Improving the PLOTS program

[Obi-Wan]

If the small game stamp increased by $ 20 and they sell 50,000 stamps or they sell 20,000 plot stamps for $ 20 which would generate more revenue? How would the stamp be enforced?

if a stamp cost 20 bucks or they increase license fees 20 bucks which one costs more?

 

[LBrandt]

I would buy into the plots stamp idea.

 

[Retired Educator]

Have hunted in MT a few times and usually on BM land. Where I hunted it was not uncommon to have the BM in sections and not quarters of land. Also fairly common to have more than one rancher combine land with another to increase the size of the BM For the most part I hunter in ranch country where it is common for the acreage to be much larger.

I did like the BM concept but have to agree that it works better where there are larger acres involved. I'm not sure on the PLOTS permit. Have to see more number on how much would actually be raised with such a permit. Can argue all you want about NR but they are a fact and when we leave the state to hunt in another wouldn't we wanted to be treated fairly. In fact, when I leave the northern part of the state to hunt in the southern or western part don't I use the same facilities as a NR? Or when a Bismarck resident travels to Devils Lake to fish, don't they use the same facilities as someone from MN or WI?

I'm not against the PLOT permit, but if it's instituted we need to raise enough to actually make a difference. Lots of people on here were willing to suggest $50-$100 for a permit. Do you realize how many people complained when the Combo license went from $35 to $40. "What the hell is the G&F going to do with all that extra money?" was heard more than once. Good idea, more info needed to justify for the non-believers.

 

[Kurtr]

If the small game stamp increased by $ 20 and they sell 50,000 stamps or they sell 20,000 plot stamps for $ 20 which would generate more revenue? How would the stamp be enforced?

but what if those people who would have bought a license dont now and you are out 50 bucks for 15000 then what?

 

[Bfishn]

I quick search revealed that there are about 80,000 pheasant hunters, 50,000 deer tags, 50,000 waterfowl hunters in ND per year. If even half of pheasant hunters (40,000) were willing to buy an extra $50 PLOTS stamp, that's $2,000,000 per year!

 

[Obi-Wan]

???????

but what if those people who would have bought a license dont now and you are out 50 bucks for 15000 then what?

 

[gst]

seems fishy

In my best State Farm voice.........

Well he is from Fargo..........

 

[Kurtr]

???????

because they cant afford the extra 20 rack and now just dont get a license at all

 

[zoops]

Would like to start with the fact that in many cases those lands that several have complained about being worthless are probably not even being paid to be in the program, and if they are it's very low. Although it does suck to go out of your way to look at some PLOTS land that ends up being a flat pasture full of cattle.
I'm in favor of the idea, but obviously some details would need to be worked out. I believe we already currently are required to buy the general game/habitat 'stamp' for $20, although I don't know how much of that goes directly to PLOTS. As some have mentioned, I'm not sure that lack of money is the main issue with PLOTS - I think many landowners don't like the unlimited access aspect of it as the good ones get absolutely pounded in much of pheasant country. You could make it an optional stamp (having the choice to not buy it would mean you can't hunt them which would probably be fine with guys who only hunt private land, etc) but the only issue would be that if a decent percentage of hunters don't buy it, even making it $50 won't increase revenues much. I think the program has gotten some money out of the heritage fund which is a good use and more money could be a big help to not necessarily increase acreage but to offer programs to make the existing acres into better habitat.

 

[Bowhunter_24]

Adding a fee to a license is much different than making someone buy a seperate stamp. Making someone buy a stamp is making it more into a rich mans sport and not equal to all

and obviously my comment about leasing land was not to be taken literally, waggetron

- - - Updated - - -

Also I would be all for it if it was included in license fee. Just not a seperate stamp

 

[Norske]

As the owner of about 180 acres enrolled in PLOTS, I'll add the things that get me on the phone to the Game Warden:
1. Driving into my pastures after your deer.
2. Driving across hilly cultivated land to get to my PLOTS acres.
3. Looking at your host through your rifle scope.

 

[deleted_account]

As the owner of about 180 acres enrolled in PLOTS, I'll add the things that get me on the phone to the Game Warden:
1. Driving into my pastures after your deer.
2. Driving across hilly cultivated land to get to my PLOTS acres.
3. Looking at your host through your rifle scope.

the stupidity of some never ceases to amaze me.

 

[KDM]

One must be careful when entertaining programs such as this. If only those who purchase this stamp can hunt plots land, then essentially this "PLOT Stamp" is nothing more than a large scale group lease program. So for anyone against leasing land, but for this kind of "Plot Stamp" is playing both sides. IMO, putting this in place would be a huge step towards the "pay to play" way of hunting and I'm NOT in favor of this. I would prefer to have an additional $10 added to my hunting license earmarked specifically to add plots acres rather than a special stamp. Then all plots acres remain open to ALL SPORTSMAN!!

 

[ItemB]

If they raised fees on licences 10-20 bucks, and that was guaranteed to go towards the plots program I wouldn't have a problem with it, but who is going to audit keep track that it goes into thee plots fund? Selfishly I would love if they limited non residents access to plots, but I like to hunt and fish out of state so I can't be to against it. The other thing would be if then on residents don't have no access then more land would end up in exclusive leases that would would pay for.

I don't think the game and fish has anything to do with CRP acres, and I do know that getting land enrolled back into a crp contract seems like it just doesn't happen anymore I know of a lot of crp that will be getting broke up and fenced off for pasture this fall, not because the producer wants to get rid of crp just can't get the land enrolled back into crp.

 

[wslayer]

One must be careful when entertaining programs such as this. If only those who purchase this stamp can hunt plots land, then essentially this "PLOT Stamp" is nothing more than a large scale group lease program. So for anyone against leasing land, but for this kind of "Plot Stamp" is playing both sides. IMO, putting this in place would be a huge step towards the "pay to play" way of hunting and I'm NOT in favor of this. I would prefer to have an additional $10 added to my hunting license earmarked specifically to add plots acres rather than a special stamp. Then all plots acres remain open to ALL SPORTSMAN!!

Agree with this, additional $10-20 on license fee to go toward PLOT program

 

[Fisherman25]

I am not asking for anything for free I just disagree with a special stamp. We already are paying for the plots with the purchase of our hunting license. Now if the question was are you willing to pay more for your hunting license with the additional amount going to the plots program then my poll choice would be different.

Incorrect. In order to fund plots it has to pass legislation. If something like this was to happen, as part of the legislation to pass this bill they would have to take the original dollars off the program for it to be fair. It's a hell of a lot better option that federally purchased land that becomes non productive.

 

[Obi-Wan]

because they cant afford the extra 20 rack and now just dont get a license at all

In your scenario this same guy could not afford the 20 for a stamp so he could not hunt plots land

 

[Kurtr]

No he still gets to hunt the tilled up plots just not the 20 dollar plots land.

 

[Huskerdu]

Plots are funded though state and Federal funds, 2million in additional funding would add 1/3 more acres approx. Some of the poor PLOTS land is in trade to get some of the land owners more productive or better land. I don't understand why ND residents would want a exclusive on PLOTS property , small towns make more on non-resident hunters than day trippers , out of state money is economic development.
I can see some plots land from my place in western ND and I have seen 4 groups of bird hunters on the same 40 acres in the same day, maybe a sign in sheet would reduce some of the pressure on individual pieces of property?

 

[Obi-Wan]

No he still gets to hunt the tilled up plots just not the 20 dollar plots land.

That sounds like quite the system you are promoting Only those that can afford to pay get to hunt land that is partially paid for by public funds