Trespass Bill

[johnr]

I have gotten a few negative reps, really hurts my feelers.

 

[westwolfone]

Lots of good viewpoints and information on this on here.

Other then the petty bickering, I think it benefits us all to be educated on something that may affect us.

And please get rid of the stupid rep system.

 

[Zogman]

I have gotten a few negative reps, really hurts my feelers.

If you have feelings this is NOT a site for you...........

 

[PrairieGhost]

If you have feelings this is NOT a site for you

;:;funnypost

 

[Kurtr]

i just fail to see the benefit from a strictly sportsman standpoint. Why want something that will limit access further, possibly deter new hunters, make some quit all together, have what limited public land hit even harder... etc. Our voice is small as it is. With less hunters, that could mean less gun owners, and that is not good for us. I know im talking worst case scenarios here but you have to admit there could be a trickle down from something like this. Something about Incrementalism...?

And dont even try comparing ND to MT, WY, or SD. That isnt even apples and oranges.

I completely agree with trying not to compare to the great state of Sodak. I am proposing a bill so you guys are just North so people quit thinking we are the same............. OK now that blood pressures are way up I was just joking and love my neighbors to the north.

 

[Colt45]

KurtR, there is a reason we in North Dakota call South Dakota our sister state........ instead of our brother state ..........ha!! Hope I don't get hammered with negative rep now!!!

 

[johnr]

Its more the red headed step child state to us...haha
Jackrabbits and all.

 

[Kurtr]

hey tell those fighting hawks to leave the jackrabbits alone

 

[Retired Educator]

I understand why many landowners as well as sportsman have developed some mistrust in some of the conservation organizations. Perhaps they have gotten to big for their own good. DU is one that immediately comes to mind. When DU started it was a member driven organization that was solely in the business of promoting habitat for duck nesting. No argument with that goal, in fact recently they had programs available to help farmers with some expenses in the preservation of nesting habitat. The only time I've ever heard of farmers not supporting ducks is when the harvest is late and huge flocks of ducks begin feeding in unharvested crops. Don't blame a farmer for being frustrated with that problem. Ducks feeding in crops is a separate issue in my mind and one of the hazards of a late harvest. Certainly not created by either sportsmen or farmers. Most farmers are concerned with good habitat as good habitat generally means healthy land. On the downside is more ducks means more depredation and truthfully that is generally only an issue when we have a late harvest.

So DU didn't start out, years ago, as the bad guy. However, when DU felt the need to try and steer some of the state tax money (oil tax in this case) into their coffers, lots of people took offense. What happened to the member-driven theory? For many years I was a member of DU as I felt my member fees were being used to improve habitat for ducks. That also meant better habitat for all other types of game. My membership quit when someone decided that the tax money of this state was better than member donations. At one time I know several farmers that also were members or participated in fundraising through the many DU banquets. It's too bad that what started as a good idea organization got so side-tracked. And in the end pissed off so many people that today it basically has no support in this state and has created a divide between sportsman and landowners.

It's a shame we have this divide as based on the vote, there were very few sportsman who supported the DU money grab any more than landowners. How did we end up with an argument between two groups that neither group supported?

Others are correct in that there are outdoor organizations that do a lot of good. Perhaps most of them are the local groups. Let's not blame everyone for the actions of a few.

 

[wstnodak]

Take GST's post into context Lunk........he posts about the unsigned neg rep then 2 minutes later wstnodak shows up with his post....coincidence?
Looks like he's posted 13 times on this site. 12 of them hit and run cheap shots on GST..........
http://nodakangler.com/forums/search.php?searchid=884156

The guy has mental issues

Do you really think that is what the neg rep system is designed for?

Sorry to disappoint you pecker. I gave gst a negative rep many moons ago as I am sure he did to me. As far as I know you can only do that once so nope, it wasn't me. Apparently someone else sees through goobers smoke an mirrors as well....shocker.

