High Fence Hunting On the Ballot

Pages

612 posts / 0 new
Last post
gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

EyeKllr Said:
And I am about fair chase - no fences, no pens, no baiting and maybe on game camera's.

Whats wrong with wanting to keep at least one thing somewhat pure?

And no....I dont belong to any organizations other than the GOA - used to belong to the NRA but they are too into selling out. But thats another story.

Eye killer, NO ONE is trying to take away your ability to remain as pure to what you need as an individual to take from the hunting experience what you must. Even if HF exists, even if baiting exists you can still make the choice to hunt how you wish. Even if it is running thru the woods naked with a pointed rock on a stick ! Well maybe you would need at least a loin cloth or something! 

To me that is the beauty of hunting it is soley an individual experience and choice what you want to take from the experience. When people believe they need to begin imposing their beliefs for that on other people to me it takes more away from the hunting experience than HFor baiting or cameras ever will.

pber's picture
pber
Offline
Joined: 5/19/08

Montanans for Trap-Free Public Lands:  As a true grassroots group, we are composed of folks from all walks of life; citizens, and outdoor recreationists including hikers, skiers, ice-climbers, fishermen, hunters, campers, and horseback riders.

There is no “fair chase” in trapping.  Trapping does not honor the hunters’ ethical code of “fair chase,” or the time-honored principles of quick and efficient kill.  Tens of thousands of untended, unmonitored traps lure wild and domestic animals with bait.  Trappers are not required to check their traps in any specific period of time.

http://www.mttrapfree.org/index.html

aba's picture
aba
Offline
Joined: 12/16/01

Allen,  After reading your answer it easy to see which side you're on.  Your statement about all HF/outfitter land being closed to the average Joe is completely out of context.  All I can say is you really need to get a life.   After reading Roger Kaseman's letter in the Tribune I had to laugh, he mentioned 3 times about those " out of state hunter, and referred to them as "rich".   The chickens have come home to roost, this is the whole agenda like always them "out of state hunters'.  Check the names of the sponsors of this petition and you will find these are the same ones that always want more restrictions on out of state hunters.  So Allen let me ask you a question, Why is it that none of these guys customers are complaining?   You guy's make a big deal about this not being fair chase yet I'm not hearing any complaints against these guys in ND doing this. 

mauserG33-40's picture
mauserG33-40
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

Allen in case you don't have a list to check here you  go

http://www.nd.gov/sos/electvote/elections/docs/petition20090821.pdf

 

hunternd's picture
hunternd
Offline
Joined: 5/19/04

This has been interesting to watch over the years. The proponents have tried the disease issue, the "I don't like it and the legislature won't pass it " approach and not the "Fair Chase" approach.  So - where does a person go to get the official and ethical "Fair Chase" rules??  Maybe there's a rule book out there somewhere, I would like to find it to get the defined rules Or , will the ethics masters pass one law at a time until their defination of ethical and fair chase gets into law?? 

If you choose to be a pureist - great, if you want to pay a pheasant preserve to take your friends or kids hunting - great. Which will be the most rewarding??  Depends on the person.  I'll bet that we couldn't even agree on the use of high power scopes, rangefinders, trail cameras, or shooting a deer laing down???

The article in the Bismarck Tribune written by Roger Kaseman brings out several issues that aren't related to high fence and I believe will be their next areas of legislation.

1. Guides and outfitters, and private landowners that cater to "rich, out of state hunters"
2. Baiting and other methods that are viewed as "unacceptable" by the ethics masters.
3. The North American Model of Conservation
4. Common ag practices such as AI, genetic selection, keep in mind the fenced animals are not wild but domesticated?

This issue has the potential to go much deeper than the high fenced operations. 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

EyeKllr Said:
I would say yes of course.
tic system" be based of factual truth?
So educate me on how it is wrong or decietful and I guarantee I will vote against it - I will even get people around me to vote against it.

I am being that open - no sarcasm intended.

And to another poster - I see where animals traditionally thought of as wild game animals have been bastardized into so much livestock - and I hate it. I despise it.......

