North Dakota Fishing and Hunting Forum banner
1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This bill will be heard in the House on Jan. 23.It would mandate opening the pheasant season the Saturday after duck season opens.The first 7 days residents only could hunt GNF lands...PLOTS

Any thoughts on this one?
If the duck season opens like it did this year,the pheasant season would have opened on Sept. 28.Even if the duck season opened on the 28th, the pheasant season would be just like the governor wanted this year...1 week earlier.
This seems like an outfitter bill to get a 1 week earlier opening and placate residents by opening GNF land for res. only.I wouldn't be surprised if Cannonball proposed this!!! This is pheasantgate all over again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,645 Posts
Todd Porter is a good man with an A rating on wildlife issues, but this bill is not like him. I am am deadset against it. No way, no how, no where. Pheasantgate. Pheasantgate. Remember Pheasantgate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,645 Posts
David-WHY??????????This bill is the exact thing we fought so hard last winter in Pheasantgate. A skunk by any other name is still a bad bill. It would make us farmers go nuts. It would be the exact thing that Cannonball wants. It would expand commercial hunting (there has to be a better name for that phrase) dramatically. It would shrink access. It would play right into the hands of the crazy politicians who flaunt outfitters in your face. I just got a letter from a farmer at Mott. His story about effects of (how about market hunting) would make a farmer cry.

Porter is a good man-I can only guess he traded this sucker for some other piece of legislation. But it has to die. Quickly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
It really baffles my mind to see how short of a memory some people have. Where were these people 10 months ago? I think the people of ND explained loud and clear why they were not in favor of an early pheasant season. It is too bad we are wasting valuable time and energy on this dumb issue...again. We have so many extremely important outdoor issues that will play a critical role in the future of ND outdoors but yet we are talking about shooting pheasant chicks in early October. I hope I'm not the only one that is puzzled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
I like the idea of an earlier opener. In fact, when I asked my two Springer Spaniels they liked it even more than me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,062 Posts
Here's another question. How many of the outfitters in the heavily hunted SW area of the state are going to allow access to their leases, at a reasonable cost for the average ND hunter, knowing full well that there are NR hunters waiting to pay big money the next week? Sorry, this is a bad bill. The resident sportsmen made it clear they are not in favor of opening the season early. I think 3 months is an adequate amount of time to harvest the amount of birds anyone needs. How about making the season longer and allowing resident only hunting from mid Dec through Jan. if the intent is to make the resource more available to residents. That'll never happen because the big $$$ NR's don't want to hunt in the cold. This bill needs to be defeated quickly.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I'm not so sure FH.The interesting part of this bill is the first 7 days would be res. only on the PLOTS acres.I would think res hunters would favor this part.After all,the first week of waterfowl was res. only.
As far as opening it a week earlier than now,that wasn't why res were opposed to it.It was because the governor did it as a favor to Cannonball and tried to sneak it past us without public input.An extra week might not be so bad,especially if it doesn't hurt the resource.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,326 Posts
If they made the first week resident only period I would definitely support this bill. The way it's written now is only going to make getting access a lot worse. It only encourages the buying and leasing of land by outfitters and NR's.

I would have no problem opening the season earlier, as long as that time is allocated for residents like the waterfowl opener. I think we should definitely look into this. Also, we can't forget that Pheasantgate was a joke for how the extra week was passed and why it was passed. If there is no harm towards the resource by opening the season a week earlier I'd be all for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,645 Posts
redlabel, cute answer. My labs felt the same way but do you really want advice from someone who licks themselves dry?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
Dick, I'm not sure about the licking themselves dry part, but I do know that I will take the advice of these two gals because of the way their noses work. I answered for them because Maggie doesn't know how to type but if you say the word pheasant she runs to the window and looks outside, or if you blow a duck call she starts scanning the skies looking for the ducks.

Anyway I hope this bill passes as it is stated. My take on the bill is Mr. Porter is trying to save the first week of hunting on PLOTS for the residents before someone else introduces a bill that just opens the season for everyone 1 week after the waterfowl opener. If so then I think Mr. Porter is trying to do us all a favor. Opening the season a week earlier does not hurt the resource, hunters shooting non-colored birds hurts the resource.

I was sure glad we took advantage of the early waterfowl season last year since it was shortened so much by the weather in October.

I think this year I will plan to hunt the early goose season and hit the ducks hard when they open. Then I think I will do like several on here are suggesting and go to Canada to hunt geese and then come back and hunt ducks or pheasants depending on the freeze up.

It should be an interesting year as I am discussing with the Game & Fish Department the possibility of signing up 480 acres of awfully good pheasant and grouse habitat for the PLOTS program.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
It is to early. The way I understand it private land would be open to anybody. Would this not promote more leasing and buying of land by outfitters and non-res? If they are bound and determined to get more gun time add two weeks to the end of the season. This looks like Hoven has to pay those people back or else and porter is his wipping boy on this one. Can they not get it threw there head the sportsmen like it yhe way it is.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I believe catman is correct.The season would be open for everybody,but the GNF land would be residents only the first 7 days.With a limited number of wardens it would be difficult to enforce.
I'm not totally against a week earlier opening.An extra week of warm weather hunting would be OK.I was against the governors idea only because of the way he did it not the idea itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
389 Posts
In my poll of people opposing the pheasant opener there was largely sentiment about the way that it was done. I think that Mr. Porter heard the same thing and is trying to start fresh with this issue and do it the right way. Now, we have a chance to write our legislators and let them know how we want them to vote on this.

My labs and I really have to agree with redlabel's springers and Ken W on this one.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
By the way as long as we are talking dogs...my GWP likes the idea too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,645 Posts
I am against 1223. I believe the NDWF opposes it also. The NDGF upland biologist spoke against it when the boys had that private meeting with Hoeven last year. All other states have later season than we do right now.

Farmers do not want the road traffic when they are moving combines with wide headers and also loaded trucks. Remember that soybeans, corn and sunflowers are still standing and harvest time is critical. We don't need to aggravate farmers, they are our allies. These standing crops are bird cover but not huntable habitat. Also the cattails are not frozen hard enough to walk in yet.

The early opener would play right into Cannonball. All the residents flush the birds off PLOTS right onto the fee hunting ground around it.

If this bill were targeted to residents, it would leave the opener as is, give the whole first week to residents only, and extend the season in January.
We need to spread out the number of hunters in time and space. HB 1223
does the exact opposite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I personally see a gold lining in this cloud for the pay-for-hunt group. If we allow reidents only for the first week, guides and land leasing operations will not allow residents to hunt for free (who would expect them to). So now you have residents crowded onto the little public land that holds birds, shooting the crap out of them, and running them over to the nearest piece of posted/pay-for-hunt land where they won't get shot at. That is, they won't get shot until the next weekend when the guides will have every bird in the state on their land.

This is my belief, all game is property of the people of ND (actually, this is the law). So it should be illegal for private organizations to charge money to access a public good. I am all for farmers/landowners having full control over their property and if they do not want hunters on it, that's fine. But where do people get the audacity to charge me money to access public property?
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top