Other views: Landowner has final say about who hunts the land
By Amber Krapp
The Forum - 02/06/2003
In response to the attention Senate Bill 2048 (hunting pressure concept) has recently brought about, I offer input as a 22- year- old North Dakota resident.
You might recognize my last name and guess that I might be Connie Krapp's daughter. She got a few responses to her Jan. 29 column in The Forum. I am her daughter, but she has no clue I am writing this commentary.
Growing up in rural North Dakota, I am familiar with hunting seasons. I am familiar with the excitement of the hunters, and I am familiar with hunters knocking on our door to ask if it is okay for them to hunt our land. I am also familiar with the response they get from my parents. Never, not once, have my parents denied a hunter on the land if they ask permission! That is why I am taking interest in SB 2048.
In response to a Jan. 31 letter by Dick Monson, I find it interesting that he could call my mom a "fee-hunting only kind of gal." I find that rude and immature, considering he has never met my mother and does not know the kind of person she is.
She and my dad have worked hard on the land that they own, and every landowner in North Dakota has a right to do as they please on their property. They are far from being gold diggers, and Monson and all other sportsmen would know this if they had any experience with them. Let me repeat again, they have never denied anyone who asked permission first access to their land.
My mother has every right to be a "fee-hunting only kind of gal" - after all, she and my dad have put time and effort into their land. But, "fee hunting" only? That is far from the case; they have taken special measures to nurture the land, and it's probably no accident that their land is good hunting land. My dad has worked hard and always makes sure that wildlife is given what it needs to thrive. He is a nature-loving type and the kindest person you'll meet. He has lived on that land his whole life, and knows the history of the land and every species of bird and mammal on it. He knows the habits of the wildlife - what they eat - everything. He takes great pride in his land and his love of nature. He is eager to share his knowledge of wildlife and North Dakota culture with everyone - residents and nonresidents alike. That's likely what makes his hunters love their visits to North Dakota.
Last year, my parents won a land conservation award. You think that comes without work? Yet even after all their hard work, not once have they ever turned down a resident hunter or charged them to use the land. Resident hunters are benefiting from my parents' hard work and they have never been charged or turned down. I have been home on weekends during hunting season and have answered the door to resident hunters. I've always had instructions that give the hunters directions to where they can have a good hunt, on my parents' land. For anyone to say that my parents "exploit" North Dakota's resources, well it's just trash talk.
I guess I haven't seen 300 deer in anyone's yard here in Fargo, but I obviously have not passed Daniel Bueide's (column, Jan. 31) yard. Whenever I go home there are that many deer running around on my parents' land. Exploiting the resources you say? How about "nurturing the resources"? How about landowners ignore their land and we'll watch the water holes dry up? There would be no birds and sportsmen wouldn't have anything to complain about. Maybe that's what should be done.
Restricting non-resident hunters in North Dakota is about as intelligent as it would be for Minnesota to restrict out-of-state people who enjoy the lakes. Or, for Montana to limit the use of the mountains to out-of-state tourists. Seems ridiculous considering there is plenty of the resource available, as there are plenty of waterfowl for both resident and non-resident hunters to all enjoy.
As a student at North Dakota State University I am friends with many people who attend NDSU and are not North Dakota residents. Yet, they come to school here and spend thousands of dollars in North Dakota. Why shouldn't they be able to come back with a North Dakota resident buddy for the weekend and be able to hunt?
And what about people like my brother? He is a pilot in the Air Force who is currently flying over Afghanistan serving our country. He is no longer a North Dakota resident and rarely makes it home. When he is allowed to come home to spend some time with family, is it right to deny him the chance to go hunting with my dad? I DON'T THINK SO. My brother, along with myself and my younger brother, have also put a lot of work into that land in the past and my older brother should be able to enjoy it when he gets an opportunity to be off duty.
Birds fly. They are just as much "ours" as the next state's resource. What will be next? We may as well build a wall around the state and live our lives in a shoe box.
Our state needs to optimize every chance it can get for its economy to grow. Turning our backs on the tens of millions of dollars non-resident hunters bring to our state each year doesn't seem like a step in the right direction to help the North Dakota economy.
Krapp is a North Dakota State University student from Pingree, N.D. She can be reached at [email protected]
-----------------------------------------------------
Other views: Resident hunters spend, too
By Joe Antonoplos
The Forum - 02/06/2003
WOW, The Forum finally answered the difficult question: "Who is more important to North Dakota's economy, the resident hunter or the non-resident hunter?" (Editorial, Jan. 23.) Thankfully they may have solved all of North Dakota's agricultural, economic, and population problems. The answer: the non-resident hunter.