The clock can not be turned back and these animals wether it is liked or not have been domesticated in the eyes of the state and are clearly defined as such in the NDCC. Yet a sponsor of this measure admits to telling the public they are defined as wild game and are included under art.11 sec 27 which they simply are not. This lie was admittedly told to help gather signatures to get this on the ballot. The sponsor Gary Masching stated that when people were told this they went out and got others to come back and sign this measure. So how many signatures were gathered  based on this fraudulent statement?

The sponsors claim it will not shut down other elk operations that raise their animals for sale for meat. Yet will not explain why this measure is put into the section of the Century Code reserved for animal agriculture and how if these animals are indeed reclassified as big game as this measure is worded how the Federal Lacey Act (which sponsor Roger Kaseman stated will be used in regards to this measure) will not make anyone receiving a fee or renumeration for the killing of a big game animal in violation of this state and federal laws?

Dick Monson, a sponsor, publically  stated that the CWD infected deer in SW ND had to have been infected by a HFH operation. Where is his factual proof to base this statement on?

People have came on this site and stated they had been told lies by the sponsors of this measure one being these animals were stolen from the wild. If these lies had not been told, would there have been enough signatures gathered to place this on the ballot??

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Allen Said:Does truth include the answers to any of the following?

- Did HFH operators and participants turn their backs on the Average Joe by tossing the tradition of fair chase out the window
No. People are paying to shoot domesticated livestock. Has nothing to do with fair chase.

- Did HFH operators and participants, either directly or indirectly, remove access from previously open lands to the Average Joe in the name of the almighty dollar?
No. How is this any different than Guided Outfitter hunts, where the land is posted and you have to pay a fee to hunt it?

- Has any HFH operation ever been associated with bringing CWD, or other disease, across state lines?
Dont know. Have Elk farms? HFH operations are more of a CWD risk than normal elk farms?

- Have HFH operations ever had animals escape that were never recovered?
Probably. Do cattle, chickens, turkeys, or the family dog ever get loose and run away from home?

- Do HFH operations that have animals escape ever pay the full cost of their removal by state or federal agents when that operation has been unsuccessful at recovering their non-traditional livestock?
For the few times ive ever heard of it happening, i dont think they have had to pay anything. I dont think it has cost the state very much considering these animals dont get loose very often and the g and f employees are gonna get there 40 hours in whether they're tracking these animals down or not. Maybe they should pass a law stating that the HFH operations have to pay for the costs?

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

sportsman | Said:
As of right now, I will not be voting for the measure (due to wording).

However, if anyone who claims it will open the door to shutting down other methods of hunting would like to explain exactly how, I would love to listen to it. Do you think they will only try an initiated measure if this passes? Or that they would never (or have never) think about following a states method of enacting laws? Those are extremely naive' in my opinion. Unless you are strictly talking about interpretting this law in the court system, in which case a rewrite to address that concern will most likely be attempted next time.

If I recall there has been numerous debates on how this bill could very easily be used to restrict other normal hunting issues.  All you have to do is read the info from the HSUS.  They will use whatever methods they can to impose their will on hunters.  I fully expect the use of Trail Cams to come under attack soon.  Also the baiting issue will rear it's ugly head very soon also.  There is nothing off the table when the HSUS is involved.  And whether you believe it or not, the HSUS is involved in this deal big time. 

 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

pber Said:
Allen, My point is, do we want Fair Chase defined in federal law?  At the rate this is going, this is exactly what is going to happen and then Fair Chase can be used to define away hunting.

I actually do know an operator that allows hunting on his land that is not fenced.  A lot of operators do not totally fence all their land. 

So are you saying that by eliminating the high fence hunt facilities, all some 10 of them, there will be more acres for others to hunt?

Lol, the land owners most definitely will charge a fee, if they let anyone on at all. Couldnt really blame them i guess since there business got shutdown because of some pee brained voters.

pber's picture
pber
Offline
Joined: 5/19/08
Eyexer Stated:  I fully expect the use of Trail Cams to come under attack soon.  Also the baiting issue will rear it's ugly head very soon also.  There is nothing off the table when the HSUS is involved.  And whether you believe it or not, the HSUS is involved in this deal big time. 

