[Amber Krapp]

Hello to everyone!

I am new to the website and when registering, had no hesitation to include my last name. Oh heaven forbid, a "Krapp" offers her 2 cents.

I've been following the non-resident hunting issue and quite frankly, I think it is ridiculous that the people who have come to call themselves "Sportsmen" even think they have a reason to complain. If it were not for landowners who have taken great care of their land, these "sportsmen" wouldn't have a reason to complain. Think about it: great land offers great hunting, but great land does not come without great effort.

If you "sportsmen" want to buy land and nurture it to great hunting land, then by all means do it. You can have all the hunting opportunities you've ever dreamed of. Maybe then you'll realize that all your hard work may be worth a dime or two. What makes you think that someone's property is everyone's priviledge? As a Fargo resident, I know I don't see too many people strolling around in someone else's yard and above all else, feel "entitled" by their state of residency to do so.

As much as you get a kick out of bashing my parents and other landowners with any common sense, perhaps it is reality that they are the smart ones in all this, and after much hard work beat you to an opportunity you can only dream of. I guess as a ND citizen, I don't find it too smart to want to restrict visitors to a state that struggles with tourism in more ways than one. There are PLENTY of birds to hunt for non-residents and residents alike. We all learned in kindergarten that BIRDS FLY. Maybe they were born in another state and flew to the ND skies. I'm willing to bet they even flew over a few states in between. So whose are they? What makes a select few ND residents feel they are superior to anyone in our "United Country?"

The "Sportsmen" may hold a small chance of winning the battle of zoned areas, but they will NOT win the war. How many area landowners do you believe will let you hunt THEIR land after all the commotion and complaining you have done in the past year? After writing an editorial to The Forum in February 2003, I received many responses from residents who agreed with me. The underlying message was much to the effect of no "sportsmen" allowed. One northern N.D. farmer stated that one of his 3 questions to people asking permission to hunt his land was "Are you from Jamestown, Fargo, or Grand Forks?" And obviously a "yes" response to that question was a definite "NO" to the PRIVILEDGE of hunting his land.

With all that is going on in our world today, I find it sad that for some of you, the biggest worry is whether or not you'll get to hunt or not.

I know everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, but looking at this issue realistically might be helpful too. The reality boils down to the fact that everyone is entitled to do as they please on THEIR property.

Amber Krapp
Fargo, ND

 

[bioman]

Amber:

Welcome to the site, and for the record I am a non-resident. I believe your argument is missing one critical element, you as a landowner do not own that resource. The State and Federal government does (e.g., they manage the resource and set limits, season lengths, etc). Do yourself a big favor and become acquainted with the Public Trust Doctrine. Once you understand the doctrine emphatically, then maybe you will see where a lot of "sportsmen" are getting their ideals.

 

[gandergrinder]

Amber,
One of the major reasons that your parents get bashed is the fact that they are so very vocal in the way they stand. If you want to stand in the middle of the fire then prepared to get burned. This is just the way it is.

The question is will your parents have enough restraint to say no to money when the birds aren't as plentiful? Or will they sell sell sell as long as there is one duck left. :eyeroll: Without some limits the greed begins to take hold untill we sell off every natural resource we have.

No one says that they cannot make money off there land or even a few ducks. But if they do make money off the ducks that we all own. Are they going to send a check in the mail to the landowners who grew the ducks in another county or another state or another country?

How about the money that all the SPORTSMEN paid into the Game and Fish through licences or Ducks Unlimited or Delta or Pheasants Forever.
They helped grow those birds.

My question to you is. Who is selling out all of the resources that we all helped to grow?

 

[redlabel]

How does the Public Trust Doctrine work in the following case?

In 1984 Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones purchased 640 acres of pasture. The area around this pasture has some game but not much and harldy anyone hunts in the immediate vicinity. Smith and Jones spend the next 10 years planting trees and shrubs on their new property. They also spend considerable time weeding, cultivating, tilling, and hauling water to those trees.

The area gradually turns into quite a haven for deer and upland game. The former pasture and the surrounding area become an area of excellent hunting and is utilized by many "sportsmen" because the land is unposted.

Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones, as well as most of the landowners in the area now start to post their property due to the increasing number of "sportsmen" now using the property and allow hunting to anyone that asks.

Over the next several years a few of those "sportsmen", (note the word few) decide to leave their garbage along the road, leave gates open, hunt in areas they were asked to avoid, left their unwanted game in a pile, and in a few cases left the female of the pheasant species where it was inadvertently, or not, shot. Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones reluctantly became a bit more selective in their policy of granting permission and some of the surrounding landowners just plain quit giving permission out of frustration and disgust with these few "sportsmen".

