[Fetch]

I see you liked my "commercial" at the Grand Forks meeting last night ??? I believe you were not listening very closely, or I was shaking like a rooster had just exploded at my feet while speaking :smile:

What I said was, I echoed all the speakers before me & did'nt want to waste alot of time, cause all I have said & believe in, is on the internet, at this site. The internet is now a powerful tool, to bring us together. The only other site for ND is sponsored by commercial interests, guide / outfitters & is CENSORED. This new site has expirenced - respected hunters, that come from all over the state & other states. I invited all, to go to this site & read what we / I think. These things have been discussed for along time. Sure there are problems - But there are also answers & solutions. This site is not just whining or complaining. But people who have ideas to make ND better.

Sorry ! you saw it as a commercial - also sorry, if you can't see thru, what that other site is about ??? I have no financial interest, or gain to be had from this site. I just see real people, who have similar intersts & ideals, about what would be best for the future of ND hunting. More can be presented here, than a 6 or 7 minute speech, to a crowd of hunters (who have trouble agreeing on much of anything - most of the time)

I also did not feel or hear alot of whining or b#tching last night. I thought Mr Hildebrand, while a nice guy & a good administrator & truely interested in maintaining the outdoors in ND. I think he deserved to be blasted & told straight out - that is not his only job. To go with the political flow & only maintain things, as a temporary position, until he retires. We need strong leadership & new ideas & courage to try new things & the political expertise, to get them done.

How sad! were those that spoke in favor of the early opener ??? Most have no clue what the real problems, or concerns are in ND. I know one was a real piece of work, as a land owner. Constantly mad at the government (especially the USFWS) & I believe a abuser of their laws ??? & one of those, that had his land posted with the signs, that took his frustration out on hunters. With hope it would send a message to the powers that be, to change things, to the way he wanted them. He also missed all the points being made & tried to twist it into a landowner vs hunter problem. Also a city vs rural problem. Also a East vs West problem. Which is so far from the reality of those, that gave heart felt testimony at these meetings. At the last meeting in GF he said he had a friend in Mott that got him on land to hunt - So he had no proplems getting on land ??? ??? ??? Duh! but he forgot to include that last night. I hope most at these meetings were not influenced by the likes of someone like this. It's really sad & a negative detriment to a otherwise positive / productive meeting.

[ This Message was edited by: Fetch on 2002-03-15 13:05 ]

 

[redlabel]

Mr. Fetch:

You were correct in stating I must not have been listening very closely when you spoke at the Grand Forks meeting Wednesday evening. When you spoke, it was later in the meeting, and so many people had said the same things that I wasn't paying full attention when you started speaking. I was listening though and heard and enjoyed your "commercial". I saw it as a commercial because that is exactly what it was. It was designed to have wide popular appeal to the people at the meeting.

If you did not hear a lot of whining and b#tching Wednesday I'm wondering what part of the meeting you missed. The President of the Grand Forks County Wildlife Federation started it out and those that followed, while not echoing his tone, if they weren't whining and b#tching, sure were doing a lot of complaning.

I am wondering what process you used to arrive at the conclusion that anyone that spoke in favor of the opener doesn't have a clue what the real problems are. One purpose of the meeting was to gather testimony from those for and against the opener. That's what they were doing and should be able to voice there opinion without personal attacks as to their intelligence.

Sorry but on this one I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Fetch]

The process is called an opinion (like azz holes we all have one ) :smile: & unlike the other site you spoke at about the commercial. Here you will learn you can really have &/or be one. :wink:

The one I mentioned, as a indivdual - but in general terms, used the same old negative drivel- cliches. & most of what he was trying to say had an agenda too. It's all also called politics. It is to bad it has now reached us. & this issue has launched a "were mad as Hell & not taking it anymore attitude towards the ND G&FD" but is it their job to work for the people of ND (majority) or for out of state & a small minority of for profit people ???

Just about everyone opposed to this issue, has admitted for some time, the real issues are access. ( maybe you have not been keeping up, cause you read & post at the outfitters angler pal site :grin: ) I can see how that could happen. With a steady dose of of their slant on things.

I guess your right about agreeing we disagree - cause I do not see my remarks as a attack - If I were to attack - I'd most definetly have to delete myself or scold myself, as moderator of this forum. Or Chris could do it, if I ever really say what alot of us 100 to what- ??? 100 to 4 or 5 ??? Has'nt that been about the average ??? -really think.

