Got to talk to the Govenor today on KNOX Radio

Has anyone ever heard any possible zone plans ???

This could get weird if they let this committee or the Legislature decide the zones ???

Did HPC ever address them ???

Would they be based on where the water is ???

Where the ducks are ??? In the Fall ???

Where there are rooms & accomodations ???

Where ever a guide is, that is not booked solid for the entire season ???

Where there is public lands to handle the #'s ???

Where communities work with Tourism & Hospitality & G&FD to prove the need & open access they can help provide to the NR's & Residents Freelancers ???

1st come 1st served ???

A lottery system if all want to go to the same few places - with a 1st - 2nd - 3rd choice ??? with weighted system like for deer if your not drawn ???

I think most of these things can be worked out

But I don't think guides should be gauranteed any licenses - REMEMBER - I bet less than 5 % of Non Residents Use guides - & Less than 1% of residents use them

I do not have any input on the zone issue, but this would not surprise me. I have mixed feeling on to many changes to this legislation. We will have to wait and see. My fear is that it will come out of committe and go to the floor for a vote before we have a chance to digest what is happening.

On the Red Head, I for one will not support him in any shape way or form. He would do more to hurt freelance hunting in this state than our current leadership. This should have been evident to all that have lisened to him for the past 2 years. He has done more to promote fee hunting on his radio program than the tourisum and GNDA have.

I have some personel info that I will share if he make a run that will show just who the real Red head is.

I think that maybe surface views on our current Gov.stand on the hunting issue may be best left until all the dust settles, andwe can weigh the evils that we may face with someone else at the helm.

Change for the sake of change may get us something worse? I do beleive that some of our other elected officals do need to feel the same heat that the GOV. is feeling. Many have become almost smug and arrogant and are getting reelected on name recognition only or party affiliation.

We as sportsmen need to be more involved and aware of other issues that are influencing votes for or against the things we support.

When I was young and picking up my date for the evening her father imparted these word of wisdom." I am a forgiving man, but I never forget, and I always get even or ahead." Something to take away from this session.

Fetch...one thing we were told at the hearing last week was that the governor wants nothing to do with that 25% option in 2048.He feels no matter which way he goes on it...half the people will be ticked off.I wouldn't be suprised to see that changed.I'm sure he would rather have the GNF have that option so they can take the blame.He felt a lot of heat last spring.

During the hearing they also brought up the zones.In fact the committee members thought it would probably be OK to put in more zones like deer.
I don't like that idea.Deer don't migrate,ducks do.

When that bill by Rep. Nelson was introduced to require non-res. to put land descriptions on licenses the non-res. on the national websites were really PO'D.Almost all the non-res. I've talked to hate the idea of zones more than the cost of the license,caps or number of days.
An example...last year we had an early freeze the last week of Oct. The birds all left and here sat all those non-res. screwed.They all went home unhappy.

They would prefer no zones at all.Let them go where the birds are.I told Rep. Hunskor on Thurs. that if there were zones the lines should run north-south,not east-west like they do now.That way they could move south with the birds if there is an early freezeup.It would still spread out the hunters but would let them move with the birds.Say three zones,with the lines on Hyws 281,and 83.

The need for guides and outfitters in the sporting world is a nessasary thing. We have many reputable services in this state that are assests and help in creating habitat for the overall benifit of all species. However the trend and problem area's are coming from a segment with money and influence in putting forth agenda's that will benifit large commerical operations that are demostrating a single principal. Anything and everthing for money.

The paid control of 100,000 plus acres by one outfitter who then restricted access for deer hunting causing other area landowners continued depradation problems. Promoting legislation to require all non residents to use a guide for hunting in ND, promotion of land descriptions as a requirment of licensing which would benifit the guiding industy only. This is only some examples of the industy that you say we need to obtain comprimise.

Ed's intent to promote rural economic development on the back of a resource that is as volitale as waterfowl cannot be sustained. The current dry cycle across ND by USFW estimates will reduce duck numbers by 50 percent this fall if things stay the course. Loss of water will concentrate ducks increasing the current strain for quality access. Do you believe that only those that can afford the $300.00 a day fee charged by many benifts all sportsmen?

If the information on Cannonball is not correct, I am sorry and will apologize even though I was not the one that posted it. I will however stand behind my and others post that say ED is not a benifit to the freelance hunter resident or nonresident of this state, past positions and his own statements bear this fact out. I believe he thinks that he is, but those that understand that this is not a money only issue will probally agree with me.

You show great loyalty in coming to his defense and this is a great trait to have. I thank you for sharing your thoughts and point of view, even if they differ from mine.

Mr. Gilmore- First of all, I would like to compliment you on the article you wrote in the Forum. It was well written and I agree with you 100%. I didn't want to come across as an advocate for outfitters. I apologize, for this was not my intention. I sincerely share your veiw.

I am deeply disturbed by the increasing amount of land being devoured by the fiscal motives of some outfitters. This issue needs to be dealt with. I cannot speak for Ed, but I couldn't ever see him condone development at the expense of our precious resources, which I feel are currently being exploited beyond sustenance.

The guiding industry has already taken more than their share, and therefore, passing SB 2048 in its original form is a comprimise. The point I wanted to make is that insults and negativity are counterproductive. Armed with this type of attitude we will develop enemies and the farmers and landowners will veiw are cause as motivated by greed.

Ed understands the importance of hearing both sides and maintaining friendships, and if he appears to be on the side of the outfitters . . . well, we'll have to do something about that. It is our job to provide information and educate people about our cause.
You, Mr Bueide and many others do this quite well. Keep up the good work!