In 1992 and again in 1996 adjacent landowners sold additional property to Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones who again planted trees and rented the farmable acreage to an area farmer.

Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones have children that helped plant, weed, and water those trees and enjoyed the hunting in the area with their fathers. These children have now moved out of North Dakota and return to hunt with Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones on three occasions each year. They return for the pheasant opening weekend, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. This year Mr. Jones will have each of his children miss one of those weekends due to the legislature, with a very strong backing by many of the urban "sportsmen", changing the licenses to two 5 day periods. The twist now comes in that Mrs. Jones, a non-hunter, is now upset with the urban hunters because she will not see her grandchildren this year at Thanksgiving and has declared that permission should not be given to any hunters from (you've probably guessed it), Fargo, Grand Forks, Minot, or Bismarck.

Mrs. Smith, however, comes up with a suggestion to charge resident hunters and use that money to pay for the extra licenses that will be required due to the changes. Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones think this is a good idea an so this fall will be charging residents that wish to hunt on their property.

Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones know they do not own the birds and game on their land but they have learned the GOLDEN RULE of giving permission to hunt on their land.

HE WHO HAS THE GOLD, MAKES THE RULES

As stated neither Mr. Smith nor Mr. Jones think they own any of the game on their property, but they do know they game is their due to the habitat they have provided. This habitat was not provided by the Game and Fish Department, Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited, or Delta Waterfowl.

 

[kkrapp]

The facts on the subject are these: 1. The birds are here NOW, regardless of what the future holds. 2. People are willing to visit North Dakota, god's land of tourism :roll: , and hunt for these birds. 3. Correct, the ducks belong to not one single individual or group of people. 4. Non-residents pay outfitters and guides for a SERVICE, not for the birds. Do you go to a car wash and pay them for the soap and water, or do you pay them for the labor? That is the principle of a service business.

 

[Dick Monson]

redlabel, if you know Smith and Jones, suggest to them that they replace Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Jones.

 

[Amber Krapp]

Gandergrinder, just curious how you have done your share to help "grow" the waterfowl you mentioned? Do you own land that you work year-round on, making sure the wildlife has just what it needs to survive? If you think it is an accident that certain landowners have wonderful hunting land, you're mistaken. I see first hand all the work that is put into it. If you're offering to do that work, then by all means do it. Landowners know very well that they do not own the waterfowl on their land, but that still does not change the fact that is IS their land and the work put into it entitles them to say who may or may not be on that land. I think those of you who call yourself sportsmen are digging your own grave. The Smith/Jones story posted is exactly where your battle is going to get you. Who in their right mind would allow groups such as yours access to their land after all the name-calling and bad mouthing you have demonstrated towards landowners?

As far as my parents being vocal, they along with every other landowner have every right to be. It is their hard work that until now, every hunter (resident and non-resident alike) have benefitted from. I know for a fact they have never denied access to a resident hunter who has first asked permission. The non-residents are the only ones charged. Although after this is all said and done, I think a lot of the residents should be prepared to be denied access or ready to pay an access fee, thanks to certain "sportsmen" groups.

 

[gandergrinder]

Facts
1. Will nonresidents pay for your services without ducks? NO
2. Did the Game and Fish supply a proposal to try and maintain it so you will have ducks for years to come? YES
3.Was this based on the opinion of professional biologists? YES
4. Did you lobby against this proposal? YES
5. Are you a biologist? NO

Yes the ducks are here now and we don't know what the future holds but that does not give us permission to lose sight of the long term. It is that short term ideology that I fear will destroy the wonderful resources we have.

 

[Amber Krapp]

Mother Nature will take care of the waterfowl population, not non-resident hunters. I've seen the reports from the professional biologists, but what you fail to mention is how biased that whole survey was. If you really want to call yourself "sportsmen" one would think you'd be more concerned about if the wildlife is being cared for more than if someone is benefitting from landowners' hard work. You should be thankful there are people who put such hard work into their land. Keep up your whining and you'll find yourself traveling to another state just to find access. Landowners aren't the right people to upset.

I'm still curious how you helped to "grow" the resource. You must have a plot of land somewhere that you put a lot of work into if you can honestly believe yourself.

 

[gandergrinder]

Amber,
Do I own land? No.
Have I ever bashed a land owner? No
Will I own land some day? Yes
Will I grow wildlife on that land? Yes

If you asked me if I was willing to come and help out on your farm for the chance to do a little hunting would I do it? You bet I would.

Do I think that your parents and you have every right to state your opinion? I sure do and I respect the fact that you and they are willing to put your name behind what you say. So I will do the same. Even if it means that a landowner may see this and not let me hunt.
Hope your having a great weekend.

Jed Fluhrer

 

[Amber Krapp]

Thanks Jed.