Isn't this great we can disagree & even get mad, as long as we show restraint & some respect. Here we can get to some real HOT Topics. (I'm not really mad) but if I were. I have learned to still be able to converse without the flagrant NA, NA NA, NA NA NA,BS you so often see & read.

Welcome to a REAL Outdoors Site, with REAL people & REAL Hot Topics.

I have a feeling were more on the same page than not ??? If I'm wrong the ball is in your court.:grin:

[ This Message was edited by: Fetch on 2002-03-17 16:44 ]

 

[redlabel]

Mr. Fetch:

Contrary to your opinion we are not on the same page, in fact, I don't think we even read the same book.

I had originally thought to not respond to your post since you were responding here to a post I made on another website. I don't know what that means but I think some psychologist would have an answer to that.

When I say we are not on the same page, I mean that I have decided to take a realistic approach to the situation in North Dakota. My decision is rather than ignore the situation, and hide my head in the sand, and hope that the the hunting in good old ND never changes, I have decided to be a realist and have begun purchasing my own land for hunting.

I started this 12 years ago and have been purchasing some here and there and now am in the process of selling those parcels and consolidating to one area. It has not been a problem to sell hunting land and I can honostly say that I have had more inquiries from ND residents that non-residents. I have found that the land has been an excellent investment with some pretty fair returns.

The present whining over access is really quite funny to me. Let me explain.

The area of the state I am now concentrating in was an area I found about 4 years ago. I spent two weekends (one in July and the other in August) with 2 coolers full of pop, beer, and ice water and went out seeking hunting access in an area I had never hunted before. Those 2 weekends resulted in permission to hunt on over 13,000 acres. The next 2 years I had such good hunting that I decided to concentrate in this area and purchased some property there in 1999.

To date with my property I have planted trees, food plots, put out duck and goose nesting, had tenants leave part of the crop for food, and put out pheasants and hungarian partridge for stocking. To date I have had numerous people stop and seek permission to hunt the property and the only offers of help I have had came from 2 very good freinds. It is amazing how many people want to hunt when the game is available but it is also discouraging about the number of people that think they should be able to hunt the area because the are a resident of North Dakota. Permission is granted to hunt unless I have a group planning to hunt that area in the next three days or my children are planning to hunt that area.

To further show how far apart we are in our ideas I have the following opinions.

I do not want to see the non-resident waterfowler put into zones. If my son from Mpls or any of my friends came to ND to hunt and were not able to hunt with me because of a legislative decision to put them in zones I would probably post my land completely. The second thing I would personally like to see is the land use change to include all land automatically posted and hunting by permission only. I think that this is something that will occur in the present decade.

So while I believe we must agree to disagree I don't thing we're on the same page at all. I also don't believe that you can get mad at someone and still respect them. Showing someone respect is not included in the definition of being mad as proposed by Webster.

There are 3 types of people in the world. People who make things happen, people who watch things happen, and people who wonder what happened. Also, be careful when complaining about the guides getting to big for you should remember, IT'S NOT THE BIG THAT EAT THE SMALL, BUT THE FAST THAT EAT THE SLOW.

 

[Miller]

I don't normally respond in the hot topics, and I'm not sure if this is where I want to start, but redlabel you are part of the problem.

Most of us aren't rich enough to buy our own land. I agree that spending some time off season helps open doors, but when it comes time to pull out the wallet I can't. I could go to another state, make more money, and then buy land. But I chose to live here, make less money and have the chance to raise my kids here and enjoy the same opportunities I had.

I'm sorry, but your arrogance struck a nerve. I'm not the debating type, I'm just putting in my 2 cents.

 

[Fetch]

Yeah ! thats what it is going to turn into - He who can buy the most land (or lease) will get to hunt.

How do you know ? that I don't own hunting land ??? Maybe I have seen this coming to. (but it is sad) the how selfish & self centered we must become.

I have a feeling your land is posted tight (& I could care less) - You probably never hunted much around the state, or never scouted the state & hunted in the best areas ??? To really know what your missing. It's great FUN hunting one spot for the rest of your life

Seems having your friends & relatives being able to come & hunt with you, is more important than keeping a realistic # of NR hunters from using up our state & turning it into a state like they come from ???