Funny thing, Mr. Kaseman already was trying to get sponsors for a petition to ban baiting.  I also believe he has stated in Dakota Country that he does not like trail cams.  So I wonder if and when he sponsors and chairs any of these petitions he will collect another 8000 plus signatures by himself.  Will he meet with David Pauli, HSUS Regional Director again?

mauserG33-40's picture
mauserG33-40
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

pber Said:

Eyexer Stated:  I fully expect the use of Trail Cams to come under attack soon.  Also the baiting issue will rear it's ugly head very soon also.  There is nothing off the table when the HSUS is involved.  And whether you believe it or not, the HSUS is involved in this deal big time. 

Funny thing, Mr. Kaseman already was trying to get sponsors for a petition to ban baiting.  I also believe he has stated in Dakota Country that he does not like trail cams.  So I wonder if and when he sponsors and chairs any of these petitions he will collect another 8000 plus signatures by himself.  Will he meet with David Pauli, HSUS Regional Director again?

Just guessing, if he wants his paycheck I am sure he will meet with David.

 

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

Tim Sandstrom Said:

To me it seems absolutely hilarious, hypocritical, etc that the park is allowed to let caged elk roam freely in and out of the park.  In fact, the reason they cannot ship the elk to other places anymore is because of CWD and other disease concerns.  Yet, every single year you hear of people shooting them as they go back into the park.  Doesn't that seem weird?

Then of course this whole high fence thing.  Nobody can convince me there won't be issue soon arising about the park hunt.  This initiative (as mentioned above) opens the door for litigation.  The answer I hear is "oh but Tim, there isn't any money exchanged at hand."

Hence, it won't be shut down as a high fence operation.  The older I get the more I see the hypocrisy of the world.  Some of guilty of but man, this is something else. 
 

Tim,

Please tell me you have read the measure.  It specifically EXCLUDES operations such as the TRNP elk.  The "volunteers" are unpaid government employees performing a management cull.   Period, end of frigging story.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

Hmm.  The edit function doesn't seem to work tonight for me.  Sorry Tim, I think I pulled an older post out of yours.

To GST, pber, and several others.  Quite honestly, I haven't completely made up my mind on which way to vote as I too have issues with some of the same things some of you bring up.  The problem is...I ABSOLUTELY frigging despise what HFH and outfitters do in ND.  At the same time, Kaseman is a very poor example of how to lead an initiated measure.
 
Yet, not many of you are any frigging better than Kaseman with your discussion of the pros and cons of HFH. 

Guess I will return to the sidelines now.  Especially since not much "truth" is available here in regard to a few questions I asked.

Sure was a lot of opining going on though.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

aba's picture
aba
Offline
Joined: 12/16/01

Allen Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:

I brought this over from a different forum:

Tuff Chick Said:
Not so good.  I helped my friend this weekend and saw nothing.  We camped at the Buffalo Gap and only 5 Elk were brought there to be hung.  Ollie said this is the worst year for elk. The only ones that I saw shot were the elk trying to get back into the park after feeding all night.  Hopefully since the weather is cooler that will help. 
Good Luck!

To me it seems absolutely hilarious, hypocritical, etc that the park is allowed to let caged elk roam freely in and out of the park.  In fact, the reason they cannot ship the elk to other places anymore is because of CWD and other disease concerns.  Yet, every single year you hear of people shooting them as they go back into the park.  Doesn't that seem weird?

Then of course this whole high fence thing.  Nobody can convince me there won't be issue soon arising about the park hunt.  This initiative (as mentioned above) opens the door for litigation.  The answer I hear is "oh but Tim, there isn't any money exchanged at hand."

Hence, it won't be shut down as a high fence operation.  The older I get the more I see the hypocrisy of the world.  Some of guilty of but man, this is something else. 

Guess there's nothing to really do but sit back and watch the show in November and maybe write some letters, do some blogging, etc to lobby against this.  Should be interesting regardless.
 

Tim,

Please tell me you have read the measure.  It specifically EXCLUDES operations such as the TRNP elk.  The "volunteers" are unpaid government employees performing a management cull.   Period, end of frigging story.

Allen, So it is "ethical"  because they are not paid and volunteer's?  Gonna be a real challenge isn't it when they track the Elk by radio collars.  