 

[johnr]

Excellent post Retired Educator, I also let my DU membership slide about 5 or so yrs ago, cant remember exactly, but felt my money was better spent elsewhere

 

[guywhofishes]

 

[PrairieGhost]

Excellent post Retired Educator, I also let my DU membership slide about 5 or so yrs ago, cant remember exactly, but felt my money was better spent elsewhere

I never have belonged. I hardly ever pick up a shotgun. My first preference is archery, then rifle, then handgun. I just about got hung at work one day when I said I love ducks. A fellow worker said "really you hardly ever hunt ducks". I said "I like them because they are good fox food". Yikes what a reaction.

I guess I remember the old DU when duck hunters got all wound up a month before the annual meeting.

 

[johnr]

Some guys are strung so effn tight, you make a joke, and the get pissy, that's when I really like to lay it on, but only face to face so they can see my expressions, and figure out they are over reacting

 

[lunkerslayer]

I was thinking about OK let's find a middle ground here if this passes to look at the glass half full scenerio. Since some have stated that there are farmers or land owners that keep thier land open for public hunting so the NDGF will need to update the plots section to include all land open to public hunting.

That way farmers who rather not be bothered can make it known that their land is open. Easy fix of course it will take time for people to adjust to a new system but I think the NDGF will need to move into the 21st century. Just a thought this all can be done with time and cooperation with all those this concerns.

 

[Migrator Man]

I understand why many landowners as well as sportsman have developed some mistrust in some of the conservation organizations. Perhaps they have gotten to big for their own good. DU is one that immediately comes to mind. When DU started it was a member driven organization that was solely in the business of promoting habitat for duck nesting. No argument with that goal, in fact recently they had programs available to help farmers with some expenses in the preservation of nesting habitat. The only time I've ever heard of farmers not supporting ducks is when the harvest is late and huge flocks of ducks begin feeding in unharvested crops. Don't blame a farmer for being frustrated with that problem. Ducks feeding in crops is a separate issue in my mind and one of the hazards of a late harvest. Certainly not created by either sportsmen or farmers. Most farmers are concerned with good habitat as good habitat generally means healthy land. On the downside is more ducks means more depredation and truthfully that is generally only an issue when we have a late harvest.

So DU didn't start out, years ago, as the bad guy. However, when DU felt the need to try and steer some of the state tax money (oil tax in this case) into their coffers, lots of people took offense. What happened to the member-driven theory? For many years I was a member of DU as I felt my member fees were being used to improve habitat for ducks. That also meant better habitat for all other types of game. My membership quit when someone decided that the tax money of this state was better than member donations. At one time I know several farmers that also were members or participated in fundraising through the many DU banquets. It's too bad that what started as a good idea organization got so side-tracked. And in the end pissed off so many people that today it basically has no support in this state and has created a divide between sportsman and landowners.

It's a shame we have this divide as based on the vote, there were very few sportsman who supported the DU money grab any more than landowners. How did we end up with an argument between two groups that neither group supported?

Others are correct in that there are outdoor organizations that do a lot of good. Perhaps most of them are the local groups. Let's not blame everyone for the actions of a few.

What is your opinion of the current outdoor heritage fund in ND that takes a small portion of the oil tax revenue and funds are allocated by the industrial commission? Do you oppose groups like DU from applying for these funds for conservation projects? I think the OHF has done some grea things for the sportsmen of ND and wish they had more money to support it.

 

[gst]

Old man you are full of sh$t better do some reflection becuase either you have dementia or being dishonest. Either way I know which one is true...Carry on gst you know you will...

For the record gst I agree with yur opinions majority of times but when you bring up this negative rep bull sh$t. It really brings out your true intentions which is you are looking for the validity of your confrontational response by screaming victim.

Holy, help a guy fill his deer tag with one of his property on our property and then go to a ball game and ....................lunk, no "victim" here, just someone with enough back bone to sign the one bad rep point I have given that thinks little of those without the balls to do the same.

Try not to get to deep into the psychic analysis lunk.

you aren;t pissed becasue I haven;t responded to your friend request are you?