Yep! if ya can't beat em join em -

I don't care to discuss this with you either :grin: because if you can't see from my 1st post - why I felt it nessessary to respond to your post at FB - than you are the one that would benefit from some psychologist (they have medication for your type now :grin: ) But most that can't think on their feet (or keyboard) :wink: usually have to turn to mudslinging because of lack of original thought -

If I were a gambler & took you up on your bet (on no tresspass law) - Say your hunting land against mine ??? I would be the one hunting & you would be out looking for the public stuff :grin:

You must be a disgruntled Farmer - or a were a NR yourself at one time - to think like that ??? Plus you have not read, or kept up with the proposed alternatives, to help famers - other than selling out - leasing to guides & outfitters - making hunting for $$$ a norm - cause someone always has more $$$ - I don't think $$$ is the only solution, like you.

The Big & the Fast are two things that ND folks can see thru - I believe most of us, in ND, don't want to live like that. Bigger is part of the problem, why this whole country is expirencing problems. Plus the fast usually have something to hide, or are on the run. I have faith in the people of ND to do the right things. If not, we have the referal vote.

PS..... your book just got real smutty - Nothing I'd subscribe to, or respect anyway shape or form.

If your an example of the fast :grin: (took a month to respond) than I think were OK & on a safe speed :grin:

[ This Message was edited by: Fetch on 2002-04-14 18:58 ]

 

[KEN W]

I respect your opinions Red Label...but we are not on the the same page either.

 

[redlabel]

Mr Miller:

Quite to the contrary I am not part of the problem. Every parcel of land that I presently own has more habitat and game now then when I purchased it. Land that I purchased and sold had more habitat and game on it than when I purchased it. The area around these parcels of land also benefitted by having more game as well.

You also don't have to be rich to buy or own land. You just need enough for a down payment, after that the rent or CRP payments can make your payments and taxes. Contract for deed works well also as it helps the owner with capital gains taxes. You don't need to move to another state to make more money, you can do it here. Work a few more hours. Get a part time job. Sell more if you're on commission. Get a few friends together and pool your funds. Send me a private message and I'd be glad to get together with you and show you how it can be done.

Sorry you took the message as arrogance, I was just explaining my point of view on the situation.

 

[redlabel]

Mr Fetch:

You should reread my message. I don't think you need to buy or lease land to hunt. A couple of weekends in the summer with some pop, beer, or water and a friendly manner is all it takes to secure permission to hunt.

I don't know if you own hunting land or not, and whether you do or not is irrelevant. Why do you think this is selfish and self-centered? Why is building a movie theatre and charging admission to see the movies called a business, but having a Bed & Breakfast and charging a package price for a stay and hunt is called selfish and/or self centered?

My land is not posted tight. If you reread my post you will catch the part about permission being granted unless I have a group (of friends not fee hunting) planning to hunt that area, or my children are planning to hunt that area.

You misinterpreted my paragraph about about the non-resident waterfowlers and zones. Again if you reread my post you will see I stated that I would not like them put in zones because IF my son that lives in Mpls or my friends from outside of North Dakota came and couldn't hunt with me on my property I would be very disappointed. If the numbers are restricted and they don't get a license this is not an issue. That's why I think the zone issue is not a good idea, it could make it so that family members could not hunt with each other.

I'm not a gambler so don't like to make bets. But again, sorry to repeat myself, if you reread my post you will see that I did not make an offer of a bet but rather said I think. This is an opinion of mine, no basis in fact, just an opinion.

Mr. Fetch, I am neither a disgruntled Farmer or a non-resident. Although I guess I was one for 2 1/2 years in the 70's. I took that position so I would be able to return to ND with a better job. I have also turned down several pretty good job offers to remain here as well. That's not to be taken as a complaint, just a fact. I also spent quite a few years living in the western part of the state and have some insights and an understanding of the west vs east viewpoint they have there. As far as hunting North Dakota I have a fair bit of experience as I have hunted all but 2 counties of the state in the 39 years I have been hunting.

