# Hoeven says no to nonresident limits



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Gov. John Hoeven told Dean Hildebrand no when he suggested a cap on nonresidents last Tuesday. He evidently didn't listen to the people at the advisory board meetings as this was the number 1 solution presented at them. He is going to dump more money into the plots program which is a good thing. But even if they double the acreage in the next 5 years it is just a small percentage of land in ND. If you put in more plots with no cap on nonresidents, the problem will not go away. It will just be more attractive for people to come here. This is evidently to please commericial interests like tourism. They can advertise more hunting opportunities here and suck even more people in here. Start writing letters.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

By all means, tell him what you think. I've written him many times this year.

Governor's Office
Dept. 101
600 E. Boulevard Ave.
Bismarck, ND 58505-0001

(701) 328-2200 [Phone]
(701) 328-2205 [Fax]

1-800-366-6888 [TTY-Relay ND]
1-800-366-6889 [TTY-Relay ND - Voice]

[email protected]


----------



## bcarson (Mar 8, 2002)

The legislature has a committee studying the non-resident issue at the present time. I don't think the Governor wants to step on anyone's toes and make a decision without getting input anymore.

He did mention the probability of raising non-resident fees to help raise money for access. This may be just as effective as putting caps in place.

Since fee hunting is here to stay raising the fees will not affect the people utilizing guides and outfitters. It will curtail the number of freelancers who are the people in competition for access with the average ND hunter.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2002)

the govenor dont need to raise the fee's,he needs to put a cap on the non res.there are people who will pay no matter what the fee is.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

The governor must balance many different sets of constituents. He also must politely listen to each even if he has no plans to support them.

Politics (even in ND) largely centers on money and power.

Do ND Hunters have the money ? 
ND hunters probably do not have the money to launch a successful campaign against Hoven. Will his competitor (Rep or Dem) care to fight on this issue ?

Many wealthy ND hunters are not concerned about these issues - they have already secured places to hunt. They will support Hoven or someone else based on other issues.

Do ND Hunters have the power ?
I will say they are very vocal at meetings. But what ND sportsman sits within the governor's inner circle of friends ?

Let's say there are 650,000 people in ND.

Last year there were about 40,000 resident waterfowl and pheasant hunters in the state.
This is about 6% of the population.

Of that 40,000 hunters how many bother to vote ? Many are probably deer hunting.

How many are under 18 and can not vote ?

How many are farmers and will vote first on agri issues ?

How many are small town businessmen that will vote first on other issues ?

What percentage of these 40,000 resident hunters will vote based on this issue alone ?

Many people have strong convictions on many other issues too. Many people will always vote Dem or Rep regardless of the issues. Many people will vote first on taxation or another issue.

Hey - maybe your spouse will vote the opposite of you. She may figure out that you might just quit hunting and stay home with her. Some Humor Here.

My point is eight meetings times 200 people per meeting is only 1,600 potential voters.
Do Hoven's people need to run damage control - YES. Is there a lot of power there - no.

Government officials always have a team that weighs each move. The biggest mistake by Hoven's team was the early pheasant opener. They are in damage control mode now.

Hoven will let the 2003 legislature make their bills into laws. He will then sign the bill and state that this is the compromised situation that has been worked out for the best benefit of all.

This will minimize his liabilities on this HOT issue.

Will there be caps - Probably
Will there be rate increase - Yes
Will NR number of days decrease - Probably


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

In the last legislative session - the guides and outfitters had secured enough licenses for all of their needs and beyond.

If you place caps on the number of NRs they will still get what they need. The ND guides and outfitters association will have one or more paid professional lobbyists working the 2003 legislative session everyday.

Will the guides and outfitters come first on the list and get everything they need ?

First dibs on all licenses

Unlimited ability to lease all the land 
they need

free state advertising

YES, YES, YES


----------



## NDMALLARD (Mar 9, 2002)

praire hunter I like your views and the sad truth is I think your right on the money. The lobbiest will be there everyday for the guides. I only hope the hunters continue to speak out!


