No public land hunting 1st week in ND

[huskminn]

I have been dealing with those types of restrictions in SD for years.

Two 5-day hunting periods, which is fine with me. I can't afford to spend that much time out there anyway. You have to pick your second period at the time you buy the license, but I always pick the last week of the season because you can move that second period up at any point in the season.

If states insist on limiting hunting time, what would make more sense to me is to see a two-day, five-day, ten-day, etc. license. That would be more user friendly and they could graduate the fees accordingly.

Residents get first crack at the birds in SD, as well. I've got no problem with that. After all, the birds are South Dakota state property and therefore belong to the residents, not to non-residents. They have every right to do anything they want as far as regulation.

Yes, some businesses may suffer due to reduced NR visitation, but, those businesses are basing their revenues on the existence of a limited resource: wild game. As increasing NR pressures negatively affect wild game availability and hunting access availability, these businesses will suffer.

States are trying to figure out ways to balance the needs and wants of their businesses, hunters/anglers and game populations. In recent years, NR waterfowl hunting has nearly quadrupled in North Dakota. That trend can't continue without negatively affecting populations, hunter/landowner relations and a pleasant hunting experience.

North Dakota is trying NOT to become Minnesota, in case everyone hasn't yet noticed.

[Guest]

Again, limitations and certain restrictions are fine and they become a necessary part of N/R and even resident hunting and fishing.

As our population increases and especially as habitats change and are reduced the need to regulate becomes common sense.

I fully understand the logic behind these facts, however, with specific regard to ND they screwed-up in a huge way and now, we have a right to voice our opinions, like it or not.

Nothing is "fair" to everyone That would become really boring and quite surreal.

I like your view on graduated costs for extended usage--it is the most eqitable for everyone.

Thanks for your thoughts, Huskmn!

------------------
Chells

[Guest]

I would be willing to bet that all of you that are crying about ND regs would throw an abslolute fit if MN had the quality of hunting that they do and were all of a sudden over-come by 30,000 + n/r hunters.

If you do not like other state's rules, than stay in MN. If you do not like the quality of MN hunting, than work to change it.

[Dano2]

HEH, HEH,, that ooooold Walter anyway

[GAR]

huskminm; right on, couldn't of said it better. Walter you right also, to bad some of these other guys can't see the whole picture. You want to have no restrictions, move to North Dakota!!! I'm Hunting there this year, and will have a blast as allways. GAR

[BLACKJACK]

I have no problem with ND restricting hunters, too many hunters cuts down on the quality of the hunt, but I still think that MN should raise the cost of their non-resident fishing and hunting licences for all non-residents, just to keep the resident hunting licence fees down, and to raise money for wildlife programs. Do the 5-day licence thing for fishing too, theres lots of competion for lakeshore property, the old duffs from out of state that are too cheap will be replaced by someone else.

[Guest]

Blackjack you are exactly right. Too many hunters and fisherman does lower the quality of the sports. THat is precisly why MN does not have the quality of huning/fishing that the other states have. Look at the resident populations and the numbers of sportsmen of the "quality states" It does not even come close to MN. If we raise our nr fees, who is going to pay them?

Again, the problem is in the state of MN, not the other states.

[Dano2]

I'm sick of you people adding the fishing part in on your little minnesota hunting sucks slams example- "HUNTING/FISHING"

Its a no-brainer that ND and SD and maybe some others beat out MN on bird hunting, but its also a NO-BRAINER that MINNESOTA , YES I SAID MINNESOTA ,offers some of the BEST fishing and whitetail deer hunting in the ENTIRE FRICKEN COUNTRY!!!!!!

NUFF SAID

[Guest]

Dano,

Easy tiger: It is obvious that you have not fished or hunted deer in many, if any other states. Try fishing in South Dakota or Deer hunting in Iowa. Odds are you will see more MN people partaking than residents. And we wonder why they crank up the N/R fees for both??

[Surface Tension]

Mn is bulging with deer and has more public land to hunt then ND,SD and Iowa combined. Mn Deer Hunters go out of state to expand their hunting days.

NR's come to Mn to fish for two reasons.
Its great diverse fishier and most importantly its a quality experience to fish in beautiful country. Thats right, we got what NR's want. A gazillion lakes in a forest region that some call wilderness.

Guess which state was number one in Pheasant numbers? It was Mn. We've lost habitat from making as much land as possible "productive" by farmers. Thats a whole nother story and under certain circumstances farmers cant take all the blame. Urban sprawl has taken its toll on Pheasants too. We need more nesting and winter cover. If we reclaimed 1/10th of the sloughs that have been drained I think our pheasants numbers would jump dramatical. CRP is a temporary fix that provides habitat for a short period during summer and fall. Come winter its covered in snow. In fact CRPs inception had nothing to do with creating habitat, lawmakers looked for support from sportsman with the sell it creates habitat. I'd rather we use money to acquire lands and return that land back to areas with year round habitat.