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

aba Said:
Allen,  After reading your answer it easy to see which side you're on.  Your statement about all HF/outfitter land being closed to the average Joe is completely out of context.  All I can say is you really need to get a life.   After reading Roger Kaseman's letter in the Tribune I had to laugh, he mentioned 3 times about those " out of state hunter, and referred to them as "rich".   The chickens have come home to roost, this is the whole agenda like always them "out of state hunters'.  Check the names of the sponsors of this petition and you will find these are the same ones that always want more restrictions on out of state hunters.  So Allen let me ask you a question, Why is it that none of these guys customers are complaining?   You guy's make a big deal about this not being fair chase yet I'm not hearing any complaints against these guys in ND doing this. 

Ok, gotta comment on this one.  You missed the point in my question of where I don't know of any, pber answered it.  I never said NOBODY never got onto land of HFH operations, I said I am unaware of any that can and do.  Again, I never said a fact.

And yes, laws and those who propose laws should be truthful in their quest for laws or changes in them.  Only problem though is that as an on-the-fencer who leans toward voting yes, I see just as much deceit and BS on both sides.

OK. back to the sidelines.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

pber's picture
pber
Offline
Joined: 5/19/08

Allen,

Let me ask you this, do you think that initiated measures should be used to take legal businesses away from people without any form of compensation with a simple majority vote?

Do you think that personal grievances with another should be part of initiated measures? 

The following incident happened to one of the elk growers.  He found out that someone he knows signed the petition.  When he asked the person why he signed he was told, "Because you make too much money."

Is this a precedent we want to set in our country?

mauserG33-40's picture
mauserG33-40
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

Allen Said:
Hmm.  The edit function doesn't seem to work tonight for me.  Sorry Tim, I think I pulled an older post out of yours.

To GST, pber, and several others.  Quite honestly, I haven't completely made up my mind on which way to vote as I too have issues with some of the same things some of you bring up.  The problem is...I ABSOLUTELY frigging despise what HFH and outfitters do in ND.  At the same time, Kaseman is a very poor example of how to lead an initiated measure.
 
Yet, not many of you are any frigging better than Kaseman with your discussion of the pros and cons of HFH. 

Guess I will return to the sidelines now.  Especially since not much "truth" is available here in regard to a few questions I asked.

Sure was a lot of opining going on though.

The truth is there Allen you just can't handle it.  

 

aba's picture
aba
Offline
Joined: 12/16/01

To GST, pber, and several others.  Quite honestly, I haven't completely made up my mind on which way to vote as I too have issues with some of the same things some of you bring up.  The problem is...I ABSOLUTELY frigging despise what HFH and outfitters do in ND. 



So Allen what has the HFH and outfitters done to hurt you?

EyeKllr's picture
EyeKllr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/27/06

Whoa...

Dont be jumping on Allen for having his own right to form his opinion...

And dont dare ask anyone to have to justify their own opinion - thats their right.

I think some of you need to learn to respect others or take a hike.

Enough with the bullcrap already.

Patience Suchka.......

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Allen Said:
Hmm.  The edit function doesn't seem to work tonight for me.  Sorry Tim, I think I pulled an older post out of yours.

To GST, pber, and several others.  Quite honestly, I haven't completely made up my mind on which way to vote as I too have issues with some of the same things some of you bring up.  The problem is...I ABSOLUTELY frigging despise what HFH and outfitters do in ND.  At the same time, Kaseman is a very poor example of how to lead an initiated measure.
 
Yet, not many of you are any frigging better than Kaseman with your discussion of the pros and cons of HFH. 

Guess I will return to the sidelines now.  Especially since not much "truth" is available here in regard to a few questions I asked.

Sure was a lot of opining going on though.

Thats funny. why dont you answer the questions yourself. oh wait, that would be an opinion too i guess.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

EyeKllr Said:
Whoa...

Dont be jumping on Allen for having his own right to form his opinion...

And dont dare ask anyone to have to justify their own opinion - thats their right.

I think some of you need to learn to respect others or take a hike.

Enough with the bullshit already.

What are you talking about? Just because the majority of people don't agree with him doesn't mean anyone's jumping on him. Lol. He can ask questions and have an opinion, but no one else can?? Please.... The only disrespectful or bs comment ive read, is the one you just wrote. "And dont dare ask anyone to have to justify their own opinion".....thats politics....thats how it works.

mauserG33-40's picture
mauserG33-40
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

Allen Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:

To me it seems absolutely hilarious, hypocritical, etc that the park is allowed to let caged elk roam freely in and out of the park.  In fact, the reason they cannot ship the elk to other places anymore is because of CWD and other disease concerns.  Yet, every single year you hear of people shooting them as they go back into the park.  Doesn't that seem weird?