The Forum proudly declares non-resident hunter expenditures to be "new money," an influx of money into the rural economy, while resident hunter expenditures are just a re-shuffling of existing North Dakota money. How could I have missed it? People who live, work, and pay taxes in this state are not important to North Dakota's rural economy. All we need to do is find a way for the rest of America to send us "new money!"
Wait, we already do that. North Dakota has a proud history of receiving more money from the federal government than we pay in. Yet, this is not quite enough. Perhaps we should ask North Dakota ex-patriots to send a portion of their "new money" salaries to the struggling North Dakota community of their choice.
I empathize with the economic plight of rural North Dakota. I am, however, offended that The Forum minimizes the economic impact of North Dakota resident hunters, myself included.
I grew up in North Dakota, graduated from North Dakota State University, married a North Dakota girl, and promptly moved away. We returned six years ago, ostensibly to be near family. The truth is that hunting brought me back, and hunting will keep me here.
I, like thousands of North Dakota hunters, consider quality hunting an important reason why we live here. Unfortunately, The Forum considers our money to be reshuffled, "old money." The Forum could not be further from the truth. Many resident hunters, including myself, are employed by out-of-state companies. Our salaries come from out of state. Everything we earn is "new money," not a reshuffling of existing resources. Certainly, no less important than non-resident hunter money.
I truly love North Dakota. Hunting North Dakota gives me the opportunity to spend my time and my "new money" in many rural communities. This past hunting season, I stayed in motels in Washburn and Carrington. I have dined in Sykeston, Wilton, Woodworth and many other small towns. I have purchased gas in almost every Cenex south of Highway 2. Not once was I asked if I was paying with "new money" or tired, old, reshuffled money.
I do not pretend to know what is the best solution to the resident hunter vs. non-resident hunter issue. I do know that hunting is changing in North Dakota. Hunting in North Dakota is changing from a pastime and way of life to a commodity. Prime areas that I used to hunt are now leased or fee hunting only. Other areas are, thankfully, enrolled in the PLOTS program. Residents and non-residents surround these areas every weekend. A farm near Oakes charges thousands of dollars to shoot a pen-raised trophy white tail buck. A ranch near Pingree will let you shoot a domesticated Bison, for a price.
Fortunately, these places are the exception not the rule. They are a warning sign of what might be in the future. Resident hunters want a role in how that future is managed.
North Dakota is a hunter's paradise. We have not yet become a state where only the wealthy have an opportunity to hunt, but if I look real hard in my North Dakota purchased binoculars, I can see it from here.
Antonoplos, Fargo, can be reached at [email protected]
By Amber Krapp
The Forum - 02/06/2003
In response to the attention Senate Bill 2048 (hunting pressure concept) has recently brought about, I offer input as a 22- year- old North Dakota resident.
You might recognize my last name and guess that I might be Connie Krapp's daughter. She got a few responses to her Jan. 29 column in The Forum. I am her daughter, but she has no clue I am writing this commentary.
Growing up in rural North Dakota, I am familiar with hunting seasons. I am familiar with the excitement of the hunters, and I am familiar with hunters knocking on our door to ask if it is okay for them to hunt our land. I am also familiar with the response they get from my parents. Never, not once, have my parents denied a hunter on the land if they ask permission! That is why I am taking interest in SB 2048.
In response to a Jan. 31 letter by Dick Monson, I find it interesting that he could call my mom a "fee-hunting only kind of gal." I find that rude and immature, considering he has never met my mother and does not know the kind of person she is.
She and my dad have worked hard on the land that they own, and every landowner in North Dakota has a right to do as they please on their property. They are far from being gold diggers, and Monson and all other sportsmen would know this if they had any experience with them. Let me repeat again, they have never denied anyone who asked permission first access to their land.
My mother has every right to be a "fee-hunting only kind of gal" - after all, she and my dad have put time and effort into their land. But, "fee hunting" only? That is far from the case; they have taken special measures to nurture the land, and it's probably no accident that their land is good hunting land. My dad has worked hard and always makes sure that wildlife is given what it needs to thrive. He is a nature-loving type and the kindest person you'll meet. He has lived on that land his whole life, and knows the history of the land and every species of bird and mammal on it. He knows the habits of the wildlife - what they eat - everything. He takes great pride in his land and his love of nature. He is eager to share his knowledge of wildlife and North Dakota culture with everyone - residents and nonresidents alike. That's likely what makes his hunters love their visits to North Dakota.
Last year, my parents won a land conservation award. You think that comes without work? Yet even after all their hard work, not once have they ever turned down a resident hunter or charged them to use the land. Resident hunters are benefiting from my parents' hard work and they have never been charged or turned down. I have been home on weekends during hunting season and have answered the door to resident hunters. I've always had instructions that give the hunters directions to where they can have a good hunt, on my parents' land. For anyone to say that my parents "exploit" North Dakota's resources, well it's just trash talk.