[Guest]

Boy, between the bold pheasant numbers and public land in MN it really makes me wonder why one would pay the cost of going out of state.

[metrojoe]

I think you have missed walters point.

As residents we are already elbow to elbow during most hunting seasons. We may have more public land but we also have more resident that use this land.

I'm bear hunting on public land and on opener it was a complete fiasco. There were OHVer's everywhere. You'd have a hard time convincing me this doesn't effect the bears.

Why would a NR pay for that?

[This message has been edited by metrojoe (edited 09-04-2003).]

[huskminn]

Chells,

I can certainly appreciate your position...thanks for your kind comments.

Dano,

Minnesota has tremendous fishing opportunities, no doubt. MN would be the freshwater fishing Mecca if it had the small resident population of ND or SD. However, what about truly quality fishing? I live in the Cities.....how long do I drive to find good fishing opportunity, some keepable fish, few people and an overall pleasant experience?

Four hours finds me all of those things in SD. Walleyes, perch, crappies, northerns, LMB, SMB, bluegills, catfish........drive another couple hours and you've got salmon and trout thrown in the mix. No lines at boat ramps, little competition on the lakes, lower motel/restaurant costs. Oh, and this is kind of important to me, virtually no mercury or PCB's in the lakes.

I like fishing in MN and I do as much as I can, but, my extended trips are always out of state because I just get sick of all the people I have to deal with to find a quiet place to fish in MN.

As far as whitetail deer....there are certainly a lot of deer in MN. Every year there are some quality bucks taken. If you've got private land to hunt, then you're probably good to go. I don't and I have given up on public land as I don't care for that experience.....not worth it to me anymore. Sure, I could drive 7 hours up north and find some public land that I had to myself.....but, as long as I'm driving that far, I'll go out of state. I guess, in my mind, there is a reason why I've taken 23 deer in 10 seasons in SD, but only 1 in 6 seasons in MN. Maybe I'm just a bad hunter in the north woods....maybe the hunting really is better elsewhere, though.

I would agree that MN has one of the highest populations of deer in the freaking country, but I don't think it has "some of the best" deer hunting.

Anyway.....I guess I've gotten pretty far off topic with this.......

[Guest]

Bingo!!!! Metro and Huskminn, you have both hit the nail on the head. The overcrowding that we see in MN is exactly what the other states are trying to prevent. I cannot blame them one bit.

[Crossin' Eyes]

O.K. Walter.
I agree with you 100%. I've read every post in this thread. Some twice. Back to the original issue. If ND and SD raised fees and shortened seasons for NR hunters to increase the quality of the experience for everyone, and we've already come to the unanimous decision that Minnesota is overcrowded and lines at boat ramps are too long etc... Then Minnesota should jack up NR fishing fees and shorten the NR season. Period. I hope Pawlenty and other Minnesota law makers will even the playing field.

[First Ice-Mike]

I know this will never happen, but I'd like to see all MN outdoorsmen boycott ND for a year or two. Then they would see that it is MN $$$ that contributes to a large part of their success and survival. The only problem would be the negative effect on some of the nice people who like having us come out and spend money in their small communities. This is all one big [PoorWordUsage]in' match. We're [PoorWordUsage]in' with a fire hose and they're [PoorWordUsage]ing with a straw. They need us more than we need them. As for pheasant hunting - there is no need to visit either of the dakotas for quality hunting. Minnesota will have excellent pheasant hunting- I haven't seen this many birds since I was a little kid. I say keep our $$ in Minnesota and help keep our hunting on the rise. Our enemy is not the rural ND farmer or businessman. It is the stuck-up ND cityslicker, the arrogant ND outfitter, and the Minnesota wannabe ND government.

FI

[Shorelunch]

I agree First Ice. It's not the folks in Watford City or Garrison, it's the Ed Schultz listening, wann-a-be big city "sportsmen" in Fargo and Grand Forks who want to stick it to MN.

I go back home to ND to see family and to hunt and I imagine for a majority of MN hunters that go to ND, it's the same situation - to see family or friends and enjoy the hunting.

It's the Fargo and Grand Forks day hunters - and especially the outfitters who gain the most. Hunting is becoming a big dollars sport and it's getting more and more difficult for the father and son or a couple of non-millionare buddies to enjoy quality hunting.

Maybe not Tony Dean . . . but a lot of the big hunting/fishing names (Babe Winkelman, Dreislein, Shara) are against this new law - let alone the thousands of outstate hunters who just want to go back to ND to see friends and family and enjoy some quality time in the field. Shame on you ND.

[Dano2]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I THINK tony dean is against it too.

I think i remember him making some comments over at the nodak forum awhile back, and there were some that didn't care for it too much.

But thats what I'll be doing this year, is handing my dollars over to my own state(mn)

Maybe we dont have groups of hundreds of pheasants all over like western ND, but from what I hear, it sounds like it'll be darn good this year, and hopefully we end up with a few more mild winters to ehlp things along more.