Then of course this whole high fence thing.  Nobody can convince me there won't be issue soon arising about the park hunt.  This initiative (as mentioned above) opens the door for litigation.  The answer I hear is "oh but Tim, there isn't any money exchanged at hand."

Hence, it won't be shut down as a high fence operation.  The older I get the more I see the hypocrisy of the world.  Some of guilty of but man, this is something else. 
 

Tim,

Please tell me you have read the measure.  It specifically EXCLUDES operations such as the TRNP elk.  The "volunteers" are unpaid government employees performing a management cull.   Period, end of frigging story.

This is the only post with a personal attact and really uncalled for.
Allen are you saying the government employees are unpaid for this culling program?
I know and most others this is not the "end of frigging story"

 

KurtR's picture
KurtR
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/16/07

2nd amendment right to bear arms,  end of friggen story !!!!!   That sure works like that in govt just one of many examples that show there is never a end to friggen stroy with politics.  Slippery slope and this is just one step closer to the slide getting steeper and steeper

 Adn

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

mauserG33-40 Said:

Allen Said:

 

Tim,

Please tell me you have read the measure.  It specifically EXCLUDES operations such as the TRNP elk.  The "volunteers" are unpaid government employees performing a management cull.   Period, end of frigging story.

This is the only post with a personal attact and really uncalled for.
Allen are you saying the government employees are unpaid for this culling program?
I know and most others this is not the "end of frigging story"

Mauser, No, the below is a personal attack that was uncalled for even if it isn't against me.  Sorry guy, just helping you with your reading comprehension skills.  

mauserG33-40 Said:

Just guessing, if he wants his paycheck I am sure he will meet with David.

p.s.  The volunteers are volunteer federal employees, it's been mentioned in a number of newspaper articles as to that's the only reason they get to "hunt" in the park.  And there are something like 5 team leaders who are paid temp federal employees.  I've seen the job ad, it pays around $22 an hour in case you are interested.  Although they may filled them already.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

mauserG33-40's picture
mauserG33-40
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

Allen Said:

mauserG33-40 Said:

Allen Said:

 

Tim,

Please tell me you have read the measure.  It specifically EXCLUDES operations such as the TRNP elk.  The "volunteers" are unpaid government employees performing a management cull.   Period, end of frigging story.

This is the only post with a personal attact and really uncalled for.
Allen are you saying the government employees are unpaid for this culling program?
I know and most others this is not the "end of frigging story"

Mauser, No you flipping idiot.   The below is a personal attack that was uncalled for, even if it wasn't against me.  Oh and by the way, my calling you an idiot isn't so much of a personal attack as it is just an observation of your reading comprehension.

mauserG33-40 Said:

Just guessing, if he wants his paycheck I am sure he will meet with David.

p.s.  The volunteers are volunteer federal employees, it's been mentioned in a number of newspaper articles as to that's the only reason they get to "hunt" in the park.  And there are something like 5 team leaders are paid temp federal employees.  I've seen the job ad, it pays around $22 an hour in case you are interested.  Although they may filled them already.

No Allen the last thing I would want to be would be is government employee.

 

mauserG33-40's picture
mauserG33-40
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

Allen now tell me if my reading skills are bad but you called this a "hunt" and these guys get $22 an hour to guide?  

p.s.  The volunteers are volunteer federal employees, it's been mentioned in a number of newspaper articles as to that's the only reason they get to "hunt" in the park.  And there are something like 5 team leaders who are paid temp federal employees.  I've seen the job ad, it pays around $22 an hour in case you are interested.  Although they may filled them already.

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Allen Said:
Hmm.  The edit function doesn't seem to work tonight for me.  Sorry Tim, I think I pulled an older post out of yours.

To GST, pber, and several others.  Quite honestly, I haven't completely made up my mind on which way to vote as I too have issues with some of the same things some of you bring up.  The problem is...I ABSOLUTELY frigging despise what HFH and outfitters do in ND.  At the same time, Kaseman is a very poor example of how to lead an initiated measure.
 
Yet, not many of you are any frigging better than Kaseman with your discussion of the pros and cons of HFH. 