- - - Updated - - -

the problem with that argument in this particular case is that a rep from a transportation organization (possibly from out of state) had more influence than numerous constituents. That's a load of BS. We need to remove these scum bags from office when they pull shit like that. Drain the swamp. Electing this governor was the start of the draining process. Now we have to get the locals to pull their heads out of their asses and elect some decent people.

hey I have NO problem removing representatives that do not listen to their constituents thru the electoral process. Hold them accountable!! . Right with ya there. You also have to get people to run that will to elect them.

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't really matter what I think about the rep system is for anymore. It is easier to just ignore someone than it is to acknowledge you got one it would be a different story if gst would give a heads up to those who gave him a positive rep for a good post. "Hey thanks to those who gave me a positive rep for that comment thanks whoever you are." gst

Well I get so many of them that is all I would get done..............................................

Thanks to those that have given me positive rep, It certainly boosts my self esteem and makes my day seem a little brighter, if one of them was you lunk I certainly appreciate your thoughtfullness to put the effort into posting a supportive rep.

- - - Updated - - -

What is your opinion of the current outdoor heritage fund in ND that takes a small portion of the oil tax revenue and funds are allocated by the industrial commission? Do you oppose groups like DU from applying for these funds for conservation projects? I think the OHF has done some grea things for the sportsmen of ND and wish they had more money to support it.

Know a little bit about the origins of what became the OHF. Was a voice within an ag org that pushed for this idea. The original program had support from ag as well as other stake holders in our outdoors. Personally I have no problem with groups like DU putting in their application and if they are good having them funded thru this program, but like happens to often there was a few shenanigans and some of the cooperative spirit that created this program was stressed.

It truly would be a shame if groups involved skirting what the program has agreed to do stresses the relationships of the stake holders within this program.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry to disappoint you pecker. I gave gst a negative rep many moons ago as I am sure he did to me. As far as I know you can only do that once so nope, it wasn't me. Apparently someone else sees through goobers smoke an mirrors as well....shocker.

Jimmy, have only ever given one bad rep and it was not to you. So you are one up on me. Your posts on this site aimed at personal attacks are of such little consequence to any of the issues being discussed they simply do not warrant a response of bad rep, and I don;t give bad rep for being a whiney little bitch, sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[gst]

AS per my new year/new self........thanks espringers I am going sleep easy tonite with the warm feeling positive rep brings.

 

[Retired Educator]

Funds for conservation doesn't bother me. I don't pretend to know what everybody is thinking but had a sense in the last initiated measure that most people thought that DU was going to use the funds to purchase land. May or not have been the case but perception drives a lot of discussion.

For me, DU original goal was preserving wetlands without actually owning any land. Again, for me, that is a big difference. If an individual wants to sign an easement with DU without a change in ownership that allows the owner to continue normal farm/ranch uses and the land remains on the tax roles, that would be more acceptable to most people. Whether it was true or not I have no proof but that seemed to be one of the major issues with said initiated measure.

Have no idea if what I just wrote makes sense but for me, DU wanted way to much money for plans that neither sportsman nor landowners supported.

Back to my original thinking that how did an issue that neither sportsman or landowners support, become a reason that is now dividing both groups? Perhaps it's a case of those who post their land would like to not have to do that and achieve the same result and think that would benefit all other landowners as well. I don't have an answer other than I prefer to not change our current laws.

 

[db-2]

Grew up on a farm and as a kid would grab my 22, start walking after chores were done and be back by evening chores. No signs back then and never did run into another hunter. And there were rabbits to hunt. A couple of friends did hunt but used dad,s pick up. Felt they were missing a bunch.
grew up and left the land. Was agaisnt this law. But hunting has changed and I have changed and no rabbits so it chAnged for my kids.
for me whatever. Have no problem lining up my hunts by asking far in advance now. But then I now hunt with a bow, that 22 has not been shot in probably 20 years and just to old to make that walk again. Db