No licenses for non landowners

[lunkerslayer]

Even if non landowners get a tag the way land owners are posting every stick of land so non land owners could get a chance to fill their tag. The NDGF should step up and allow only so many land owners get a gratis tag but allow non owner residents to hunt their land in exchange for gratis tags, so if land owners don't want to open their land to non owners they shouldn't get to draw for a tag. It's time for change in the way we north dakotans favor those who seem to have entitlement. Also like a stated before on a other thread land owners getting multiple elk tags because they feel that NDGF has to cater to them because they have the herd. Should be one tag per person for life period. Good for the goose is good for the gander

This is my agenda KDM opening private lands for the benefit of non land owners, the other thing about getting dibs on a buck tag was supposed to be sarcastic attempt because of your comment on land owners being dishonest.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Now you are showing your true motives Lunker. It's NOT the landowners fault in any way shape or form that people don't get tags. If you don't like the gratis tag system, talk to your legislators and try to get it changed, but be prepared for push back as I am a landowner and will lobby against you in such an issue. I don't think vilifying landowners will improve hunting opportunities for non land owners, but that of course is just my opinion.

I dont think anyone is endorsing removal of the gratis system, and if you are a farmer, changing from 160 to 640 shouldnt affect you much at all. Why would you lobby against it exactly?

 

[Crankn]

;:;rofl yeah OK DJE you keep telling yourself that is the truth, but not all land owners are in that category, how many deer are on your land since you feed them.? It still doesn't address multiple gratis tags for multiple families

I'm a land owner and I Get one gratis tag I don't get one for my wife my non farming son or my daughter. So do I fit your profile?

 

[lunkerslayer]

I dont think anyone is endorsing removal of the gratis system, and if you are a farmer, changing from 160 to 640 shouldnt affect you much at all. Why would you lobby against it exactly?

The problem even if they do allow this 640 land owners can still keep their land closed to public hunting, which is exactly what has been going on in other outdoor hunting opportunities (waterfowl, game birds, or etc.) Now minnesota has it where you can buy so many acres of land for your family to hunt for that year exclusively but still not opening to non land owners.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm a land owner and I Get one gratis tag I don't get one for my wife my non farming son or my daughter. So do I fit your profile?

Thank you Crankn for not abusing your right to get said gratis tags, but would you be willing to do your part by counting how many deer are on your land and sharing the information to the NDGF so we non landowners could find out if we can get more tags.
Also I am not bashing All farmers

 

[Crankn]

The problem even if they do allow this 640 land owners can still keep their land closed to public hunting, which is exactly what has been going on in other outdoor hunting opportunities (waterfowl, game birds, or etc.) Now minnesota has it where you can buy so many acres of land for your family to hunt for that year exclusively but still not opening to non land owners.

- - - Updated - - -



Thank you Crankn for not abusing your right to get said gratis tags, but would you be willing to do your part by counting how many deer are on your land and sharing the information to the NDGF so we non landowners could find out if we can get more tags.
Also I am not bashing All farmers

I sure would if I was asked. It wouldn't be a problem at all.

 

[camoman]

The problem even if they do allow this 640 land owners can still keep their land closed to public hunting, which is exactly what has been going on in other outdoor hunting opportunities (waterfowl, game birds, or etc.) Now minnesota has it where you can buy so many acres of land for your family to hunt for that year exclusively but still not opening to non land owners.

- - - Updated - - -



Thank you Crankn for not abusing your right to get said gratis tags, but would you be willing to do your part by counting how many deer are on your land and sharing the information to the NDGF so we non landowners could find out if we can get more tags.

If you want more opportunity, get off your keyboard and go meet some landowners. Physically meet them, get to know them, and ask permission to hunt. If you aren't willing to do this, then don't hunt. I don't want to hear the excuse that you don't have time to do all that, because if you want to hunt more property (private property) you'll do what it takes.

Also, can you not read or are you a selective listener? KDM already stated that it is not biologically sound data to ask landowners about the presence of deer on their property, period.

 

[westwolfone]

Or just go shoot one anywhere. The odds of getting caught are about zero.

 

[Crankn]

I post some of my land every poster has my cell# on every sign.Very seldom do I get a call.

 

[lunkerslayer]

If you want more opportunity, get off your keyboard and go meet some landowners. Physically meet them, get to know them, and ask permission to hunt. If you aren't willing to do this, then don't hunt. I don't want to hear the excuse that you don't have time to do all that, because if you want to hunt more property (private property) you'll do what it takes.

Also, can you not read or are you a selective listener? KDM already stated that it is not biologically sound data to ask landowners about the presence of deer on their property, period.

This is not about me this is about non landowners who don't even get to draw a tag because most of the tags are drawn by land owners. It is about those who land owners must harvest three deer with multiple land owners families. It's is bigger than me, also who are the state reps who we can call or email to get things rolling. So I can get information from the horses mouth.

- - - Updated - - -

Also this dishonest land owners only cause animosity towards those who believe they are Greedy by not giving good numbers of deer

 

[Enslow]

I post some of my land every poster has my cell# on every sign.Very seldom do I get a call.

Nobody has tags. Deer season is a ghost town.

 

[KDM]

I dont think anyone is endorsing removal of the gratis system, and if you are a farmer, changing from 160 to 640 shouldnt affect you much at all. Why would you lobby against it exactly?

I'm not a farmer, but why would I lobby for giving up a perk of being a landowner?? Are you saying if you inherited 160 acres of river bottom you wouldn't put in for a gratis tag??? Would you also lobby to give up your opportunity to get a deer tag every year??