Also wish they would figure something out as far as checmicals used on the aphids, something that wont be so deadly to the birds.
thanks

[wallycronk]

Crossin, your idea of jacking fees is good in theory, but I think ultimately would end up hurting only the resort owners and other small businesses MN. I do not think that is what we want. MN sportsmen and women need to pull together and put all resources, ie: time and money into the orgs (pheasants forever, D.U., etc.) that work to improve quality hunting/fishing, instead of throwing all of that money out of state.

We could then take the high road, and have the last laugh.

Waltercronkite

[Shorelunch]

Where are Pheasants Forever and DU's voice in this issue? I have yet to hear a voice from them during a time when a state is taking away hunting opportunities from their members.

I am hunting ND twice this year - September and October, but am looking forward to hunting MN later in the year.

[wallycronk]

Shorelunch, I am assuming we have not heard their voices because it would be a conflict of interest that they would rather not be involved in. Can you imagine what would happen if they took one states side on a subject as sensitive as this one?

Since you have such strong feelings against ND, maybe you should start an org. in which MN residents apply what they would have spent on ND's fees and put that money towards land acquisitions in MN.

Just a thought, and there is now correct answer.

[Crossin' Eyes]

Good Morning. Remembering Sept 11,2001.....

I agree with you Walter. I've been a PF member for a lot of years and have done all I can to support it. One of the things Minnesotans struggle with is the diversity of the natural resources. In the southern part of the state you have lots and lots of flat crop land and argueably some of the most fertile soil anywhere. This coupled with a short growing season forces farmers to till up more land and plant more crops. The result is less habitat and land to hunt. Now add in the population density compared to a state like ND or SD. It puts a lot of hunters elbow to elbow on public lands, and at times, can lead to conflicts which taint the hunting experience. In my opinion it is the single biggest reason more hunters don't stay in Minnesota. I grew up in Owatonna and during my high school years when CRP was big, we had numerous successful hunts and there seemed to be plenty of spots and birds for everyone. When CRP went away it hurt the bird population and left little land for everyone to arm wrestle over. Last year I had less time to hunt because of my job. I got out Pheasant hunting a total of 4 times and every time I went to Iowa. Why? Simple, I wanted to see and shoot birds. Now my job has moved me to West Central Wisconsin and even less Pheasants than SE Minnesota. I'll go to Iowa again this year. Here's an idea....We are all Americans and **** pround of it. Every state has something unique to offer, whether its fishing, or hunting, or whatever. What about a United States Hunting license that with the proper habitat stamps and such is good in any state in the Union. A pipe dream I know, but Hey, if I can't dream then what?

------------------
Good Fishin!
Crossin

[cdnfisherman]

Hey guys..

Shorelunch and others....I totally understand your situation. I have been in that situation before and am dealing with it. I moved back to ND from MN 2 years ago....partially for the outdoor opportunities that exist here (hunting/fishing) and partially because I think this is a better place to raise my 3 daughters.

I am originally from Saskatchewan. I go back there to hunt every year...guess what...now I am a non resident. I pay their NR fees....sure they are high...but I pay for the quality of the hunt I get. If ever I feel that the hunt is not worth the fee...then I will quit going. I can't even buy a big game license because to hunt big game I am required to hire a guide. I can't afford it so don't do it.

I know that a good portion of MN hunters that come to ND are originally from ND....sorry but too bad....if you choose not to live here then pay the fee!! Our G & F Dept is doing what is necessary to protect the quality of hunting in ND. Just my opinion.

I lived in West Central MN for 5 years. While I did, I paid the NR fee to hunt ND. I did so because the quality of hunting in ND was worth it....still would be IMO.

The government in MN needs to initiate some programs that would encourage farmers to set aside land...don't lay drain tile in all fields....encourage CRP, CREP type programs. There is no reason that West Central MN and the MN River Valley cannot produce huge amounts of pheasants/ducks.

For whoever said that ND has a "Minnesota wanna-be government"......all I can say is WHATEVER!! LOL Come take a look at the results of the initiative of the ND government and the G & F Dept...ie)PLOTS programs, etc. We've got you beat by a mile!

Again...Just my opinions.
Clarkie

[Shorelunch]

No, I'm not against ND, heck I'm still a Sioux hockey fan. I was born and grew up their, went to college in SD and moved back to ND for a year afterwards in 1993. A lack of job opportunities in the marketing/advertising areas made me move to Minneapolis. Growing up there, I know the thoughts and voices of ND very well.

I just thinks it's a shame that the ND G&F department and legislature allowed outfitters and a few hunters from the RR valley to ruin the pheasant opener for a lot of families and friends that annually travel back home to ND (espicially during the teacher's conference weekend). I still love coming back to ND every year - and I REALLY hope my now 2 year old gets to expeience the same in 10 years.