I'm glad you haven't ever personally attacked a landowner, but many memebers in groups such as yours have. One bad apple spoils the whole bunch, I guess. I would like to believe that not every member of sportsmen groups is as extreme as the few who have stepped up. The vocalists in your groups are going to ruin it for everyone, and that is too bad. I'm also glad you have enough courage to put a name to your claims, I know that with my last name I am probably automatically put on everyone's hate list coming into a forum filled with "sportsmen" such as this.

I just want everyone to know that my parents are far from being greedy or selfish people. They are the kindest people you'll ever meet. Dad has lived on this land his entire life and he knows absolutely everything there is to know about it. His love of nature and wildlife is what keeps his land thriving and likely what keeps his hunters coming back. They just love my parents and the community and I know they'd come back to visit whether or not we had plenty of birds or if they were scarce. Not just anyone can go buy some land and have wildlife flock to it. Dad knows what wildlife needs to have for food, what they need to survive--everything.

I have never, ever seen my parents deny anyone access to their land if permission was asked. Even this past hunting season I was home to visit and given strict orders of what to tell a hunter who stopped to get permission to hunt (if my parents were gone). Dad always told me to give them directions to a spot that he believed would be the "lucky spot". You call that greedy and selfish? If greed and selfishness were involved, I think he would send me to the door with a money box. That is far from the case. My parents are genuinely good people who have worked their tails off to get to where they are today.

Until the uproar was brought up by sportsmen groups, I don't think I'd ever ran into a resident hunter who had problems accessing PRIVATE land. But now I know a lot of landowners are upset and sick of this going on, and on, and on. I think this fall you all will see a lot of changes and a LOT more land that is posted. It's exactly what you're asking for.

And yes, my weekend at the lake has been wonderful, even though I'm sunburned and exhausted!

 

[Austin Bachmeier]

If I wasn't a poor kid I would buy as much land as I could. I would invite anyone who asked to come out with me and hunt on it, and if they were decent, they could come back. Maybe someday....

The problem is not telling people what they can do with their land, the problem is people thinking they have the right to do whatever they want with the animals on their land.

Put it this way... You have 10,000 ducks sitting in an unharvested field eating whatever crop it may be.... can you just go out and kill them all because they are on YOUR land?? uh uh that just ain't gonna happen.. You would have feds at your farm door fast as the new High Velocity Steel...

So should you be able to take the birds away from the general public during the season and give them to a few high rollers from both here and god knows where?? I guess in my opinion, No. Freelancers, both resident and non should have equal opportunity at them as anyone or else NOONE should have them.

Maybe this is just the mentality I have from hunting pubilc land most of my days, as there it's whoever puts in the work and time gets the rewards... I am grateful to the few private landowners around here that grant me persmission, and I respect them and their property as much as the Birds I'm hunting....

All I can say is Im glad you people can't lease out the Sand I hunt so I will at least have one place to go..... until some greedy person attempts to pull that one off too, but you can bet if something like that happens I'll be there to put a boot to that silly idea.... :eyeroll:

 

[kkrapp]

You're right, you cant go shoot them all. But you could go out there and get a couple limits and they wouldnt come back, because they are smart and wouldnt go back to the same field that all their buddies got slaughtered at. I've never seen a flock of stupid birds like that.

 

[Miller]

So did you Krapps sell your business yet?

 

[Austin Bachmeier]

I was talking off season, but yeah, spin it however you want.... :eyeroll:

 

[ND Gander]

Austin:

Be careful what you post. If you are going to call a spade a spade then why is it you have been baned from your sisters land up by Wolford? Is it because you forgot how to ask permission? If I were you I would walk softly when talking about landowners and granting permission. Folks in the grass lake area know the truth.

 

[nodakoutdoors.com]

Amber,

I really don't think the outfitters and small town North Dakota are on the same "side". Small town North Dakota and outfitters are in competition to try to profit in every way they can off of the nonresident hunter.

Here's some services that small town North Dakota provides for hunters:

food and snacks, cafe, lounge, gas, shells and other equipment, etc.

Outfitters provide the same services (except for gas). Only difference between these two competitors, is that one has power to "muscle" the other out and that's the outfitters.

When an outfitter controls all of the land surrounding that small town in ND, and the only access is pay access, and all of the same services offered in that town are also offered in the lodge........what does that do for the town? The outfitters are taking the last profits the small towns could've been making away.

