Bha North Dakota chairman

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,394
Likes
821
Points
483
Location
Drifting the high plains
Look at what our state senators try each year. Take away access to unposted land, drill and carve up the badlands for oil and gas, and give COE land back to themselves or their friends' families, with nice roads and boat ramps that you paid for. I could care less about that (R) behind their name, and I'm a current life long republican.
Thats why I call them the money worshipers. Its their greed that made me join BCHA for one year. I just cant vote for the abortionists and gender confused.
 


Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
18,366
Likes
2,191
Points
758
Location
Mobridge,Sd
They are about land if you agree with there limited use and access of it. Kdm already spelled it out very well.
 

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
569
Likes
328
Points
230
I'm not clear on the instances KDM and you are referring to, but I will take your word for it (and I don't mean that in a snide way). I know in ND they take a yearly survey to find areas where access to public land is blocked or impassable so that access is available. And the fact that they want to keep the roadless areas roadless, well I am all for that.
 

JMF

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 19, 2015
Posts
1,705
Likes
72
Points
248
Location
Mandan
I'm not clear on the instances KDM and you are referring to, but I will take your word for it (and I don't mean that in a snide way). I know in ND they take a yearly survey to find areas where access to public land is blocked or impassable so that access is available. And the fact that they want to keep the roadless areas roadless, well I am all for that.

These 2 sentences contradict themselves.
 


Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
18,366
Likes
2,191
Points
758
Location
Mobridge,Sd
by taking roads out that already their access is reduced.
 

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
569
Likes
328
Points
230
Ok, 1. Keeping roadless areas roadless. Namely land designated “roadless” or “wilderness” by the USFS; as well as addressing illegal vehicle use on grasslands. 2. Addressing landlocked or blocked (no access roads, impassable road conditions, illegal gates etc) public acres that should otherwise legally accessed.
 

Migrator Man

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
3,961
Likes
22
Points
226
I'm not clear on the instances KDM and you are referring to, but I will take your word for it (and I don't mean that in a snide way). I know in ND they take a yearly survey to find areas where access to public land is blocked or impassable so that access is available. And the fact that they want to keep the roadless areas roadless, well I am all for that.

I’m about as anti left as it gets but I really want to support BHA with their causes. If the state chapter would just succeed and create a new org without all the national ties to sketchy proposals I would be all in. Also, what is this shadiness you speak of the DU pulled?
 


bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
569
Likes
328
Points
230
I completely understand what you mean. That’s how I feel about all of these large organizations, love the work they do at the local level, but as a whole they’re too big to be perfect. As far as DU, I hate to post something without being able to show sources but I’m at work at the moment and don’t have the time to find all the references. Basically, they fired a journalist who had the nuts to call out a millionaire Montana land grabber who wanted to cut off access to the waterways near his empire. He donated a lot of money to DU so they canned him. Also, I know there’s instances of DU purchasing easements with member dollars. Easements that are located within private outfits where only the DU big wigs and the owners can hunt.

I’m still a BHA, DU, MDF, RMEF member. I think the local chapters do much more good than the national umbrella they fall under.
 

Fly Carpin

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2015
Posts
2,580
Likes
206
Points
303
Location
Helena, MT
As far as DU, I hate to post something without being able to show sources but I’m at work at the moment and don’t have the time to find all the references. Basically, they fired a journalist who had the nuts to call out a millionaire Montana land grabber who wanted to cut off access to the waterways near his empire. He donated a lot of money to DU so they canned him.

https://www.hcn.org/articles/quack-attack-ducks-unlimited-fires-writer-over-stream-access-fracas
 

ndlongshot

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
1,781
Likes
121
Points
268
Also, I know there’s instances of DU purchasing easements with member dollars. Easements that are located within private outfits where only the DU big wigs and the owners can hunt.

I’m still a BHA, DU, MDF, RMEF member. I think the local chapters do much more good than the national umbrella they fall under.

If conserving wetlands and wetland habitat (for ducks, and all the benefits they provide to society) Is your concern, I see no problem conserving those wetlands where they lie. Aka, on private lands. Thats how all of the duck stamps dollars are spent, nation wide. And DU kicks in their own member dollars as well for maximum benefit to conserve and restore acres.

Didnt mean to derail, just adding some context and something to consider. I understand if you still dont like it, to each their own.
 

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
569
Likes
328
Points
230
If conserving wetlands and wetland habitat (for ducks, and all the benefits they provide to society) Is your concern, I see no problem conserving those wetlands where they lie. Aka, on private lands. Thats how all of the duck stamps dollars are spent, nation wide. And DU kicks in their own member dollars as well for maximum benefit to conserve and restore acres.

Didnt mean to derail, just adding some context and something to consider. I understand if you still dont like it, to each their own.

Nope, I see what you’re saying. My whole point is that all groups do things not every member will agree with.
 

Retired Educator

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Posts
3,233
Likes
192
Points
283
Location
North Dakota
Roadless in ND is virtually non-existent. I've been hunting the grasslands of western ND for more than 50 years. There used to be access trails over a large majority of those acres. Lately the USFS has deemed it necessary to close many of those trails to vehicle access. To say that they were roadless is incorrect. They are using that as an excuse to restrict vehicle traffic. I'm not suggesting there were trails on every section line, in fact they rarely followed a section line. Geography had more to do with a trail than any line. In fact many fences, even those on National Grasslands, don't follow section lines. When you get to be my age, restricting access is basically restricting me and other older hunters from hunting that public land. I'm 100% in favor of not driving off-trail rules, just not in favor of closing all those trails.
 