I guess I haven't seen 300 deer in anyone's yard here in Fargo, but I obviously have not passed Daniel Bueide's (column, Jan. 31) yard. Whenever I go home there are that many deer running around on my parents' land. Exploiting the resources you say? How about "nurturing the resources"? How about landowners ignore their land and we'll watch the water holes dry up? There would be no birds and sportsmen wouldn't have anything to complain about. Maybe that's what should be done.
Restricting non-resident hunters in North Dakota is about as intelligent as it would be for Minnesota to restrict out-of-state people who enjoy the lakes. Or, for Montana to limit the use of the mountains to out-of-state tourists. Seems ridiculous considering there is plenty of the resource available, as there are plenty of waterfowl for both resident and non-resident hunters to all enjoy.
As a student at North Dakota State University I am friends with many people who attend NDSU and are not North Dakota residents. Yet, they come to school here and spend thousands of dollars in North Dakota. Why shouldn't they be able to come back with a North Dakota resident buddy for the weekend and be able to hunt?
And what about people like my brother? He is a pilot in the Air Force who is currently flying over Afghanistan serving our country. He is no longer a North Dakota resident and rarely makes it home. When he is allowed to come home to spend some time with family, is it right to deny him the chance to go hunting with my dad? I DON'T THINK SO. My brother, along with myself and my younger brother, have also put a lot of work into that land in the past and my older brother should be able to enjoy it when he gets an opportunity to be off duty.
Birds fly. They are just as much "ours" as the next state's resource. What will be next? We may as well build a wall around the state and live our lives in a shoe box.
Our state needs to optimize every chance it can get for its economy to grow. Turning our backs on the tens of millions of dollars non-resident hunters bring to our state each year doesn't seem like a step in the right direction to help the North Dakota economy.
Krapp is a North Dakota State University student from Pingree, N.D. She can be reached at [email protected]
-----------------------------------------------------
Other views: Resident hunters spend, too
By Joe Antonoplos
The Forum - 02/06/2003
WOW, The Forum finally answered the difficult question: "Who is more important to North Dakota's economy, the resident hunter or the non-resident hunter?" (Editorial, Jan. 23.) Thankfully they may have solved all of North Dakota's agricultural, economic, and population problems. The answer: the non-resident hunter.
The Forum proudly declares non-resident hunter expenditures to be "new money," an influx of money into the rural economy, while resident hunter expenditures are just a re-shuffling of existing North Dakota money. How could I have missed it? People who live, work, and pay taxes in this state are not important to North Dakota's rural economy. All we need to do is find a way for the rest of America to send us "new money!"
Wait, we already do that. North Dakota has a proud history of receiving more money from the federal government than we pay in. Yet, this is not quite enough. Perhaps we should ask North Dakota ex-patriots to send a portion of their "new money" salaries to the struggling North Dakota community of their choice.
I empathize with the economic plight of rural North Dakota. I am, however, offended that The Forum minimizes the economic impact of North Dakota resident hunters, myself included.
I grew up in North Dakota, graduated from North Dakota State University, married a North Dakota girl, and promptly moved away. We returned six years ago, ostensibly to be near family. The truth is that hunting brought me back, and hunting will keep me here.
I, like thousands of North Dakota hunters, consider quality hunting an important reason why we live here. Unfortunately, The Forum considers our money to be reshuffled, "old money." The Forum could not be further from the truth. Many resident hunters, including myself, are employed by out-of-state companies. Our salaries come from out of state. Everything we earn is "new money," not a reshuffling of existing resources. Certainly, no less important than non-resident hunter money.
I truly love North Dakota. Hunting North Dakota gives me the opportunity to spend my time and my "new money" in many rural communities. This past hunting season, I stayed in motels in Washburn and Carrington. I have dined in Sykeston, Wilton, Woodworth and many other small towns. I have purchased gas in almost every Cenex south of Highway 2. Not once was I asked if I was paying with "new money" or tired, old, reshuffled money.
I do not pretend to know what is the best solution to the resident hunter vs. non-resident hunter issue. I do know that hunting is changing in North Dakota. Hunting in North Dakota is changing from a pastime and way of life to a commodity. Prime areas that I used to hunt are now leased or fee hunting only. Other areas are, thankfully, enrolled in the PLOTS program. Residents and non-residents surround these areas every weekend. A farm near Oakes charges thousands of dollars to shoot a pen-raised trophy white tail buck. A ranch near Pingree will let you shoot a domesticated Bison, for a price.
Fortunately, these places are the exception not the rule. They are a warning sign of what might be in the future. Resident hunters want a role in how that future is managed.
North Dakota is a hunter's paradise. We have not yet become a state where only the wealthy have an opportunity to hunt, but if I look real hard in my North Dakota purchased binoculars, I can see it from here.
Antonoplos, Fargo, can be reached at [email protected]
