knows they are not wildlife just as tame mallards in a farmers yard aren't wildlife.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Cmon guys haven't you learned that property rights supercede whats good for society as a whole. :eyeroll: As soon as your ready to swallow that pill follow it quickly by a handful of quaaludes and a bottle of Jack.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Thanks Ken for bringing some common sense to this forum. The elk producers actually have very stringent rules governing our industry. That is why we don't have CWD in ND. We have way more rules in addition to those that govern all livestock industries in general. However there are some that just want to make a law that would take away a large portion of my income.

Some other considerations that proponents of a ban on preserver hunts should consider. What about bison hunts? Are you going to ban these as well, many bison producers are moving a considerable number of animals via pasture hunts. How about Sully's hill, a game preserve surrounded by a FENCE of all things. Several elk and bison are culled "hunted" from there every year to keep the herd in check. The carcass is sold to a nonprofit group. Is this considered immoral too, and will it be outlawed. There has been talk of managing the Theodore Roosevelt Park herd by implementing some hunting. This park is fenced you know, so does that pass the smell test for you purists? I have stated before and will again, what we do does not harm the publics view of hunting. We actually can assure the public that we do not allow wounded animals to suffer for long periods but our animals are harvest in a timely and humane way. As you said, Ken, it really is no different from taking a steer to the butcher, some folks just can't seem to get it that these elk are not wildlife.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

History repeats itself again and again and again. Do some reading on Yellowstone on the subject of hunting within the park. I recommend James A. Pritchard's Preserving Yellowstone's Natural Conditions.

Do I think we should shoot animals in our national parks and call it hunting No. We should reintroduce predators into the park to help control the animals. Make it truelly wild again. Untill that happens these are not "wild" herds they are protected herds of animals that should not be hunted. I am against all hunting in national parks. There should be some places left alone.

Try and introduce predators into a park and see what your livestock industry says.

There are always people trying to take away the income of others. How about the govt trying to make it easier for people to buy drugs in Canada. Is this good for people who own pharmacies in the US. No.

This upsets you because it affects you. Otherwise you wouldn't care. How often do you take up issues with others out of principle. We all choose our battles to fight.


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

Although there is a "fence" around TR state park, the elk move freely in and out of the park, it does not limit their range. Not really comparable to a highfence operation where you have to open a gate to let the hunter in.


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

4590,

Trying to envision reasonable options:

If you (or others) were precluded from using the term "hunt" on any of your documents, ads, contracts, etc - would that pose a problem? What term would suffice? (Safari? Picnic Lunch?)

M.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Last I checked the US Constitution still provides for Property rights and free speech. I am not sure how competition from Canada relates to these issues. In America I think I can still call what I do what ever I want.

Interesting no one responded to the Sully's Hill "hunts".

Reintroduce wolves into TR Nat. Park, now there is reasonable idea, may be some Grizzly bears to boot. Even though some elk do come and go the herd in the park continues to grow and will eventually need some kind of management.

More later.


----------



## MACBARN (Aug 1, 2002)

Ive been in sinse the getgo.Save North Dakota with your vote


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

4590 wrote


> However there are some that just want to make a law that would take away a large portion of my income.


Should I feel sorry for you?

I was only trying to let you know that these types of things happen all the time in various industries. Heck, your buddies growing elk are trying to take a large part of your income through competition and I bet if they could they would take it all. The best interests of the people are not always in the best interest of the individual landowner. Ask the native americans who had much of their land covered by Sakakawea when the dam was built in Garrison.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

gg brings up a good point--Native Americans & property rights advocates.
Now there's contradiction. If anyone had a beef (or elk) those folks should. Do they get invited to LAND meetings?

The list of bills is proposed. A farmer was assigned the exotics-caged hunts portion. Me. Took portions of caged hunt laws from half a dozen states. This one is far less restrictive than Wyoming and Montana, where game farm #s are frozen, and nontransferable. At our legislative forum these bills were bounced off the 7 candidates and to a man they opposed caged hunts. As will the public.