----------



## MResner (Mar 14, 2002)

prairie hunter,

Your logic is fine. Your statistics are fine. But your attitude leaves something to be desired. Something very significant has just happened in North Dakota. For the first time since the waterfowl wars of the 70s, the sportsmen of North Dakota have been listened to by at least one branch of state government. It is a time for rejoicing, and a time to consolidate our gains. North Dakota hunters don't have to finance a campaign against Gov. Hoeven. North Dakota hunters don't want to control the state. There isn't a "Hunter's" party. All the hunters of North Dakota want is a fair shake in their own home! North Dakota hunters don't need to have the Gov. in their pocket. They don't need to be in the inner circle. The rollback of the early pheasant opener was a huge political event, and hopefully a watershed. The last time I remember a comparable uprising in this state was when Gov. Olson tried to buy a new airplane.

According to the figures I got from Paul Schadewald of the G&F Dept, there were 95,000 North Dakotans who bought hunting licenses last year. Granted that some of those hunters were under voting age, but that still represents one of the largest voting blocks in the state. As a comparison, there are only 25,000 to 30,000 ag producers. The hunters of North Dakota have demonstrated their capacity for a coordinated consistent position and action. Let's not diminish that accomplishment or its significance by implying that our hunters cannot win. Please allow me to restate it; the hunters did win! The commercial hunting operations are busy right now setting all their bookings back by a week. According to Pat Candrian's own words in the Bismarck Tribune, the early week meant $100,000 to Cannonball.

If the hunters of North Dakota stay as focused and as united as they have been in the past few weeks, and if that momentum is carried through this fall's legislative election and on into the next legislative session, the resident hunters of North Dakota can win again and again.

Rather than come up with all of the negative points possible; rather than cite all the difficulties; rather than list all of the advantages the guides and outfitters have, let's direct that effort into positive action. Whether we've got 40,000 or 95,000 resident hunters, we sure outnumber the guides and outfitters by a bunch. There are only 300 and some registered guides in North Dakota. Those guides may be in the inner circle and they may have money and power, but for the tens of thousands of hunters to capitulate to the guides before a fight is cowardly and ludicrous.

Come on prairie hunter, let's adopt a positive proactive attitude and leave the naysaying for some other group.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Celebrate - Yea Hah Mr. Moderator.

I will quote Mr. Hustad "Remember to respect everyone's opinion. If everyone agreed, we wouldn't need this forum!!!"

As I state these facts I have may have more to lose than you. My best scenario would be for you to go home happy and hang your hat for another day.

My post is simply a warning. Celebrate, but understand that you are playing hardball politics.

I have been a nonresident for the past 12 years or so. Where I hunt I have seen minimal impact from any increase in hunting pressure. The amount of water and number of birds is staggering compared to 10 years ago. The only changes I have seen are less snow geese - since they all seem to like Canada.

Somewhat sarcastic and a little pessimistic - you bet.

I can not hunt deer on family owned land because I can not draw a permit. The difficulty in getting a permit was doubled when the guides and outfitters took half of the NR deer licenses off the top. This legislation was passed without anyone knowing. Turkey license - not even an option.

My posts often do take a "devils advocate" approach but that is based upon 25+ years of hunting and observing hunting politics in ND. If you look at some of my past posts I have tried to point out how politics have influenced hunting opportunities. This is not the first time nor the last time politics will impact your outdoor fun.

As I grew up hunting in ND I have seen:

+) Huge tracts of waterfowl land LEASED and posted by ND residents north of ND Hwy 36 near Woodworth. (late 1970s and early '80s). Noticed the signs are back in '00s

+) Swampbuster landowner posting. This closed very good areas to me in the mid '80s.

+) Prime badlands sharptail areas ruined by oil rigs, roads, and developers

+) Drought
bad for ducks, but what great pheasant
years

+) The rains of '93 and '94.

+) The disappearance of snow geese from the ND hunting seen. First SE ND in the '80s and now the northern tier counties in '00s

+) Every two years ND legislators from southwestern ND tried to pass a "all land closed to hunting" law. As I said before this scared the hell out of us growing up.
They will try again in 2003 - I guarantee. The land access set aside acres may be the "balance" they need to close off everything else.

+) An east vs west ND issue in the 1980s and now a NR vs resident issue. Much of the attitude based upon competition for EASY access.

Some of these events were acts of nature others a function of politics and man's greed.

