[hunt4life]

I don't really see the big problem with opening the pheasant season a week earlier.

Is the resource really that fragile that it can't take one more week?

We all know who this is really going to help and it is not the average hunter, but if the land owner really needs to make a little extra money, why not let him.

I would rather hunt the ringnecks later in the season anyway. I'm sure there will be plenty of birds left and fewer hunters to boot.

 

[nodakoutdoors.com]

Opening the season one week earlier means the season closes one week earlier. The traditional hunters I know love that last week, as it's really quiet and peaceful with no other hunters around.

With the week earlier means more traffic on what's already becoming busy back roads during the harvest season. That weekend is already becoming a zoo with waterfowling, combine pheasants and it could just be too much.

The season really doesn't bother me, but how the decision was made does. I would love to take Hoeven out with the Nodak Outdoors crew into our sacred area and get a law passed for us. I know there has to be more to that story, but it's been blown so wide open that I see no reason not to believe it.

If you have a meeting in your area, take the time to attend. I'll be in Casselton on the 14th. If anyone wants to hook up and go with Eric and I, let me know.

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Hustad on 2002-03-07 09:19 ]

 

[Field Hunter]

I have to agree, who wouldn't want the season to open up earlier? Unfortunately there are so many more issues surrounding the way it was done and for whom it was done.

Basically as I see it, the early season is being enacted for the fee hunting operations. In the good areas of the state for pheasant hunting this will benefit the guys who want to pay to hunt, resident and non-resident a like.

If there is no biological concern, then why not a compromise on the issue and keep the hunting open a week or two longer at the end of the season to benefit the people who want to hunt at that time. I would doubt that the fee hunting operations have many customers at that time of year anyway. Also to keep the residents happy and to back the issue of a non-biological impact that is being asserted by certain outfitters, ask them to open their fee operations to the last two weeks of the season either for free or at say $25 per day. This would help to bring the population of roosters down to a better biological number than carrying over the amount of roosters that are out there at the end of the season.

I hunted the end of the season last year and saw more rooster pheasants than I saw at many times through out the year.

Another issue that I'm not hearing is the issue of loading up the area for both pheasant and waterfowl hunters. The opening of the pheasant season one week earlier is really tightening up the availablity of hotel rooms in the hunting areas. Speaking from my experience, In the areas that my friends and I hunt it will be very difficut to find local accomadations this year. The non-residents are booking rooms a year in advance. This had always been done but now due to the great pheasant hunting and waterfowl hunting they are coming the entire season instead of just the beginning. By opening the pheasant season a week earlier we will now have the non-residents, who used to wait until the 3rd weekend of waterfowl season, so as to hit both seasons while they are here (I'd do the same thing if I as in their shoes)visisting our state and congesting the good areas even more. Last year there were guys staying 50-100 miles away from good pheasant hunting areas in hotels that usually only have duck hunters.

 

[KEN W]

This problem of both waterfowl hunters and upland hunters at the same time could be a real big problem east of Bismarck.However it won't be west of Bismarck.In the area we hunt west of Bismarck,every motel room within 50 miles of Elgin-Mott is already booked the first weekends.They put you on a waiting list.So,opening it a week earlier will add money to those economies.Personally,I would like to see it open earlier,I just don't like how it was done.

 

[hunt4life]

I agree with everybody about the way it was done, but I hate to see more ill will between landowners and hunters. The big debate won't help us hunters gain access in the field next season. It will probably hurt my chances to hunt on private land in the future.

 

[Field Hunter]

I don't think the average local farmer that hasn't limited access in the past is going to this year either. The Guide associations lobbyist was quoted in the paper today and he implied that this issue would close down many areas to the people involved in this fight with the gov.

Come on, I've hunted this state for 35 years and the landwners are smarter than that. Just continue to do your homework, get to know the farmers, do some scouting, and leave the land better than you found it. There will always be places to hunt. Not every farmer in ND is involved in fee hunting and never will be. It's the outfitters that need to have their access limited.

 

[prairie hunter]

All of the ND sportsman will be watching the NR licenses cap bills in the next legislative session.

Remember also that every two years a bill that would post all private land closed to hunting without permission is entered into the system. This is often led by representitives from SW North Dakota.

This bill has always failed before - but,

Eventually North Dakota could become like South Dakota. All land is closed to hunting without permission. No longer need to post land with no hunting signs.

If you rally an attack ... better watch your flank - you may be blind sided and lose everything.

[ This Message was edited by: prairie hunter on 2002-03-13 16:45 ]