And no, it not like swating a steer in a pasture. (Archery Angus Inc.) It is an imitation hunt of an imitation trophy in an imitation setting. If that. For a picture yet. With no semblence of fair chase. Fiberglass racks would be cheaper. Boon and Crockett does not recognize the scource nor Pope and Young, correct? Dog fights are outlawed, cock fight are outlawed, bull fights are outlawed, all animal property. And changing the name does not change the act. It is unethical and immoral. Live targets for rich boys.....


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590

Property Rights, Again why should mine be different than yours? Because you are in Agriculture? Process all of the elk you would like, Personally I wish I could buy it at the store. I love the stuff. but killing an elk in a pen just so you can lie to all of your buddies about how hard it was to stalk the beast, come on, tell me where it is socially acceptable to tell some one you shot a critter in a pen. As you know I have hunted elk in the wild, it is one hell of a lot of work, miles and miles are logged on those danners, and even the unsuccessful hunts were a positive because i can still reflect on some of the sights and smells that I encountered, the experience was almost better than the harvest.

To kill an elk in a pen puts your clients at the bottom of the pit in my opinion. they obviousloy have soooo much money and are to damn lazy to hunt the ethical way with fair chase. It is to bad that they have amassed so much wealth or are looking impress so bad that they don't know what they are missing.

Just one more question, How many of these idiots are able to place a one shot kill? They sure as h$ll must not go for a head shot if all they want is a wall hanger!

we can go round and round on this but the bottom line is: you make money on this because there is money out there to spend on trophies.

I wonder what the butcher at the store would say if I said I 
would like to go out to a pen and shoot the steer that I want. And oh by the way Mr. butcher, I would like that fine angus head taken to the taxidermist so i can have it on my wall at work, I think i may want a shoulder mount, just make it look majestic.

I can not do that. Your clients should not be able to do it either!

Take care
Bob


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Well where does one start, you all present such thought provoking logical arguements.

gg Your logic really escapes me. I am an independent business man in the greatest free enterprise system on the planet. Competition does not scare me in the least, if any thing it makes me more efficient. And what's this sacrifice my business for the "common good" stuff, you been visiting those commy web sites again? When the government does a takings as in the case of Lake S. the land owner is reimbursed, which I think to date the Native Am. in this country have been reinbursed to a substantial degree. What is being proposed also constitutes a takings but without compensation.

Mr. Monson,

You also make some statements that really escape me. How are Native Americans and property rights advocates a contradiction. I am sure any proerty owner, including Native Am. are welcome in the LAND organization. We have had representatives from the Tribe at our ND Elk Growers mtgs. They are welcome and have been involved in preserve hunting as well.

I would certainly be interested in seeing a copy of the proposed legislative bill. I would not count on the public having the same emotional response to preserve hunts as you do. It does not surprise me that some candidates at your forum would support your efforts. I am sure they had opportunity to hear both sides of the debate probably described in similar fashion as you have here.

It is true that Mont. did put severe restrictions on the elk industry.  And the law suits continue and I believe they will until the producers are rightly compensated for their loss. Do not forget that ND has an "Ag Defamation" law that allows for law suits to compensate agriculture producers or defamation of their business of which we are classified under ND Cent Code. I can guarantee you that false or defamatory statements about our industry will not go unchallenged.

Your comparison of my operation to dog, cock, and bull fights also escapes logic. These activities are obviously banned because they are inhumane treatment of animals for entertainment. Now try and explain how the right to hunt, that you defend, is any more humane than what we do. The end result no matter how you slice it is an animal is harvested and the hunters utilizes the carcass as he sees fit. In our case however we do not allow for wounded animals to escape. So you tell me who is more humane.

Bob,

You can actually buy elk at the store. We have elk meat butchered under ND inspection at Hope Quality Meats in Hope, ND. Only about 50 min from Fargo. We also provide elk meat to the restuarant Little Fields.

I get the feeling your biggest beef with my operation has more to do with how hard you had to work for an elk and someone else may not have to. You also seem a bit envious of those that have more resources than you do. Well get over it Bob, I don't know you but I suspect there are alot of folks out there with alot more than both of us put together. Why is so wrong to get a few of them to part with some of it. You also seem to assume all of our clients go home and tell some big lie about how they got their elk. Wake Up and smell the coffee, Bob, preserve hunting is thousands of years old. It is a huge business in Texas and Africa and Europe. You think all these folks go hunting just to go home and lie about their hunt. You really have a warped sense of the type of people we serve. To answer your question, most of our clientel are excellent marksmen and bowmen and women. We even had a vet that was a sniper in Vietnam.