So celebrate and be happy.

[ This Message was edited by: prairie hunter on 2002-03-23 22:59 ]


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

There probably are 95,000 resident hunters in ND.

There are about 40,000 resident waterfowl hunters in ND according to most reports in ND outdoors.

Maybe another 5,000 to 10,000 ND pheasant hunters that do not bother to shoot ducks.

The balance of the 95,000 hunter number are likely deer hunters.

There is certainly alot of people that only hunt deer. Many, many farmers only deer hunt. They of course do not even need a license to shot a few pheasants on their own land.

So a little over 50% of the licensed ND hunters are impacted by these issues.

[ This Message was edited by: prairie hunter on 2002-03-23 23:09 ]


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Finally

If the battle is against overall NR numbers

- caps, license fee increases, more land access, etc will all be put into place in the fall of 2003.

I fear a major rush of people into ND will occur in 2002 to beat the changes.

Read my post again Mr. MR. My main point is the guides will work the legislative session to maintain or grow their income. Just like the deer licenses - the guides will get their licenses first. SW ND will never return to the past until
1) winter wins
2) CRP is gone

The Cannonball company could certainly open a large preserve or two and start their season in Sept. I am sure many clients at that facility would never know the difference. Many that did could care less.

The big hunting operation in Steele ND already runs a pheasant hunting preserve and likely has hunters on his place in Sept.


----------



## Dr. Bob (Mar 3, 2002)

Wow........

I feel I'm only qualified to comment on one thing after that:

If ND does not get some moisture SOON I doubt they will see a major rush of people this fall. I believe the media has had a lot to do with the ever increasing #'s of NR's. With so many people having Internet access they can't BS us any longer!...........If duck numbers fall so will hunter #'s.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Dr. Bob you are correct.It is difficult for me to say this.But a few dry years and less hunters may not be bad.At least not for me.I pretty much do all my hunting in fields.The ducks will be fewer but will be concentrated on the water left.I had some of my best mallard shoots during dry years.
Of course this will not hurt upland.But all it takes is 1 horrendous spring blizzard and there go the pheasants.
One question...Can shooting preserves be put on land that is leased?Or do you have to own it?


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Yes I know I talk/write way too much.

With all the issues centered on visiting NR hunters (& fisherman on that other ND site)in ND.

Why does the ND state tourism board keep advertizing on TV, in magazines, internet. They are still agressive in MN and I am sure beyond.

The ND Tourism board should stay away from all the Sportsman shows in 2002. Why advertize any more ? All these issues at the local meetings and yet ND is in the Twin Cities attempting to bring more people here.

Who pays for that big booth at the Sportsman shows ?

Why not lay low and let word of mouth keep people coming to ND. If the numbers of visiters drop from last year - most ND sportsman and people on these web sites would be relieved.

Save ND tax payers some money in the process.

I respect Mr. Mike Johnson as a good ND waterfowl biologist and he is probably doing what he is told to by his boss, but his comments the past few years about record duck reproduction has really had some "hype" factor added in. Why don't they try tone down the comments to facts.

People read RECORD NUMBERS, RECORD HATCHES, Highest numbers ever. Who would not want to come to ND.

Here is part of the front page of the ND Game & Fish web page :

At the North Dakota Game and Fish Department we pride ourselves in maintaining some of the most varied hunting and fishing in the nation.

For hunters, North Dakota is the ultimate for duck and goose hunting, which comes as no surprise because we lead the nation in annual duck production. Ring-necked pheasant and sharp-tailed grouse give our upland game hunters plenty of opportunity from early fall through the winter. Deer hunters look forward to next year's season all year long.

From just about anywhere in the state, hunters and anglers can find a multitude of hunting and fishing choices. Whether it be a morning of duck hunting followed by a late season fishing trip for Lake Sakakawea salmon, to a day of sharp-tailed grouse hunting followed by an early evening bow hunt for white-tailed deer, we think you will agree that we provide variety in hunting and fishing.

Mr. Tony Dean, the godfather of Dakota hunting, fishing, and conservation could tone down his show too. I guess that is difficult to do now that most of his hunting segments are with outfitters.