Quite to the contrary I have kept up with the proposed alternatives. I attended the Judiciary B meeting in Fargo, the Grand Forks County Wildlife meeting, and the recent pheasant opener meeting in Grand Forks. Some of the ideas have merit and some do not. An access stamp is a good idea, but I'm not sure about the ethics class and signing an ethics agreement suggested by someone on this site.I also attend 4 game and fish advisory meeting each year. The one for our area and a second in another part of the state so I can understand if different parts of the state have different concerns.

I don't know how to get the farmers and ranchers to respond more. I think someone should do a survey to find out why they post or lease, and or what it would take for that to change. Maybe they don't not like opening the land to the public and losing control of their land. I also think that paying for habitat access is just fee hunting with another name put on it.

It makes me think that North Dakotans are not against fee hunting if it is affordable. Kind of like the access problem. The problem is access to prime hunting areas not access to hunting.

I also believe the ND Game and Fish Department has been working to give us alternatives such as the coverlocks and PLOTS
programs.

I'm not sure about the Big & the Fast. I do know that the world and country are changing and if you don't change and adapt you can get left behind or left out. I don't think we want to become known as the hunterasaurus.

Sorry you thought I was being slow to respond, it's just this time of year is very busy for me. Getting contracts and leases signed, planning food plots, and putting out wood duck boxes and goose and mallard nests take quite a bit of time. I'm also in the process of getting a new business off the ground and that has kept me quite busy. I only responded to try to clear up a couple of misconceptions you had and to clarify some incorrect conclusions you made so they would be clear to anyone else reading this. From your response I gather you don't give much respect to another person's viewpoint if it doesn't happen to aggree with yours.

[ This Message was edited by: redlabel on 2002-04-15 01:59 ]

 

[Fetch]

Well once again you & I are not really as far apart as you come off trying to present ???

In your last post - what were you bringing to the table - as far as solutions ??? Buy your own land to hunt on. & you like the idea of a no trespass law - Hmmmmmm not the most original or friendly ideas to a forum that is trying to look for ideas to help keep ND as it has been. Or even improve things for the future of landowners (especially farmers)

The pop & beer idea is OK, but hardly original - If you read most other things here - you would see, we are very adept in how to gain permission (I too have rarely ever been turned down)........I have heard the old, I'm saving my land for relatives & friends. Many times, I'm sure it has become a polite way to say No for many ???

I still have trouble - thinking of only hunting one place (like most of the rest of the country) after having the freedom to hunt a whole state. But I too am preparing to head that direction (but I think it's Sad.)

Imagine how many hunt your land ??? Lets say 5 for this example. IN five years that # goes to 30 would that be too many ??? Would the quality still be the same ??? How about 40 - 50 - 60 ??? When would enough be enough ??? & if all those friends & relatives wanted to come at the same time ??? When would you see the problem - how would you solve the problem ??? (Buy more land ???) I bet you would find ways to rotate, or draw names, or spread them out over the length of the season. & say up until very recently you could hunt lots of good places all around your land, but the other land owners found out they coud make a buck. Even tho it may not be legal or wise (in light of libility) or selling something they don't own etc. & all of a sudden you & your family & friends could no longer hunt those lands (Umm the pop & beer thing no longer cuts it - in this scenerio) But you think why does'nt the state find ways to compete with with the pay to hunt people by charging everyone more to be able to handsomely reward (pay) farmrs & landowners (many of whom donot hunt or have friends & relatives coming), & if they do ??? for maybe a week or two. What is wrong with this idea ??? Instead of just letting the free enterprise system of supply & demand & fees set accordingly win. Remember not everyone (in fact most) ND residents can't afford Redlabel shotguns or scotch.

I'm alittle concerned if everyone had their own small parcel of land & had the farmer leave (what portion of the crop ???) when would that be baiting ??? Or at least just shooting & not hunting (& YES there are lots of wealthier folks that do these things.) some could leave the whole crop :roll: But does that make it right - OK ???

Would they all be doing the improvements for the wildlife or would it be to make the shooting better, or easier, or more plentiful ??? Is that really Hunting ??? Sounds like the rest of the country to me. :sad:

 

[Field Hunter]

Fetch,
I think you are right on track responding to Redlabel. If he's lining up access to 13,000 acres and getting the ranchers to limit access then he is part of our problem.