Lunker, I would like to see more private land open for hunting as well. I don't own any goose hunting land, but very much like to goose hunt, so I deal with posted signs just like everyone else. The same for pheasants. I would like to see the plots program better funded. I would like to see some type of shelter belt conservation program as it saddens me to see the increasing number of them being bulldozed down. I would like to see improvements made to what public land already exists instead of continually seeing people trying to gain access to private ground such as mine. Where are the calls for tree plantings on public ground?? Where are the calls for food plots on public ground?? Why are WPA's and other public lands being hayed or plowed under or farmed?? There are numerous grass roots movements that the public can take to improve what they already have access to, but instead seem to prefer to demand that they be given access to private land someone else has, that they have no right to. I suspect that if the public ground was the best deer, pheasant, and waterfowl habitat, there wouldn't be an land access issue at all.

 

[westwolfone]

Hey KDM, the answer to all your ??? is $$$$$$ like it always is.

 

[DJE]

I would almost guarantee you that if people push to take landowner tags away that every landowner would post all their land and not allow people to hunt it because the people that asked to hunt it are the very people that pushed to take their tags away.

 

[Putz ND]

If you don't like it go buy some land and pay taxes on it every year. Between my dad and I we pay over 15k a year for our gratis tags plus we feed them. If anyone wants to pitch in your more than welcome to hunt it.:;:stirthepot

Tough topic - I pay nearly three times that in various property taxes throughout the year and still don't qualify for a gratis - wrong type of real estate I also have a couple of small parcels of hunting land, yes we invest in food plots and supplemental feeding, habitat, ect, ect. I don't expect a guaranteed tag because of $$ spent or invested. Using a financial argument is what drives this conversation into the gutter very quickly. Opportunity to hunt based on land acreage (i.e. wealth and assets) is what has happened throughout Europe and hence it has become a rich-mans sport only. Anyone with an open mind needs to realize that spreading the opportunity more is the only way we'll ever maintain any type of hunting tradition. Think of all the "up and coming" hunters in these areas that get screwed out of a tag because they don't own acreage. WOW

 

[Account Deleted]

I have a hard time understanding the G&F. When I brought up mandatory big game checks to at least get that bunch of data, they seemed really apprehensive. They cited it being cost prohibitive but it seemed like they had no interest in it to begin with. I know you don't particularly value harvest info as much KDM, but to me it was an insight into their train of thought. Or maybe I'm overthinking it and they just don't want the extra cost.

The real ironic thing to me is, I've brought up raising hunting license/tag prices to pay for more conservation/access/data collection but most folks just said it wouldn't work/didn't want to pay for it.

 

[KDM]

Hey KDM, the answer to all your ??? is $$$$$$ like it always is.

That's true to a point John. However, I think it's more of a priority thing rather than a funding thing. I don't have near the money the G&F does, but I still find enough change in the couch to plant a few trees every year.

 

[lunkerslayer]

Tough topic - I pay nearly three times that in various property taxes throughout the year and still don't qualify for a gratis - wrong type of real estate I also have a couple of small parcels of hunting land, yes we invest in food plots and supplemental feeding, habitat, ect, ect. I don't expect a guaranteed tag because of $$ spent or invested. Using a financial argument is what drives this conversation into the gutter very quickly. Opportunity to hunt based on land acreage (i.e. wealth and assets) is what has happened throughout Europe and hence it has become a rich-mans sport only. Anyone with an open mind needs to realize that spreading the opportunity more is the only way we'll ever maintain any type of hunting tradition. Think of all the "up and coming" hunters in these areas that get screwed out of a tag because they don't own acreage. WOW

Holy tittysprinkles PutzND that is what I have been saying hoohooooooooo;:;bowdown

 

[DJE]

Tough topic - I pay nearly three times that in various property taxes throughout the year and still don't qualify for a gratis - wrong type of real estate I also have a couple of small parcels of hunting land, yes we invest in food plots and supplemental feeding, habitat, ect, ect. I don't expect a guaranteed tag because of $$ spent or invested. Using a financial argument is what drives this conversation into the gutter very quickly. Opportunity to hunt based on land acreage (i.e. wealth and assets) is what has happened throughout Europe and hence it has become a rich-mans sport only. Anyone with an open mind needs to realize that spreading the opportunity more is the only way we'll ever maintain any type of hunting tradition. Think of all the "up and coming" hunters in these areas that get screwed out of a tag because they don't own acreage. WOW

Appearently you didn't read my next post about letting most people that ask hunt. I've personally taken kids and women out and put them on their first buck ever.

 

[gst]

This is my agenda KDM opening private lands for the benefit of non land owners, the other thing about getting dibs on a buck tag was supposed to be sarcastic attempt because of your comment on land owners being dishonest.

So you go about this by slammin landowners and taking away their gratis tag? Genius plan you got there lunk.

So my sons run about 30 cows a peice. They rent a couple hundred acres of pasture and some hay land that they put in for gratis on. So by doing away with their ability to get a gratis tag by raising it to 640
people think private lands are going ot open up more? Funny way of thinkin there.

 

[Putz ND]

I did read your next post and for some reason this topic is always an emotional pissing match - I have a 40 acre parcel that is LOADED with deer - we harvested 4 critters off of it this year. We helped 2 kids get their first deer and had a two others use it as a last resort to fill their tags. My family had 0 rifle tags for it. Blah - blah - blah. Its very rewarding to do. I just don't think that anyone should be offered an absolute opportunity based on assets. Preference?…Maybe - but NOT to the extent where it eliminates 100% opportunity for everyone else. Also, by the passion for it that you seem to have for hunting and the sport in general, I would be hard-pressed to believe that you'd be so selfish as to shut down access if you didn't have a tag yourself.