Actually your property rights are the same as mine and I would fight just as hard to protect yours as I would mine. I would never try to tell you how to dispose of your property as long as you didn't infringe onthe rights of someone else and were not doing something inhumane or illegal. You also have the right to shoot that big Angus bull and hang it on the wall if you want, so go ahead, knock yourself out. By the way there are guys that sell hunts for longhorns. There must be some corelation between testosterone and horns.

Later


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590
Sorry bud but I do not envy anyone with money, If I chose to do it I could afford to come up and shoot one of your bulls. I never will because fair chase hunting is the only way I will ever hunt. I treasure the work that was involved with elk hunts from the past, I think everyone should have the opportunity, and not skip the hard part because they may be able to afford to do so.

I am going to ask the guy behind the meat counter if I can do as you have suggested. I may even take a camera along as I am sure the look on his face will be a Kodak Moment.

Oh and I forgot to mention, I have never lost a wounded animal in my "fair chase" hunts, sometimes there is a lot of work and skill involved in finding it, So that argument will not fly with me.

Bob


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

www.state.nd.us/gnf/ndoutdoors/issues/2 ... essing.pdf

Read, learn, decide on your own.

Bob

oops! posted it in the wrong thread, Can it be moved to Your Hunter vote decides it?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Thanks for posting up the otherside as an elk rancher. Discussion, even if we don't agree, is a good thing. If anyone thinks Montana's law was tough, look at the Wyoming code for these type of ranches. Most people probably don't have a quam about a meat operation. "Trophy Hunt" is another matter. Caged hunts are not trophies, nor are they hunts. ND Outdoors Magazine just ran a series on hunting ethics--a good read. Aside from the immorality of the issue, this type of activity is sure to give PETA more ammunition to cancel all hunting, in the public eye.

So when PETA does show up at the ranch, are those same ranchers now going to ask ND hunters to give support? Of course they will. Just like LAND is now doing again with draining pot holes. :eyeroll: Anyone who went in that business knew they were on shakey ground in the public eye.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Dick,

I hate to be a bother but you mentionsed 7 legislative candidates that favored your proposals. I would like the names and phone numbers of these folks if possible. I would like to visit with them about their position on this issue before the election.

Thanks


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Hey Bob,

I am really impressed! If you have never wounded and lost an animal while hunting, then either you don't hunt much or are some super bird dog kind of a guy. Most good hunters don't loose much game but it does happen and pretty regular. Don't get me wrong I realize it is all part of the deal. I am not trying to stop hunting by any means. My point is, and this applies to Dicks comments about PETA as well, I think the non hunting public and PETA are turned off by killing wildlife in general. I call it the BAmbi syndrome. I find it hard to believe that someone who is strongly oppose to hunting is going to care that the animals you kill can get away. One of the challenges facing all hunters and livestock producers as well, is our society is getting more removed from hunting and production agriculture and ranching all the time . The result of this is people who have not been exposed to butchering and harvesting of wildlife and when confronted with these realities they find them offensive.

So don't worry, Dick, I won't ask your little wildlife club to come to my defense when PETA comes calling. They are the enemy of all livestock producers as well as hunters because in their view animals are on the same plane as humans and none of them should be killed for any reason. I believe I have plenty of allies in this state between these two groups to support me if I need it.

The other arguement you guys always espouse is that we will turn the non hunting public against all hunters. Well I think the nonhuning public is already turned off mainly because they have not been raised around hunting and the thought of it is offensive. Hunting preserves have been vilified in the media and that has not helped. But I could take the same camera crew out with a group of deer hunters, fair chase of course, and have the same affect on the audience. I am sure the nonhunting public would find it just as offensive to see peole blowing away bambi, shooting legs off, sticking an arrow in a deer that gets away, and just plain killing those beautiful deer. Now don't get all righteous on me and tell me good sportsmen don't do those things because we all know it happens and it is really all part of the deal. Most hunters make a good effort to make a clean kill, but even that in the eyes of someone who has not seen it before will likely find it offensive. The real problem for the future of hunting is not hunting preserves but the fact that we are not getting enough youth involved in hunting. Hunting preserves are not going to turn the public against hunting any more than exposing people to the butchering process is going to make them quite eating at McDonalds. I really don't think the long term concern is that we may loose our hunting priveledge but that in the future we may not have enough participants to keep the wild herds in check. I also think the on going threat of disease in the wild herds will turn alot of hunters off. We however can off disease free animals to "harvest".