Did you read the article in the Forum's Sunday edition this week? It was an article concerning a possible hunting season for prairie chickens. What do you think some of the non-residents from MN would thnk if a bunch of ND guys went in and leased-up or purchased all the prime hunting areas? Probably would be a non-issue as the state of MN would more than likely restrict that hunt to residents only. At the very least maybe the Cannonball club should expand into the area and charge . . . say $225.00 per day for access fees.

 

[Miller]

Redlabel, you sure make it sound so easy. Let me guess, you live in a big town?

I do not. I can't just drive down the street and pick up a part time job at Denny's. I live in a small rural town, where there's not exactly jobs.

When I moved here years and years ago, I spent a lot of time with landowners in the offseason. I never had problems finding places to hunt. Than some guys come in here a couple years ago and buy it up(sound familiar? same scenario as yours). All of the relationships I've made for years is whiped out because some guy brings beer and money? It's a slap in the face to find out that money speaks louder than rural relationships. And you wonder why there's resentment towards the urban population.

I used to read your posts at FB years back regarding the same issues. I'm sorry Redlabel, I don't want to read your guide to "how to be a sellout". I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror.

If you want to buy land, whatever. Just don't come here and brag about it. Even though it is your VIEW it is the most selfish possible.

 

[redlabel]

Mr. Fetch:

You may be right in that we are not as far apart as I once thought.

I don't really have anything to bring to the table. I think the table will be set by the next legislature. The judiciary committee has a pretty good grasp on the situation and will come up with some recommendations. I was impressed with how many of them showed up at the Grand Forks Wildlife meeting and the forum held at the Grand Forks Herald. Debating it over and over on web-sites is not interesting to me since it is the committee that will help the legislature decide. I hope the hunters will continue to show up in force at the next rounds of advisory meetings the Game & Fish puts out. Like I said I attend 1 in our area and one other each time so I have a better understanding of what is happening. I went to one in that same Herald room a few years back and the attendence was about a dozen people from the game and fish deparment and 7 (YES 7!!!) concerned sportsmen and 1 of them was the advisiory board member, and we got the same presentation from the Game & Fish Department as if the room had been full. I don't understand our concerned sportsmen, they can drive all day or night to hunt or fish but don't seem to have the time to get our to one of these meetings unless they are on a crusade to stop an earlier pheasant opener. I thought it was very interesting that 23% of the Sportsman's Alliance thought the early pheasant opener was a good idea according to the survey on their web-site.

You're right that the pop and beer is not original. It wasn't offered as a new idea, it was used to show how easy it is to get access to hunting in North Dakota.

I would have trouble hunting one place also. That's why I have been doing this for more than 12 years. I am now trying to concentrate it to one area of the state as I found that having it spread out made it difficult to keep up with. I see problems with being able to hunt the whole state anymore though and so have decided to change with the times. You're right that this is sad but the one thing I know is CHANGE IS CONSTANT and you can change or be left out or behind.

My ideas of hunting have changed a lot over the years also. Hunting to me now is the most fun with a dog and a boy. If I want to shoot my gun I will go to the rifle range. If I want to shoot something I will go the trap or sporting clays range. If I want to hunt I enjoy my dogs and my sons and their friends. My pet project for this year is setting up a 300 acre area that is only open to someone with a youth under the age of 18. It is the best spot I have in that area and it has waterfowl and lots of pheasants. If they don't have a dog I will insist on walking with them because every young person should get the joy of shooting a pheasant that is flushed after being staunchly pointed by a good pointing dog.

I don't know how many hunt our land. It is a lot and as I said before I only deny permission if we are going to be using it ourselves in the next few days. I got an idea from a post on this site and am thinking about only letting people hunt that have an NRA membership and are members of at least one other conservation group. On one spot we have a couple guys who leave campers and bring their own friends up a lot. There is more than enough with the small lakes, WPA's and generous people in North Dakota.

I understand your point in trying to tie my scenerio into the North Dakota situation but I can't agree with not letting the free enterprise system work. Remember the story about the ant and the grasshopper. We shouldn't have to make something available to everyone because some are too lazy to do their own work. The free enterprise system is part of the backbone our nation was founded upon.