Guess I will return to the sidelines now.  Especially since not much "truth" is available here in regard to a few questions I asked.

Sure was a lot of opining going on though.

Allen,  much like others you have now come on here and accused someone of lying without giving specific examples and yet  then comment about this being nothing more than personal attacks. You asked questions, I and others answered them all directly, unlike many supporters and sponsors that have been asked many unanswered questions. Simply because you do not like the answers given to your questions does not mean they have not been answered truthfully. As to " a lot of opining" how your first question was asked how could it be answered directly with any thing other than an opinion?

So point out what answers to your questions do not have "much truth" or please apologize for the "personal attack" on others character.  . And while your at it, could you answer if you believe the statement made by Gary Masching regarding these animals and art. 11 sec. 27 is true.

Also realize it is not a govt official that is doing the "management" in the Park, but rather volanteer "average joes" so there is indeed room to argue that these are not "govt officials" like you claim that are "managing"  but rather the same people that are banned from otherwise taking part in a "canned hunt"  by this measure that are "culling" in this instance . At least the animals in these HF operations do not have a radio collar  However even though some of the animals that may be shot in the Park do have radio collars, they  also do  not have large antlers as it is only cows being shot so I can understand why the sponsors of this measure do not have a problem with it!

Tim Sandstrom's picture
Tim Sandstrom
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/14/03

Allen Said:
Tim.

In regard to your thoughts on #4, I don't believe anywhere in the law does the National Park Service lay claim to animals.  Rather they control activities and that is why you can smoke an elk that walks 2 inches outside of the fence.  It's not the NPS' animal.

Does it really matter Allen?  I don't think so or am I using not enough thought?  I mean, the animal is off limits because of the park to the hunters (now limited...zero bull elk though).  Only way they are okay to shoot is if they come out of the park.  Only way to do that is to escape a high fence enclosure that have no natural exits.  Only exits where holes form.  Holes, by the way, I don't understand how they get there.  Simply by elk working on them with their horns or do we have hole cutters out there?

Anyway, I think it is very VERY clear it is their animals.  How do I come to that distinction?  Well, they cannot ship them anywhere else because of the disease issue.  So obviously, if they are held to that standard they should also be held to the standard of strict laws the HF operations are.  That is, severely fined if animals get loose.  But they aren't, hence the hypocrisy and why I think the disease issue is often more times than not used as a play on litigation and handcuffing.  If it was an issue so important, there would never be animals moving in and out of the park.  Right??

Again, I should just shut up because I think the simplest way to deal with the park elk is to allow them natural exits to and from the park (like ggenthusiast has repeatedly stated in other threads).  But we cannot do that because of disease issues and yet, the elk still roam in and out and EVERYONE knows it.  Pretty evident when people line up on it as if they are on a firing line.

P.S.  Just leave the park the way it is people.  I'd rather see the public shoot the animals than to have everything sealed off.  I'm afraid there is probably already a play in hand with HSUS on the park.  They are eagerly watching this measure.  Once it passes, they will use it against the park hunt.  Idiots if you ask me, they'll shut it down just so the public couldn't do anything.  They don't seem to care about the sharpshooter style.  In other words, that don't give a crap about the public.  And that right there is why we must fear anything they want to back.


 

 

Kirsch's Outdoor Products | Fargo, ND | 701-261-9017 Garmin GPS Hunting Maps
Liebel's Guide Service | Williston, ND | 701-770-6746 liebelsguideservice.com
Jig-em-Up Guide Service | Grand Forks, ND | 701-739-9198 jig-em-up-guide-service.com

 

 
Tim Sandstrom's picture
Tim Sandstrom
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/14/03

Allen Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:

To me it seems absolutely hilarious, hypocritical, etc that the park is allowed to let caged elk roam freely in and out of the park.  In fact, the reason they cannot ship the elk to other places anymore is because of CWD and other disease concerns.  Yet, every single year you hear of people shooting them as they go back into the park.  Doesn't that seem weird?

Then of course this whole high fence thing.  Nobody can convince me there won't be issue soon arising about the park hunt.  This initiative (as mentioned above) opens the door for litigation.  The answer I hear is "oh but Tim, there isn't any money exchanged at hand."