Dick you said, " Anyone who went in that business knew they were on shakey ground in the public eye."

Was that in reference to the elk business or farming and swampbuster? We may agree on something, farming is shakey ground. If you are referring to the elk business I will have to beg to differ with you. I went into this business in an effort to diversify my farming operation. I am not sure why I would have thought and still don't think I am on "shakey ground." I did some research, visited several elk operations around the state and felt this was a unique business with a lot of potential. I have enjoyed the business very much. The fact is the state of ND has also encouraged the elk business. Many producers have utilized APUC grants and PACE loans to get their operations started. Fact is I know of at least one game preserve that received a sizeabe APUC grant to get them started. NDSU had published an elk production and economics flyer even before I started about 9 yrs ago. I also know of at least one preserve operator that has utilized PACE money to build housing for his clients. You may not know it but elk ranching and preserve hunting of elk has been going on in ND for nearly 40 yrs. So now all of sudden we are all evil and need to be outlawed - go figure.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590

I hunt all of the time, most every weekend and some nights after work, I save most of my PTO just for hunting. I will be in South Dakota all weekend chasing ringnecks.

I use a principal that was drilled into my head: If you are going to shoot at it make sure you can kill it or don't pull the D*** trigger!

I really don't give a rats butt what PETA thinks, I care about Fair Chase! and I don't want your business to fail, all I would like is for you to quit using the term "Hunting"!

I grew up on a farm when we butchered we did not go out to the pasture and hunt a steer, we went out and killed it.

later

Bob


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

4590, you have the advantage of me sir, as I don't know your name. Pop me an email and I will send the info you requested. And I don't bite.

Forgive my spelling but I have a great article by Poisteritz, former Montana G & F director on this very theme. Also one from Wyoming of the same theme.

When elk ranching started here were not velvet sales and breeding stock the primary market? And did velvet collapse? Most non-typical operations in farming suffer the same fate--the breeding stocks or seed stocks (plant or animal) collapse for the last guys in. Buffalo, emus, artichokes, triticale, etc. Tough business = shakey ground. I don't know anyone trying to drive elk ranchers or any ranchers or farmers out of business. But Bambi in a cage doesn't cut the mustard for me, and I have seen more than my share of blood, gore and butchery. And I also considered elk myself.

While farmers complain that the public is removed from farming and doesn't understand the asscoiated problems, farmers have been the worst ambassadors for their industry. The very worst. What I saw at the Natural Resource Committe hearings 2 years ago was disgusting IMO. Remeber the signs from NDFB that said "No Hunting Until Wheat Hits $5", "No Hunting Unitl Swampbuster Is Repealed", + "No Hunting Until Hunting Issues Are Settled to Landowner Satisfaction"? Dismal public relations. What goes around comes around, and it probably will in the next farm bill.

ps--Our "little club" has around 600 paid up members, about 1/2 farmers or retired farmers, with an annual budget of apx $45,000. And those guys have worked their tails off on youth projects.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Hey Bob, thanks for the vote of confidence, but without the sale of shooter bulls, my elk venture will likely fail. Seems like overkill to shut down my business over terminology.

Dick,

Kudos for the youth program, that is really great! Keep it up.

New ventures are not without their risks, certainly many fail but the rewards for success are also great. Anyone in this life who has not started their own business or at least tried has missed one the great opportunities this country offers. Yes velvet prices are soft and the whole reason is CWD and Korea has shut us out until we have a live test and can certify CWD free. There is much research going on now and we will get our test, and I believe the market will come back.