The problem is not as easy to solve as to handsomely reward farmers and landowners for allowing the public to hunt. Someone needs to study why some of this land is not available, it's not all posted due to outfitters and fee hunting. One of my renters came to me a few years ago and asked if he could post the land he was renting from me. He explained that last hunting season someone had shot some holes in a fuel barrel he had on a stand in the trees so he didn't have to haul fuel to refuel his equipment. One hole could have been an accident but 4 was more than just a coincidence. I know you, and for that matter, most hunters would not have done this. Maybe it wasn't even done by hunters but was vandalism. Either way how do you get that individual to reopen that land to the public, because not only did he post the 1/4 section that he rented from me but he also posted the other 2800 acres he farms. How many other stories like that are out there and the reason for posting land. We need to find out because giving that individual money to let the public roam his land at will is not going to succeed in access for anyone.

North Dakota had done a good job in providing those opportunities to everyone with the WPA, PLOTS, and coverlocks programs. Their hands are tied because their budget is set by the legislature and they cannot buy land.

The laws as to what regards baiting is quite clear. Ethically I would hope most hunters have higher standards than the law allows for. I personallly am appalled at the idea of putting out grain or bait for deer hunting. I also can't control what other people do and so I have learned to change the things I can and try not to worry about the things I can't.

If you would like to continue this discussion please leave me your e-mail in a private message or in your reply. I enjoy the discussion but do not want to respond nor be read by the people who insist on putting IF in front of a statement I make so they have something to complain about.

 

[redlabel]

Field Hunter: If you are going to post at least get the information right. Putting an IF in front of someones satement and changing their statement serves no purpose.

I explained what I had done to show how easy it is to get access to hunting in North Dakota. Why do you think all of these non-residents free-lancers come here. If you read some of what they post they explain what a great time they have and how easy it is to find hunting. I have never tried to persuade anyone to post their land or deny access. It is just there to show you that if many sportsmen would get of their lazy butts they could have access to more hunting areas than they could cover in a fall.

Access to prime hunting areas is different and I refuse to beat my head against the wall. I don't waterfowl hunt around Devils Lake nor do I pheasant hunt the SW corner of the state. It's too easy to get access elsewhere.

 

[redlabel]

Miller:

If you have lived in a small town for years and years and can't find an area to hunt there is something else wrong. From the tone of your response I would say some counseling or anger management would help.

You were extended an olive branch and decided to kick dirt on the persons shoes. Shame on you for that.

As far as FB goes Mr. Fetch has shown me the error of my ways. Besides I think the posters there are either young, immature, or quite possibly both. Trying to show another point of view gets tedious if there are only attacks and incorrect assumptions made.

Mr. Fetch and I will continue to agree to disaggree on a lot of issues but we agree on more items than I thought. Probably not enough to share a duck blind with but I bet it would be interesting to have a discussion with him over a few beers or lunch some time.

 

[nodakoutdoors.com]

Redlabel,

Try to understand that when you're buying up land, it could've been someone else's honey hole for years.

When you understand that you might understand the resentment.

 

[Field Hunter]

Red label,

After re-reading your post on the 13,000 acres, I see that you did not say that you had tied that amount of land up. I do have to say however that every time you either buy land or ask one of your neighbors for an extended time period to hunt you are in fact limiting access as they will be more than likely to let only you hunt due to the land enhancement and stocking of pheasants.

As another poster said here, everytime you get land it may have been somebody elses place to hunt. I have lost some great areas to hunt over the years due to other hunters asking for exclusive permission. I had done my homework, stopped to see the landowners yearly and got to know them. A hunter came in and set himself up as the great guy that was going to enhance the area and stock birds. The farmer felt it was his obligation to let this new guy have the best areas and times to hunt.

Think about expansion in the future, you may be limiting access to the same areas by someone else.

 

[redlabel]

Fieldhunter: You're getting closer but you are still adding your own words to mine to be able to give the answer you want.

I don't ask neighbors to extend the time period to hunt.

There is nothing stopping the hunter from asking permission to hunt the area that he used to hunt. If I am not using it he is welcome to hunt it and if I am I will usually tell him when it is available.

Property usually doesn't get sold because someone wants to buy it. Property usually gets bought because an owner wants to sell it.

Blaming someone for buying it is the same logic that PETA uses. If we didn't eat meat there would be no need to kill cows, chickens, pigs, etc. Saying if no one would buy the land, no one could sell it is a philosophy that would make the country very stagnent.

