[Old Hunter]

I spend about 30 days hunting every fall. About 1/2 of the time is spent with my nonresident friends. Some of these people were ND residents and some never have been. I know the young people that run this form and they hunt with men and women from all over the country.I want to allow as many hunters as the state can handel and still have quality hunting.The key word is quality. The hunting pressure is getting so heavy that in general the quality is starting to go downhill. Last fall I had a hunt planned for the Long Lake area. This was about 3 weeks into the season. I called my friend who lives on the lake to set up the hunt. He told me not to come. He said the shooting pressure was the heaviest he had everseen or heard. Three days of very heavy pressure and all the birds moved to SD Hesaid in all his life he has never seen this happen . He said it sounded like a war zone. During the course of the fall I would new flights of ducks come into the state they would be shot up in days they were gone. The quality of North Dakotas waterfowling is slipping. The only way to control this is to put a cap on the number of hunters. Most of my friends understand this. They want quality not quanity. I hope this post is accepted well by nonresidents. You are our friends and family but you can not all come at one time it ruins the hunt.

 

[Fetch]

Exactly - Have a weighted lottery for Non Residents just like we have for resident deer license. Also have more zones - based on where the birds are & where there are available services to handle them (motels - cafes- etc.) This will also spread out the so-called economic development. Also have only so many per week, spread them out over the entire season. (not just the opener & the Wisconsin & Minn. teachers conventions.- three seperate weeks) The opener for everything should be for residents only.

There are answers to all these things! ! !

[ This Message was edited by: Fetch on 2002-03-14 07:03 ]

 

[Eric Hustad]

Great post old hunter!! Some friends that I hunt with have a friend from MN that comes every year. After this last fall the friend from MN said there should be limits otherwise the hunting will be lost to residents and non-residents alike. I thought that was a very good point.

 

[Dan Schafer]

Being a non-resident I would be all for North Dakota limitnig the number of non-resident hunters each year. I would rather get the chance to have a quality hunt every 2 or 3 years rather than having a poor hunt every year. With the number of non-res hitting nodak in the fall, the birds have no chance to rest. I say let the outsiders piss and moan, its only for their own good, the good of the residents, and the quality of a good hunt.

HOO-DEE-HOO!!!

 

[Nick Roehl]

Fetch you hit it right on the head.I agree with everything you said.I tried to post exactly what you said months ago on Fishingbuddy but the staff wouldn't let the thread go through.They e-mailed me and said "it was negative towards non residents".How pathetic is that.Great Post! :rock:

_________________
ONE SHOT 2 KILLS

[ This Message was edited by: Wingmaster on 2002-03-15 00:20 ]

 

[Guest]

the non res bring big money into our state.allthough there does need to be a cap of some kind.the ones doin most of the b#tchin are the one's who kill just for the fun of it anyways .not the experience

 

[Eric Hustad]

I think the idea of raising fees for all is a good idea. Non-Res. are important to our state, but even a lot them are starting to say put in a cap or we'll all lose our chance. I liked the idea of an access stamp. I would pay $50-100 to go into a fund to pay landowners who allow access. If a person is going to complain about paying some extra cash to preserve access then they should probably stay home. I think this would have to help the landowner's who are having a hard time and maybe additional money is going to be needed to get kicked in... eace:

 

[KEN W]

Are there more farmers out there who want to put their land in programs like PLOTS and the GNF does not have enough money?If there is then the license should be increased for both res. and non-res.The problem with non-res. will be that someone will want to seperate the upland from the waterfowl and make them both $100.That is what SD has.A 100% increase is overdoing it.

 

[NDMALLARD]

Ken,

If they seperate the duck and upland into two different licenses, I believe non residents should pay twice for access stamps. If they want to enjoy the best of what we have they should pay for it.

 

[Dr. Bob]

We (NR's)already pay more for the license to be able to hunt in the first place. I think paying for access and habitat should be shared by all.

Dr. Bob

 

[KEN W]

I guess what I am saying is that I think they should leave it the way it is now.1 license to hunt waterfowl,upland,small game.Then add a new stamp to everyones license,inclunding res.All new money should go to buying access.

 

[NDMALLARD]

I am in agreement, that we can all pay more for access, howevever, NR hunters should pay more. I believe they should pay for both upland and waterfowl or move to our state if they want to enjoy the benefits we have to offer.

[ This Message was edited by: NDMALLARD on 2002-03-19 22:40 ]

 

[Dr. Bob]

It would not bother me if they split the licenses as I just hunt ducks. I wonder if it would help the problem any though?

I also have no problem with a reasonable increase as long as the extra charge would be strictly applied to access / habitat and be applied to all.