Has everyone seen the ND commercial where the burly, bearded guy lifts up a stringer limit (or more) of 5# to 10# walleyes and the slogan is rightous fishing in ND ? Is this the type of angler we want fishing in ND. Anyone keeping a stringer of fish like that is not helping the resource.

If each of the above groups took a vacation in 2002 and stopped with the "hype", there just might be some relief this fall.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Yeah your right prarie hunter.I just watched Hunting with Hank on OLN and it was his 4th show hunting in ND with Cannonball.
You are also right about Tony. Only a few fishing shows are not filmed with outfitters/guides.


----------



## Decoyer (Mar 2, 2002)

Before we label Tony Dean as a spokesperson for the Dakotas, we have to remember that he is a NONRESIDENT of ND.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

HEY NOW !!! Don't be picking on Hank :wink: I saw that show. I have only had digital cable for about a year. That hunting with Hank is one of my favorites. Most of those shows are pathetic. Thats not hunting - it just shooting ???

What I have gathered from the Cannonball commercials lately :roll: they must release alot of pheasants ??? So I think they are close to being a preserve, the way it is ??? (Nice country though)

Carry on k:


----------



## MResner (Mar 14, 2002)

prairie hunter

I certainly meant you no disrespect, and apologize if I misled you to think I did. I merely disagree with your, "Somewhat sarcastic and a little pessimistic" attitude. I don't believe this is the time for an attitude such as yours. I have to say it again, and if you can demonstrate that I'm wrong, I'll be more than happy to concede the point...North Dakota RESIDENT hunters just scored a victory, and with continued consistent effort can win in the upcoming elections and in the next legislative session. BUT, we can't win if we allow ourselves a defeatist attitude even before we have an inkling of just what we've accomplished or what more is possible.

I am fully aware that we are playing hardball politics. If you haven't noticed, I use my own name and my own city. Mott is the county seat of Hettinger County, and two of three county commissioners in this county are Pat Candrian, manager of the Cannonball Co., and Lester Brackel who's land is enrolled with Cannonball. Yes sir, Mr. prairie hunter, I'm pretty cognizant of the fact that this is hardball. I think every hunter who attended any of the Advisory Board Hearings knows it's hardball, and I'm real certain that the Governor knows it's hardball!

Sir, you are a nonresident. That doesn't make you a bad person. You might be a heck of a nice guy for all I know, but being a nonresident makes you a marginal player in this hardball game. I don't want to prevent you from ever hunting in North Dakota. I don't want to prevent Cannonball from making a bunch of money. I don't begrudge any farmer whatever he can get out of the nonresidents such as yourself. But...I want North Dakota for North Dakotans. I could have taken a job in the People's Republik of Kalifornia (now that nasty reference to the bare(sic) state was certainly in poor taste and sarcastic)and I could have made more money. I chose to stay in North Dakota. You chose to leave. What North Dakota needs more than anything else is more people in our rural communities. If you move in next door to me, become a resident of North Dakota, pay your taxes here, send your kids to school here, go to the hospital and clinic here, buy your groceries here, and have a North Dakota license plate,...THEN I'll share every benefit that North Dakota has to offer. AND, I'll share it graciously and happily.

North Dakota hasn't experienced any "political" problems over the deer hunter numbers because the nonresident numbers are restricted by statute. If those restrictions were to be lifted, we'd soon have as big a mess over deer hunting as we currently have over ducks and pheasants. I'm sorry you can't always draw a deer permit in North Dakota, and I hope you have a wonderful enjoyable hunt in Montana or Idaho.

There are a lot of folks working very hard to cloud the wildlife related issues in North Dakota. But the conflict is simply between the commercial hunting interests and the resident hunters. This isn't an east/west issue, this isn't a biological issue, this isn't a landowner/sportsmen issue, this isn't even a resident/nonresident issue. This is a conflict between the commercial hunting interests and the sportsmen. And yes, there is a lot of history in North Dakota, but this is the present and the future.

I don't care to argue with you, prairie hunter, as it can serve no positive purpose, but the hunter numbers you reported are not accurate. I spoke to the Game & Fish Dept just last week and obtained these numbers from them. The 2001 numbers are not yet compiled, so the best information is from 2000. In 2000 there were 34,443 resident small game licenses sold, and 34,401 nonresident small game licenses sold. As hunters must have that stamp to hunt either upland or waterfowl, those must be the maximum possible numbers. Those numbers most likely increased in 2001, but according to Game&Fish we have no data upon which we can base any 2001 numbers, and guesses don't count for much, no matter who's making them.

