MN Lawsuit

[smallies24]

I'm not so sure that water is the main problem as far as MN duck populations go. Has anyone else noticed that there is a lot stronger spring migration through the state than in the fall. I thik hunting pressure could have a lot to do with it. We have far more hunters than any other state. Birds may have been conditioned to avoid the pressure. I've argued other points on the subject in other forums so that's all I'll say here.

[walleyebuster]

The whole issue is the small group of lazy North Dakota sportsmen from GF/Fargo/Bismarck who don't feel they have to make relation ships to hunt on private land. They want to be able to go to Western ND the opening weekend of pheasant season and have all the public land to themselves for the first week. They also hope the new restrictions on non residents will keep people away from ND giving them more access to private land. I am a MN hunter who has traveled to western ND pheasant hunting for 10 years. I have three prime farms that I have hunting permission to hunt for the pheasant season. I am not paying big money to hunt these farms. But I do work hard at keeping the relationships strong and gaining the farmers trust and friendship. Helping them fix a fence, taking them to town for dinner, chasing cattle, or offering your help never hurts. I went cold calling with my son when he was 8 years old looking for places to hunt. I told the farmers how I would respect their land and hunt only where they told me. All of them gave me access and have continued to invite me each and every year. They have all told me that they will not let any residents hunt their land unless they are immediate family. They are not happy with what the new pheasant limitations on non-residents have done to their local economy. They know who was responsible for getting the new laws on the table and seeing that they got passed. (GF/Fargo/Bismarck sportsmen).

I live on LOW and share fish, camping spots, grouse trails, deer hunting areas, and all the other things Minnesota has to offer with non-residents. I pay a pretty hefty state tax to fund public boat ramps, DNR owned land, grouse habitat,etc. A guy from ND comes to Minnesota and buys a $34 fishing license (I pay $17 + state tax). He gets the same limits and gets to use all of the state owned accesses for no charge??

Minnesota will be changing fees, limits, access etc. to non-residents we have been too nice as other states continue to pose new restrictions each year. I don't like when I go to Beltrami Forest grouse hunting opening weekend and see two trucks with ND plates parked in the spots I want to hunt. They don't pay taxes on the state owned forest land but it's good commerce and I put up with it and haven't ran to my legislator to limit their access. I just find a new spot to hunt.

Bottom line ND residents. You can't have ND's natural resources limited to ND residents only and expect Minnesota not to retaliate. I see many of you using our resources at a minimal cost. I hope it all gets worked out.

[Guest]

TV BOY;

You are incorrect about the agriculture business in ND, when you compared it to MN.

The type of land that you see, in which is vast plains of un plowed ground is that way for a reason. It is poor soil, or federally owned land.

This message is delivered to you becaue I have 2 cousins that farm 30,000 acres south of Fargo.........Yes, that is 30,000 ND acres. The ground is flat and the only thing stopping them from plowing from one corner to the other is either roads or Dikes / ditches for water drainage. Take a road trip and you will find it!

Good Luck.

By the way, I wish two things.......

One, Sue the snot out of them. Burn em at the stake. It is pure greed for this purpose.

the 2nd is that I wish they double the NR license fees for all ND when they cross into our border............

Yes, to bad for the NR resident who needs us and our income to make a living, but his state caused it.

Hang em high!

[TV BOY]

Big G,
My bad, I really don't know much about agriculture. I just know that in SE ND where we hunt there are numerous low spots in fields that hold ducks. The farmers will tell you that it has just been the last several years that the water is up. In fact the main spot we hunt used to be a pasture.

One will see numerous fires burning in late oct when driving around. I guess folks are hopeing that a dry winter will mean that they can plow a few more acres in the spring.

Think what would happen if you burned cattails in MN !?

[This message has been edited by TV BOY (edited 03-17-2004).]

[smalls]

YES, PLEASE SUE US, LET THE NATION'S HUNTERS RUN RAMPANT ON ND LANDS, LET OUR GOAL BE TO MAKE HUNTING AS CRAPPY (I want to use another word here, but I would like this post to stay) AS MINNESOTAS!