Hence, it won't be shut down as a high fence operation.  The older I get the more I see the hypocrisy of the world.  Some of guilty of but man, this is something else. 
 

Tim,

Please tell me you have read the measure.  It specifically EXCLUDES operations such as the TRNP elk.  The "volunteers" are unpaid government employees performing a management cull.   Period, end of frigging story.

So what Allen?  You don't think this hurts the future of similar plans on other parks?  You don't think this knocks a leg off all the hard work the state, the feds and even Mr. Dorgan?  It does, common sense says so.

And funny isn't it.  The only way TRNP is excluded is because of a play on words such as "volunteers" and "unpaid government employees."  Whatever, the same play on words will be used against it in the future.  I despise play on words.


 

 

Kirsch's Outdoor Products | Fargo, ND | 701-261-9017 Garmin GPS Hunting Maps
Liebel's Guide Service | Williston, ND | 701-770-6746 liebelsguideservice.com
Jig-em-Up Guide Service | Grand Forks, ND | 701-739-9198 jig-em-up-guide-service.com

 

 
Tim Sandstrom's picture
Tim Sandstrom
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/14/03

Allen Said:

Guess I will return to the sidelines now.  Especially since not much "truth" is available here in regard to a few questions I asked.

Sure was a lot of opining going on though.

Allen,

I seriously took some thought and shaped my answers to your questions with the best facts I have available to me.  Plus pure opinion thought not driven by my likes and dislikes.

I take it since I did not receive a comment back at them that you must have been somewhat okay with my answers.  Or maybe you missed them all together.  I don't know and it really doesn't matter.

Opposite to a few on here who are kinda on "my side" I absolutely (like you) despise people who shoot HF animals and call themselves a hunter, or that the caged animal offered a "challenging and rewarding hunt.  I hate it, absolutely hate it.  That's why I repeatedly say we are attacking the wrong dang people.  We must attack the people that think they are actually shooting a trophy.  Sounds like Roger could be a dang good leader at doing a smear campaign on such a thing.  And dare I say, I would support something like that.  And yes, in a round about way I guess I can be linked to the support of shutting down HF operations.  But I'm doing it a different way, yet in what I think is the right way (by not taking away private property rights).  I think the HF folks would be much better off if they just stopped trying to spin their operations are "fair chase" and the game is totally wild.  That is so false it isn't funny.  Exception is if there is monster acreage.  Then that's a different story and I guess I am somewhat concerned with that type of operation because then we certainly do enter into a factual scenario where legitmate concern over hunting access is alive and well.

But I don't like this measure for many reasons.  None more than private property.  As gst said to Eyekllr, it is not possible to turn back time.  Bison, elk, etc have been domesticated.  I still dislike the whole concept of white tail deer and other exotic game being domesticated but I guess that might be a whole different topic.  Elk and bison though had other reasons for being turned into livestock.  They actually had a value to them from the horns to the meat.  Obviously the high fence measure folks agree because they aren't pushing to stop the raising of bison or elk as livestock.  They are just stopping the killing of it where money is exchanged.

To me, that is wrong.  I personally know people who have paid to shoot and elk and have it packaged up.  It was a change of pace from going out and putting a bullet in a cows head.  They didn't do it for the horns, they did it for the meat.  This initiative will stop the landowner from having that ability (except bison...oh the hypocrisy shows up yet again!!!!).

But anyway, you and I are not opposite each other on a lot of things in relation to this measure.  I just hate the play on words and the disease issue.  This measure is the door for the banning of baiting and banning of other things in North Dakota.  It just gives momentum that I don't think is good for us in North Dakota.  Do I want certain rues and regulations placed on baiting?  Yes I do.  100% dang right I do.  But the play people use is so soaked in hypocrisy that it drives me nuts.  And this is why I won't be casting a yes vote on this measure.

So I hope this helps answer your questions more.  I thought I did an okay shortened version of doing it but apparently it wasn't enough.  Just another Tim book to add to his many previous posts!  Ha ha!


 

 

Kirsch's Outdoor Products | Fargo, ND | 701-261-9017 Garmin GPS Hunting Maps
Liebel's Guide Service | Williston, ND | 701-770-6746 liebelsguideservice.com
Jig-em-Up Guide Service | Grand Forks, ND | 701-739-9198 jig-em-up-guide-service.com

 

 

Pages