I am confident that I fully comprehend your earlier posts, and again, I must respectfully disagree with your statement that, "My main point is the guides will work the legislative session to maintain or grow their income." I agree with you that the commercial interests will be lobbying their brains silly and checkbooks flat, but I don't think that was really your main point. It seems to me your main point was that those interests had the money and power to prevail. I am sure you're wrong, and I can cite the strongest and most current illustration of my viewpoint: The Governor of the State of North Dakota just reversed his decision that had benefited the commercial interests! It sure seems logical that if the sportsmen of this state can convince the Governor to rescind a months old decision, then we sure ought to be able to convince our legislators to institute some regulations that will return some semblance of balance to the situations in this state.

prairie hunter, I do agree with your statement that, "you talk/write way too much", and I'm ashamed that I follow your lead and talk/write too much in response, so let me make just one more short comment in explanation of your post relating to hunting promotion in North Dakota. MONEY, MONEY, MONEY! Wildlife management for MONEY!

Lastly, prairie hunter, I would like to reiterate my position that I mean you no disrespect, only honest disagreement.

Signed,

MResner
Mott, ND

PS Where did you say you're from, "prairie hunter", I must have missed it.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Don't get me wrong Fetch...I like Hunting With Hank.I also like Tony Dean's shows.His shows are informative and they are basically shows about the Dakota's.I just think he could do without the guides and outfitters all the time.Show us some where he actually has to go out and find a hunting spot on his own.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

I write too much, because I feel I have a lot to offer. I have observed and read about these issues since I was 16. No plans to go to ID or MT.

When I am hunting in ND, I am almost always a nonresident traveling in a pickup with ND plates.

I guess that makes me a ghost NR.

When we occasionally use my MN truck. The passengers traveling to the hunting spot with me are ALWAYs ND people. Sometimes I hunt my way back to MN - so I guess my MN truck may be parked in an approach at times.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

MR MResner,

Wait a minute.

Hey buddy - YOU were the one posting 95,000 resident hunters based upon a conversation with the NDG&F employee. Now YOU are back peddling to 34,000.

My original post stated about 40,000 resident waterfowl and pheasant hunters. I guess I errored on the high side to show hunters had an impact greater than 5% of the voting pop.

I was pretty close. I would assume 34,000+ is about 40,000. Remember that a landowner does not need a license to hunt their own land for upland. This could add a few thousand more people - maybe ??

In my later posting I agreed with YOUR 95,000 number in principal - because once you add the deer hunters - the total number of ND hunters could go up quite a bit.

I do not have all those numbers in front of me, do not have time to call, and I assumed YOU did get the accurate number of 95,000 total.

Regarding Nonresidents : All nonresidents must by the small game stamp. If you hunt waterfowl you need an additional stamp that costs $8 (??) and specifies zones and times slots. Thus ND G&F should have a pretty good idea of the number of people coming to ND just to hunt small game. Although I guess that pheasant hunter could by the waterfowl stamp just in case he jumps a duck or two.


----------



## MResner (Mar 14, 2002)

Ooops! Fat finger syndrome again. Now I'll have to start over.

[ This Message was edited by: MResner on 2002-03-25 11:05 ]


----------



## MResner (Mar 14, 2002)

prairie hunter,

I did not back peddle, so please do not accuse me of something I didn't do. You guessed at some numbers, inferred a significance to those numbers, and drew a conclusion based on those numbers. I merely disagreed with your numbers, your inference, and your conclusion.