How often do I here minnesotan's say "you don't know how good you've got it, hunting is nothing like this where I am from". EVERY FALL! EVERYTIME THEY HUNT IN MY BACKYARD! But was MN's waterfowl hunting always this bad....NO! Your wetlands have been drained and your habitat is now SUBPAR! This isn't groundbreaking information, most sportsmen know the state of decline Minnesota wetlands are in.

Mr. G- I have a cousin blah blah blah.
As far as 30,000 acres south of Fargo? That area is not waterfowl habitat. Southern Cass County has never been a historic waterfowl hunting area. The area in question is our prairie pothole region. So yes, it is flat, they farm from road to road. Very minimal impact to waterfowl! Try finding a flat, square field between Jamestown and Cando. Try to find a section of land that doesn't have a slough on it. They are few and far between.

The reason we implement caps and restrictions is to maintain the GREAT opportunity we have in North Dakota. Residency of the state should give us preferential treatment when it comes to this subject.

So here is a NOVEL IDEA. Minnesota should manage minnesota wildlife (including the fishes and the waterfowl). A tip, let your DNR manage it instead of your legislature. North Dakota should continue to manage ND wildlife (including the fishes and the waterfowl).

If you don't like it, vote with your pocket book. Don't come. Sit on your "duck-a-day" minnesota pond and please don't diminish what we have. Or if North Dakota hunting is that important to you. Move here, join us, I will bake you a pie if you move in next door (which as I live in the country is a 5 mile radius). We have good fishing too!

This lawsuit is lame and political! What would your sportsmen say if Wisconsin sued you because you charge more for non-res fishing licenses. EVERYONE OF YOU WOULD CALL THAT ABSOLUTELY BOGUS! But you got no problem "burning us at the stake". Hatch is nothing but a professional politician that is setting himself up to run for office. i GUARANTEE you will at some point see a Hatch political ad stating how he fought for MN sportsmen.

*This dissenting opinion brought to you by a friendly North Dakotan.*

[LABS4ME]

Smalls... I don't think the issue is of license caps, price and/or amount of days on a license. As sportsmen we can all live with and understand those... but when we purchase our license at a fee 7X's higher than a resident, shouldn't it at that point give us the same privledges? I think the biggest problem is excluded days. 1st week is all yours, no hunting on state land on pheasnt opener etc, etc. Don't kid yourself, your fellow ND's would be raising h*ll if Minnesota cut out say, the fishing opener though the 1st of June to give us a fair crack at our walleye, or we cap our non-res licenses at say 30,000. Can't fish at your cabin that year? Oh well, Res. have priority. Where my cabin is, at least 30% are owned by people from NoDak. Funny thing is when I bring up the hunting issue with them they think it's fair, but if I say what if roles were reversed and MN said no-way to Non-Res. fishing the 1st 2 weeks, or a lottery or cap, the wing nuts start to come off. That's a bunch of talk they say, we own the cabin, pay taxes, there's more walleye than ducks, they aren't going anywhere like ducks etc. etc. Seems to me I can rebutt everyone of their arguments, but it wouldn't do any good, they WANT THEIR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO! If the argument boils down to Residents getting a better crack at the resource as you say, I wouldn't even have to argue any of their points. I know a lot of NoDaks come to MN to deer hunt too. What if we excluded the opener and say the week before (rut) so we can have a crack at all our bucks first. See how endless this becomes? You buy your license, and everyone follows the same rules, dates and laws... period. That's the way it should work.

It's unfortunate that I have voted with my pocketbook... too bad! I did enjoy going to your state. Some of the nicest people I've met were the farmers in NoDak. But I've moved on... a little clue to everyone else... they aren't the only state with ducks! I agree MN is pathetic at best, but try SoDak, Nebraska, Kansas, Saskatchewan, Manitoba... they all have great hunting and great rural folks!

I think the issue with the Residents of NoDak isn't so much the fact that Non-Resident hunters are out hunting their state... it is with the outfitters gobbling up the land. Why go after non-resident hunters? Go after the outfitters, make their licenses miserable to get and that should cut out a good portion of them. Or go after the farmers who are leasing or selling them the land. Can't do that tho', wouldn't be P.C., everyone argues that's O.K. for them to do that as they need the money, right? If the farmers wouldn't turn over their lands to outfitters, no posting, more land to hunt, pressure spread out etc. etc. seems like the root to the problem. Believe me 26,000 non-res. hunters is not that many when you consider the size of NoDak. It boils down to land being gobbled up, and that's no good for any sportsman!