 

[Field Hunter]

Ok,
I give up! I'm looking for land. Anybody have any honey holes they wouldn't mind me taking over? Wait a minute. You'll find it hard to convince me that once you buy some land, enhance it, and stock birds that the nearby land owners are not going to help protect the resource. I know you didn't say that word for word but you and I both know it will happen. I've also been hunting in ND 30-35 years and have seen the changes that have happened over that time period.

Just a suggestion, one that I've thought about recently, approach the landowners with the same idea. Help them to enhance their land for wildlife and allow you and the public to hunt with maybe a donation to the local town for instance. Ok, I know there are farmers that want to sell so there are options there as well.

Nothing personal, but I'll be honest, I have become more resentful in the past couple of years to anyone that is trying to change the hunting heritage in ND. Obviously things are changing but it doesn't mean every one has to like it or go along without their input.

[ This Message was edited by: Field Hunter on 2002-04-15 19:47 ]

 

[Fetch]

I just got home from Fargo - so sorry I have not responded sooner :grin: Now I thought I'd at least find out, if the Nickname /Handle was about booze or double barrels ??? I'm a JD & bud light man & think the 870 is the only dependable shotgun made. Plus I have hardly ever hunted from a blind (except at Virgl Farstads place at Cole Harbor) I'm currantly into boat hunting after 10 yrs of jump shooting & 20 of field hunting. Getting to lazy for both (jumping potholes) or sneaking geese & setting up a hundreds of decoys to shoot a few SOB's. I'll never run out of public places to shoot ducks from a boat.

It is good that you are coming around on your feelings about this site. & I agree the legislature will make the decision on any real changes. That is why I invited them all here at the GF Herald meeting - & by email - also anyone who will listen. Because I hoped they would be able to read & see what good respectable hunters, think about these things. I hate the fact how uninformed they (legislature) are on these issues. How many opposing groups are SPINing their sides of things, to try & make the hunters from cities look like ungrateful / land using & abusing socialists. That is so far from the truth. Just about everyone I know that hunts in Grand Forks or Fargo have connections back to rural ND & small towns & understand their concerns & farmers struggles. We (now)city boys are the biggest contributors to the economics of ND hunting.(& some don't want to admidt that or have rural folks appreciate it) We have chose the way of life (being a hunter)& I bet the vast majority of our recreational dollars, are spent on what we love. & have had for the majority of our teen & adult lives (for me I just turned 50 last week) most of my hardcore hunting friends have either been older, or young folks too. & because of changes in those two groups lives, I find myself looking for new adventures & people to share what I love with. Most of the real waterfowlers I have known & learned alot from are from out of state. I hunt with 3 or 4 every year (usually different weeks) & I also would hate to see them limited. But I would sacrafice that, to try & not let ND go the way of commercial hunting.

I am the same as you in shooting & killing (done more than my share) it is now the expirences & comfort I look forward to. So I too am in process of developing a 1/2 section of prime hunting land - for my golden years & as a insurance policy, if things continue at the pace it is changing. Or that, I get so disgruntled, with how much hassle it is becoming, to be a freelance hunter. I will have some where to go & work & appreciate & BS & dream of years gone by. ( plus get away from Mrs Fetch :roll: )

I'm from Ray ND originally & no longer go out there to hunt. Have went to the SW a few times (phasants - grouse & muleys) but thats not for me - I still know where a few sharps are, that are not that far away. & really enjoy going there & hunting them - in a realitivly unspoiled area. (especially after opener) Usually those weekends I can't take all the Minn. & Wisc. Invaders :grin: & if you love dogs you can't be all bad :wink:

We don't need to do this privately - you are more than welcome to stay & try to twist our minds, into your views. But don't feel bad if we poke ya with a stick now & then. Or at least try to make ya think. Like us commoners once in awhile (or most of the time) are you one of those Tweed & Filson types ???

My bark is lot more serious than my bite - I am tired of politics, after having served my time as a appointed (temp. insane) public servant & as a FT paid (middle management) Public servant. & unlike you (I guess ???) I really enjoy this internet stuff :grin:

It's to late (& a long subject) but I can go on & on about some of those conservation groups - Like the (save the ducks) one - that is full of SPIN & fund raising marketeers. They actually have people all over the country believing without them, there would be no ducks :roll:

[ This Message was edited by: Fetch on 2002-04-15 21:35 ]