There are not 40,000 resident waterfowl hunters in ND. Neither you nor I have any idea how many ND pheasant hunters do or don't shoot ducks (thank you for admitting you had done no research, and therefore had no real basis for your "statistics"). There certainly are about 95,000 resident ND hunters according to ND G&F, and the I'll agree with you that the difference is mostly 'deer only' hunters. But you used faulty data to draw the conclusion, "...a little over 50% of the licensed ND hunters are impacted by these issues". It seems to me that you are working awfully hard to minimize the significance of the issues. I can certainly understand why a nonresdient such as yourself would like the resident, voting hunters of ND to decide this isn't too important and just sort of forget about it, or to conclude that there is nothing that can be done anyway. I strongly disagree with your conclusion! Every ND hunter is impacted by the current situations. Every North Dakotan is impacted! I sincerely hope you are unsuccessful in convincing anyone to give up on the issues. I sincerely hope that ALL ND sportsmen realize just how vital these issues are. I sincerely hope all ND sportsmen work to maintain the momentum we've gained over the past few months.

Now, prairie hunter, I believe this thread is in imminent danger of degenerating into a shouting match, so I am ending my participation. I would like to keep the posts on this forum focused on positive ideas and proposals, so although I would like to continue this debate with you, it is most properly done privately. If you care to, please email me.

MResner


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

MResner,

Many of the people reading these posts are in their teen or twenties. They need to know this is not the first time hunting has been impacted by politics. Discussion is a healthy thing.

The greatest threat to free access in ND occurs every two years when ND legislative bills are introduced to close all land to hunting whether posted or not. They will try again.

You know I already sent you a private email. If you have not accessed your email you will note that the email should post before the time on your last BB post.

My numbers were referenced from other posts on this site, anglerpal, and the ND outdoors. Not exact, but darn close of an educated guess (34,000 vs 40,000). I stand by my numbers : about 5% (34,000 out of 650,000) of NDs are impacted by competition with the NR duck hunters. How many will vote on this issue as a primary issue ? How many make money ?

Small groups of people (5%) can have a very strong impact. This number is still greater than the number of outfitters. My hope is that a good compromise will be made through education and facts. I have conceded in a previous post that I expect caps to be placed on all NR hunters.

These BB are a form of entertainment with the goal of education by some, anger release by others, and propaganda, lies, and stories by still others.

Lighten up and have fun - I am.

[ This Message was edited by: prairie hunter on 2002-03-25 12:32 ]


----------



## BigGuy (Mar 25, 2002)

You are on the mark Prairie Hunter. The guy from Mott seams to have it in for you !!!!!
:******:

His first post after yours he says "your logic is fine. Your statistics are fine ..."
Then in the same post he talks about 95,000 hunters confirmed by Schadewald at the ND G&F. :sad:

Then in a later post he realizes your number is closer to the facts than his. He finds out the real number is 34,443 and says the numbers Prairie H reports are not accurate and that you are guessing and that you did no research. :???:

Your numbers are fine 40K is a hell of a lot closer to 34K than 95K. You never said you were guessing. Did you. Your research was OK. ND outdoors is a good reference. This is not a college class were not expecting perfect numbers for the sake of discussion.

Your discussions are long but insightful. :computer: Keep pushing the edge. Don't let that guy from Mott deter you. :rock:

He either has unlimited pheasant hunting opportunities or none if he has made every one around Mott mad. :******:

[ This Message was edited by: bigguy on 2002-03-25 20:03 ]

[ This Message was edited by: bigguy on 2002-03-25 20:10 ]


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2002)

man from mott

all your griping and complaining dont help.
when hunters dont get along it just ads fuel to the fire for the anti's.so do us all a favor and keep your opinions to your self
"please"


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Ummm Errrrrrr this is a Hot Topics page - it is for OPINIONS - Let everyone have a say - I'd like it, if many, that disagree would come here & try & convince me & others were wrong about things ??? No need to get all worked up over nothing. This has been all pretty tame. Some of you act as though you have never been on a hunting forum before ??? If you like Censorship send me a private message & I can point you in the right direction :grin:


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

KenW, Have to agree with you on the Tony Dean Show. He does everything with outfitters. I can't remember a show that he didn't mention an outfitter at the end. I don't think that we need a SD resident telling us what is right for the state of ND. I heard yesterday that he has been very vocal on the grasslands issue, evidently stressing the great oportunities that woould open up for the sportsman. I don't think we need to antagonize the ranchers that rely on the grasslands, if anything we should be supporting the use of the areas by the ranchers. Let's get to working with the ranchers, helping the ranchers instead of working aganst them. This would tend to open more land to the sportsman if they thought we were helping them.


----------