 

[kkrapp]

That right there is what's wrong with it all. You make too many assumptions on these outfitters. Hunters in the Pingree area are set up with a breakfast at no charge, the rest of their meals are bought at the Pingree cafe, or the 281 Stop, which those businesses are grateful for. They buy their extra shells from Gun and Reel or WalMart in Jamestown. And if the outfitters are such vultures, then why can there only be a dozen people there at a time when it'd be so easy to go and buy another old farmhouse and put another dozen in, so the outfitter could double his so called profit. To answer another question, yes, Oren Krapp has a loyal clientel that WOULD come back even when the bird populations are low. A man named Bert from Iowa pays the North Dakota game and fish department for a non-resident license, drives up here, spends cash in the cities on the way, just to ride around in a pickup truck with "the man", and would just assume not shoot any ducks. I know a man from Houston who visits every year, believe his name is Dickey, who likes to sit out in the field and just watch the ducks fly by his spread. I think he's killed one duck in all they years he's visited. There are many more of these examples, it's the hospitality that brings them back.

 

[Amber Krapp]

What does selling land have to do with hunting? Can you explain, Miller??

You think outfitters are in competition with small towns? Yeah, right. That must be why they all back our sides in this deal. For the record, we don't sell anything you mentioned, Chris. Not shells, not food, not snacks, not beer, not gas. They go to area towns, one being the hole we've come to call Jamestown. Hunters spend a lot of money also on their way through the state. Not just in the area they are hunting. I think you shoulda done your research before jumping to any assumptions like you did.

No wonder some of you are getting kicked off your own sister's land.

 

[Ron Gilmore]

For most of us that grew up in ND and left, then retruned we are well aware of the special place ND is to sportmen. Many of us either grew up on a farm or ranch or have famliy and friends that are in the business.Most sportsmen that I have met respect and cherish this state and the landowners in it.

I went from being opposed to caps on nonresidents to being a supporter of caps. Biggest reason was what no controls where doing to the sport and the local communities.

I do not know the Krapp business personally nor do I intend to. I like many are judging them by there actions as they are ours. I looked and listened to the testimony that was given in Bismarck on many issues regarding G/O and caps and came away with the opinion that they had one agenda and that was getting laws in place that benifited them and those in there business only. I then read the e-mail that was posted on this site and remember the pettion that they helped circulate and those that signed it. Once again a ME only attitude seemed to surface. Now with that being said, I took some time and looked back at my postings and others on these same subjects and you can come to the same conclusion about many of us.Both sides have been gulity of statements that could be interrputed in correctly from there intent.

I am speaking for myself here when I say that I do believe that a landowner should and always be the one to control who has access to thier land. I believe that a landowner should have the right to profit from the ownership of that land, but like any other business not at the expense of the greater good of all citenzens of the community or state or nation. Rules and regulations have and will be in place that limit things that can be done on ones property.

I live in Fargo and I have restrictions on what I can do with my home. I am restricted from opening a business, the type of fence I can erect, putting up a clothes line, planting of certain types of tree's on the berm, etc. A farmer and rancher may not have these same restrictions but a different set of rules to follow as this is what society and democracy gives us. We live in a country that recognizes more personal freedoms than any other nation in the world, but even at the time of the signing of the Constitution it set forth restrictions.

Today we face a growing trend of losing our young people to other area's that have more econmic benifits, with less and less people being able to find employment with incomes that will help them secure a future or retirement, some of us have made choices to sacrifice monetary gain with quality of life. When we do so we help in supporting the tax base that provides services to those that cannot provide for themselves. Our need for people to help with those in need of long term care, medical facilities and other nessasary community based issues are hampered by those that will seek only activities that benifit them solely.

I here the word tourism being used by opponnets of caps and G/O restrictions and cringe, because tourism in a state that is limited by climate like we are, it cannot be the single sustaining force to provide the needs for the above services. Agriculture use to provide this when we had farms that where under 600 acres average in size. They provided workers through familes to fill seasonal needs and local community support. Today with a large portion of farmers exceeding 2000 acres in operation and the manpower to farm those acres being less than before, it no longer is viable. Add into that the average age of a farmer today is over 53, and the problem becomes magnified

We as a state need to grow jobs that will attract and retain our young people to the state. ONe of the leading businesses in this state has used hunting quality as a drawing card to recruit new people, these people are what we need to grow and survive.

So restrictions that may limit a few but benifit the many are the direction we need to follow, and this is why maintaining quality of hunting over the econmic gain of a few is a much need boost in making sure that we have people to provide the services to and for the people of this state.

Without restrictions to discourage nonresidents from purchasing land and taking the revenues for rent outside of ND instead of having that money stay and be spent in ND every year, farms will continue to grow larger forcing more and more people to leave our state. Taking with them the potential of a famliy to be raised here and another generation lost. So to those that think my sole purpose in advocating restrictions is self serving look again.

Amber I admire your williness to defend what you think is right, but step back and look at this without your loyality to family and tell me if there actions better the state as a whole or hurt it over the next 10-20 years. Not them but the state and it's residents. Are the short term gains worth the long term destructions.