I agree that farmers may not have used alot of wisdom in some of their efforts. I was really impressed with all those guys that drove their tractors to D. C. years ago. You as a farmer must realize though that we are small in number and so we often look for something that will get the attention of at least a larger segment of our society. One of the only things we can do that does get some attention is limit access. I also realize that hunters being on the receiving end of this get up in arms.

I have read some of Jim Posewitz material and the Mont. G/F guy. They have both been on Tony Dean spewing their balogna. If you buy into all their nonsense I can see why you hold the opinions you do. It is one thing for sportsman to lobby and fight for issues that truely concern wildlife but another altogether when their effort, as yours is, to take away my livelihood, simply because it does not fit with you opinion of what is "moral". You continue to reveal you warped perspective when you make statements like "Bambi in a cage". Get out the book and read it, Bambi was a WILD deer, hence wildlife. We are raising domestic livestock, and a dead elk is just as dead if it is out in the middle of a 400 acre preserve, or in the kill chute at the local locker plant.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Dick,

I think we have probably exhausted this discussion and we are obviouly not going to agree. I would ask one favor or consider it an offer. I would be willing to throw myself to the wolves and come address your next wildlife meeting. We could discuss your porposed legislation in a civil debate and I would be more than willing to answer any questions from your membership concerning hunting preserves, CWD, or any other issues involving the elk industry. I could also bring a spokesman from the bison industry if you wish. Information never hurts anyone and I would like your membership to have as much of it as possible. I don't bite either but I can bark pretty loud.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Perhaps the best venue for a public discussion of caged hunts would be at the annual NDWF meeting that is in Bismarck, early Jan., this year. With luck they will have commercialization of wildlife as their topic. Contact John Kopp, pres 845-0812 (work M thru Fri). And thank you for the emails.

I understand the NDFB-LAND theory of limiting hunter access for attention to their issues. It backfires every time, but will not change, as their view of life is confrontational rather than co-existance.

Imagine a competitive business that gives away freebees (hunting access) to attract customers, and compare that to a business that takes freebees away from customers to attract them. (?!!!) Which one is more successfull? Positive or negative reinforcemnet?


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Dick,

Coexistence, now there is a novel idea. Seems hunting preserves and other hunting have been coexisting pretty well in ND for some time. Seems your group is the one stirring things up now.

I don't think I would have much input on "commercialization of wildlife". You see domestic livestock is already a commercial venture and I really don't see much to debate there.

However if NDWF were to invite a representative from the ND Elk Growers to participate in their anual mtg. I am sure someone would attend. We will have our annual mtg. in Bismarck about the same time so that could work. I would still be willing to attend one of your local mtgs. if you would like.

In regard to your positive reinforcement comments. Good theory but my experience as a land owner and from many comments posted here, it is my observation that many, not all, hunters consider free access to "their wildlife" a right. I have never had a hunter come back after a successful hunt and say "any thing I can do for you politically, got any issues I can support for you". Pipe dream Dick.


----------



## Old Hunter (Mar 8, 2002)

4590 I think you should take a look at Flocknockers web site. Go to the central flyway fourm. Canned elk hunts with about a half dozen violations. Crippled animals wandering about. The guide was shot. He was so stupid that he put himself in between the hunters and the game. University of Iowa staff members charged with many game violations. 
Fish in a barrel What a bunch of lilly livered pukes! The thread is titled Hunting Accident.


----------



## Drakekiller (Apr 3, 2002)

4590(?)

Do you know about the outfit in central ND that the G&F had to kill around thirty deer in a high fence area? I think that this guy had not repaired his fence after many calls from the G&F. Should this guy still be operating? Would it be easier to find a escaped sick cow or a escaped Deer or Elk? What would the effects of a sick deer escaping mean?Does anybody know the name of this Outfitter or more about this story?

Kevin Hayer


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

We are at the 11th hour and 59th minute. Is this still just ideas or are there any bills in draft form we can see and visit with our legislators about?????


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

zogman

Good question, Where are we at in the process? At the Cass County Legislative Forum Dan and a few of us tried to get the word out with the legislators in attendance. Most listened, questions were answered. I have no idea what the next step should be. Dick? Dan? Dan? Kevin?

let us know, PM if you would not want to let the world know.