Last edited:


Uncle Jimbo

★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2016
Posts
464
Likes
6
Points
118
Location
ND
A friend alerted me to this thread as I don't log in here much anymore. I am a founding board member of the ND Chapter of BHA. I am proud of the group we've assembled and what we've been able to accomplish in a relatively short amount of time. I'm not here to defend Brock and what he said on Rokslide. The words he used were way out of line and I was disappointed when I read it.

That being said there seems to be some clarification that can be made about the signs we put up in the "non-motorized" portions of the Dakota Prairie Grasslands.

The local group here in ND seemed to be a good group of guys trying to address public land issues to ensure hunters and fishermen can do their thing. Unfortunately, one of the first things the local chapter did was to help put up ROAD CLOSED signs in the badlands. I would have thought that lobbying to keep at least some of those roads open for public use would have been more in line with their charter to keep public lands OPEN to the public for their use and enjoyment. The jist of the matter is this, I couldn't watch my money and support go to an organization that makes hunting and fishing more difficult for the public to enjoy, so I opted out of bha.

Did we place "ROAD CLOSED" signs in areas of the badlands? Yes we did. That is a fact. The detail left out is these roads and trails are (always were) ILLEGAL to travel unless you are permitted (ie cattle rancher with grazing permit, surveyor, USFS employee on official business, etc) since they fall within the USFS "NON-MOTORIZED" areas.

The project started organically in an attempt to improve public lands and help the time and cash strapped USFS. We were made aware of many hunters ILLEGALLY traveling these roads and getting into conflicts with other hunters who had hiked in. Law enforcement was being called numerous times throughout the season to address hunters ILLEGALLY driving these trails which took them away from other issues that could be perceived as more pressing. Many of our members knew the signs in these areas of the badlands were faded and damaged to the point of being unrecognizable. Replacing these signs would take a lot of time and effort as they were numerous and spread throughout many areas of the badlands. The project seemed like a perfect fit for a group of eager young people who care about public land and who want to help outdoor recreationalists enjoy their time outdoors legally.

In an effort to aid both the USFS and North Dakota hunters and outdoor recreationalists, our group volunteered our time to REPLACE many signs that were damaged and faded that at one time clearly marked these trails as ILLEGAL to travel via motor vehicle. There were a small number (less than 10?) new trails that had been made that the USFS wanted us to place a post and sign where one had never existed before. Again, these trails were ILLEGAL to travel unless permitted to do so.

These areas were deemed "NON-MOTORIZED" loooonnnnngggg before ND BHA was a thing. We did not lobby to have any roads closed. Our goal was to help inform hunters and recreationalists that these trails were not open to public travel. By replacing the signs we feel we helped improve public lands, helped hunters who want to follow the rules know what those rules are, help reduce the strain on law enforcement during hunting season and to help the USFS land managers.

We also got these "NON-MOTORIZED" areas placed on the NDGF PLOTS map since they were basically unknown to most hunters. See the legend on page 21 of the 2020 PLOTS guide. This again was in an attempt to make sure people enjoying our public lands were aware of the rules for these areas. I think we can all agree conflicts among hunters and citations from law enforcement are not what we look for when we spend time outdoors.

Here is an older sign that was in better condition than many we replaced:

IMG_3391.jpg

Here are some before and after photos of signs we replaced:
LRG_DSC00619.jpgLRG_DSC00624.jpgLRG_DSC00627.jpgLRG_DSC00630.jpg

Hopefully this helps clear up any confusion.

ND BHA has met face to face with Terry Steinwand and his staff on many occasions. We have a great working relationship with the NDGF. More than once we have expressed our concern for the potential loss of summer access to Twin Lake in LaMoure County, ND. We were made aware of potential access issues with the lake by KDM and made sure we elevated those access concerns to the highest level of NDGF because public access to public lands and waters is a cornerstone principle of our group.

Sorry for the long winded post. I'm going to make a whiskey drink and smile while I look at my ammo, powder and primer cache like any freedom loving red-blooded American and chuckle while thinking of those who find themselves under supplied during the current shortages.
(Those who know me know that isn't a stretch of truth)
 
Last edited:

Dirty

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Posts
1,897
Likes
33
Points
181
Location
Bismarck
Slightly different topic:

Nothing says “I appreciate public land” like bullet holes in signs. I see several in these and I see Plots signs and WMA signs and even highway signs at the top of the skyline shot up like this all the time too. Who in the hell are you people that do this and what in the hell is your problem?
 

risingsun

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Posts
2,162
Likes
707
Points
378
Slightly different topic:

Nothing says “I appreciate public land” like bullet holes in signs. I see several in these and I see Plots signs and WMA signs and even highway signs at the top of the skyline shot up like this all the time too. Who in the hell are you people that do this and what in the hell is your problem?

They are the few who have caused a good portion of the divide.
 

ndlongshot

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
1,781
Likes
121
Points
268
Slightly different topic:

Nothing says “I appreciate public land” like bullet holes in signs. I see several in these and I see Plots signs and WMA signs and even highway signs at the top of the skyline shot up like this all the time too. Who in the hell are you people that do this and what in the hell is your problem?

Dont underestimate young and dumb. I know I was. Add a six pack and things get really stupid. But we all grow up and realize they were not our proudest moments. And there is never ending pipeline of young and dumb.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 85
  • This month: 66
  • This month: 53
  • This month: 49
  • This month: 45
  • This month: 41
  • This month: 37
  • This month: 33
  • This month: 31
  • This month: 27
Top Bottom