Good Luck! I hope you didn't take offense to anything in my post... just my rebuttal!

Labs

[Guest]

Lots of heat brewing here.........

Too bad..........

We are all (hopefully) sportsmen and sportwomen.

However, the prime point is that a state is taken personal control of harvesting a "federal" controlled bird.

As the general point was made about Minnesota not having the proper "habitat" to support the waterfowel, that's fine......Walleyes taste much better.

Again, with the motion that ND has generated, you don't just smile and says THANKS NEIGHBOR, NOW COME ON OVER TO YOUR LAKE HOME AND SUCK UP OUR RESOURCES, WHILE YOU ATTEMPT TO CONTROL AND KEEP YOURS TO YOURSELF.

Again, shut down the border, I don't care! Who does care.........A tiny percentage of unfortuante (and yes, I do feel their pain) duck hunters who own land and can't hunt it.

Fine! No problem............

Just shut down MN fishing opener til July 1st to ND residents and only let them deer hunt the last two days of November..........

Works for me........Got to keep it on the level, right.

Point is, ND has taken steps not only to control the bird hunting out of greed, but has taken steps to damage relations of the two states.

------------------
Let 'em go so they can grow!!!

[Riverratpete]

The one thing the ND Res's have on their side are the resort owners in this state. The resort operators will and probably are screaming bloody murder that we(Minn) would be hurting them finacially if we were to raise the Non Resident Lic fee, close seasons, etc. Ever been up to LOW/Detroit Lakes? lots of ND vehicles with ND plates, I say S$#@w'em, theres other places to go, see how the folks in ND like it. heh, they got Devils lake.

[FoolNFish]

And I always thought north dakota was a province of canada(after all---they have the same greedy attitude)! LOL

[TV BOY]

What about non-resident land owners? Even though you own land in ND, that perhaps has been in the family, you can only hunt a part of the season. Having a seasonal cabin in MN you can fish all year long. What realy gets the goat of both groups is that they don't get a voice or vote in the state that they don't reside.

Fishing and hunting can't be directly compared in my opinion. There is C&R to keep the fisheries going. The only C&R for birds is a missed shot (shoot and release)

Should they be able to vote because they own land?

[can it be luck?]

I dont agree with ND hunting laws in regards to restricting "prime" times, or any times for that matter to residents or NRs.
I dont agree with haveing to purchase MN fish house licenses and thier removal times. I also dont agree that non residents cannot spear northerns in MN.
A lot of western states and Alaska have some really strict and expensive regs applyed to NRs. I'm not sure what they are exactly, but I know they exist.
Does WI have any "goofy" laws that NRs may feel are wrong? Living here, I guess I never gave it much thought! I may have "opened" a door here for some cheap shots....But without haveing to research WI NR regs, I'm curious.

------------------
http://groups.msn.com/canitbeluck

[This message has been edited by can it be luck? (edited 03-20-2004).]

[B. Amish]

Great topic and some good debate,
I agree with the folks who are saying let's do something about our habitat, how about all of you lake owners restoring your shorelines! It's not just the farmers all the time, they did the draing things decades ago when NOBODY knew any better. Shame on you lake shore owners who are ripping out the cattails and bullrushes because they are unsightly and bad to swim in. Guess what uses those cattails and bullrushes? DUCKS nest there in the spring and eat there in the fall or at least they used to. FISH used to spawn there. Also, emergent vegetation slows down wave action so your shorelines want erode away. instead of putting in rip-rap which has really no benefit to anything wild, try putting the vegetation back that was there when you got there!

Also, N.D. shouldn't be able to do this for one simple reason. waterfowl are a MIGRATORY species. deer, moose, fish, elk, etc. should be left to the state to manage and the residents should have first crack at them whichever state it is. now if the state has a lot of them for instance like MN's deer, then let the NR's in and hunt them (with higher license fees of course), however if it's a lower population like MN moose, then the Residents should be allowed priority

I agree with everyone on the N.R. licenses in MN, way to cheap

[can it be luck?]

I guess it's settled, WI has no "goofy" laws that discriminate against NR's unlike the opinions of others about other state's laws.

------------------
http://groups.msn.com/canitbeluck