Bob


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

What's to wonder? Any candidate that waffels here is sandbagging if they won't give you a position. HPC is clear and may be tightened a bit. A couple of the best minds (not mine) in ND are fine tuning it. 2 & 3 are being developed by the Federation. The rest are clear ideas. What is the question? The repeal of the outfitter fence is the same bill as last session. Exotics and caged hunts. Prohibit sale of any game parts.

These came from ND hunters. Be assured that there will be a host of bills from other folks and legislators that we won't hear about until the last second. The last session had something like 70 + bills that were tracked.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Drakekiller

Here is the link, 
www.nodakoutdoors.com/members/phpBB/vie ... php?t=6313

 
Bob


----------



## Drakekiller (Apr 3, 2002)

4590
Are you still there? The name of the Outfitters is Sheyenne Valley Outfitters based in the Harvey Area. Outfitters Orlin and Ted Mertz. Do you know if their operation has misplaced some of their Elk?Maybe some one should get a hold of the Board of Animal health(PH 701 328 2655) and get some public records concerning this outfit to see how well current problems are being handled with this canned shoot industry.What happens when #1)Required records are not kept?(like how many animals you are suposed to have in your fence.)#2)Could you be put out of business if say you loose 26 of your Elk.4590 I noticed on one of your old posts you did not think escaped animals would travel very far.I will get back to you on that one.

Kevin Hayer


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

I discussed the Sheyenne Valley situation at length awhile back. I do believe they are back in compliance with NDBOAH rules. As I stated before this is a rules enforcement issue and our BOAH has handled it quite well. Certainly no producer wants to have his livestock escape as he has a considerabel investment in them. However stuff happens as with any livestock. Some folks make it sound like escaped elk is going to cause a great threat to wildlife. Fact is farmed elk are much less likely to be carrying disease or parsites than are wildlife.

We are required to keep accurate inventory records. The BOAH can fine a producer for noncompliance, if animals are suspect as to origin etc, they can be confiscated and destroyed. If a producer wants to have any chance to sell animals into another state he must have very good records.

Continued noncompliance which would include poorly maintained fence and ongoing escapes could result in action by BOAH that would lead to, as you say "being put out of business". I would repeat that any producer that continues to loose his stock will be out of business anyway as his income is gone.

I also read the Flocknocker story. I did not a get a clear picture of what all went on there but I think it is clear there were several violations of the law. I would agree they should be prosecuted as such. This did not sound like a preserve hunt but someone turning animals loose to be shot by someone else. I would never condone this activity. Soundsa like he learned a hard lesson.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590

You stated the BOAH could act for continued noncompliance. Why don't they impose "example" fines on the first violation? was that negotiated by the industry from the onset? I am not trying to be a smart ***, it just seems that the leathal potential of a violation should be taken a little more seriously. which producer had CWD in his herd, It was reported on the radio that two elk tested positive in ND, I did not catch when it occoured, it was on the radio Monday.

I checked. They must still be in business, the web site is still active. Do you know what fine he had to pay? Was the state compensated for the deer that the NDGF boys had to kill for him? I don't want to start the whole thing over again, but after the initial information was released it has been pretty quiet.

Bob


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

4590,
I am perplexed. :-? You made the following statement:



> This did not sound like a preserve hunt but someone turning animals loose to be shot by someone else. I would never condone this activity.


Can you explain the the difference between a "preserve hunt" and "someone turning animals loose to be shot by someone else". You obviously condone the former but do not condone the later. I don't see the difference. Maybe I'm slow. Walk me through this, please. Thanks!


----------



## Drakekiller (Apr 3, 2002)

4590

It sounds like you run a above board operation even though I disagree with canned shooting. But what about ones that are not keeping with the rules? After makeing some calls it is my understanding that at least one Elk that escaped from Sheyenne Valley Oufitters operated by Orlin and Ted Mertz was killed by a hunter in the Walhalla/Cavaleir area, also at least one in NW Mn. What if other rules were not followed ,like shots? These animals could sprend sickness as far as they travel!


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Bob,

I would like to know what you think you heard because I just checked with the BOAH and they are not aware of any positive cases of CWD in ND. I sure hope that is not your way of pushing your agenda. The only case of CWD in ND that I am aware of is an elk shot in CO and brought back to ND whole. By the way where is your outcry about imports of carcasses especially from endemic CWD areas like CO. You talk about a "lethal potential" I know of whole elk being brought back here every year from the endemic area. If ND eventually gets CWD I would almost bet it will come in back of someones pickup.

My understanding is that the BOAH has authority to issue a fine up to $5000 for each violation of rules governing livestock issues. I am not sure if it applies to all violations but I believe it would apply to this situation. However the BOAH is a reasonable group and usually will not impose a severe penalty for a minor infractoin or first time offense. Your suggestion would be like getting a $500 fine for driving 5 mi. over the speed limit. Again where is the outcry from sportsmen and G/F in regard to imported carcasses. Though they make strong suggestions in regard to bringing back whole elk and deer from other states, there is no fine for these violations.

I am not aware of what the final actions were taken between BOAH and the party you mentioned. I believe that is between them and it is actually a law enforcement issue. The NDEG did not negotiate anything as you suggest, we worked in conjunction with BOAH to put in place reasonable rules to govern our industry. These rules went through all the proper procedure with a public comment period and today they are in place.

YOu asked if the state was compensated for the deer NDGF had to kill for him. I think you have it backwards. I don't believe the deer were a problem to Mertz, they were a problem to NDGF because they were on his property. Let me get this straight, he should compensate the state for the removal of the publics property that was found on his private ranch. I guess I always thought if your property some how ended up on my property and it needed to be removed you either come and get it or I would hire some one to remove it and send YOU the bill.

drakekiller,

I am not sure how many elk Mertz actually lost but if an everage shooter bull is worth $2500 to $3000, and he lost a few it adds up pretty fast . I am not sure a fine on top of what he lost would make any sense. I think some of you guys think he let them out on purpose. The incentive is already there to keep your elk in the fence.

There are no rules in regard to "shots" as you asked. You can not vaccinate for the diseases we are concerned about. The best and only prevention is to regulate imports and continue testing. This is obviously working because ND has no TB, Bangs, or CWD in the domestic elk herds. So with these escaped elk, what specific disease were you concerned about ? Thanks to people like Valerius Geist, many think our herds are full of disease. There is a lot less risk from escaped elk in ND, than there is from you hauling a deer around in the back of your pickup and throwing the bones out on a rock pile. There is way less risk from farmed elk escapes than from carcasses being brought back from states with an endemic CWD area.

Later,
Kim


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

4590

Please accept my apology, I called the radio station. The two confirmed cases were from Minnesota, I will listen closer next time.

Bob


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Kim
Lets keep this on a first name basis.

Now that I have apologized in public, I will address the rest of the post.

SV Lodge had the deer in the enclosure because the fence was poorly maintained, elk escaped didn't they we can rehash this until hell freezes over. I would like to know How is that the fault of the public?

Walhalla and NW Minnesota are a long way to hike for an Elk although I don't think it is farther than they travel in their wild migrations. I would be more concerned with one of your elk getting out if it was sick as the beef industry is pretty big in that area. You run a different operation than them, Thanks.

later

Bob


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Bob,

Here is my point. If you own a piece of property and you decide to put an 8 ft fence around it, is that not your right? Now if several deer find there way into your property, how is that your liability for merely building a fence. Especially when the deer, as we so often hear on this site, are the property of the public?


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Sorry Bob,

Apology accepted. You didn't however answer what disease you are concerned about.

Later


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Kim 
It is just as we discussed before, I agree with you that CWD will walk across the border, or come in as a carcass if NDGF doesn't get more agressive on the testing. There is nothing to dispute here except the possibility of a slob amongst your ranks, and if you guys police yourselves as well as you say you do, the possibility is remote! right?

Bob

ps Isn't it considered good management to keep you fences in good repair to keep out unwanted livestock as well as keeping Elk in?. and the operator in question also sells "High Fence" whitetail hunts, how do we know he wasn't just culling his herd? we don't and probably will never know.


----------



## Drakekiller (Apr 3, 2002)

I would like to say I am sorry to Sheyenne Valley Outfitters based in Valley City in my earlier posts. It was Sheyenne Valley Lodge that have had the problems. I did get the outfitters names right Orlan and Ted Mertz.


----------

