measure 5 phone call

just got a call from steve adair and now im on a live conference with a measure five meeting?  whats the deal?

Colt's picture
Colt
Offline
Joined: 10/27/10

KurtR Said:
 Ya I'm tired of the sd side of oahe  being nd sides nursery. Get some slots and regs up there.

Kurt are you stirring this measure 5 pot?

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

yellow I can see a state run program like CRP, I can see it being used in and around water sheds where run off is an issue. I can see it being used to keep carp out of DL, improve state parks, fishing piers, set aside critical lands, restore habitat, wetlands, etc.. and also to fight if we get them invasive species in our lakes and rivers.

That is some of the things. I can see it being use for tree planting programs etc... From the Ag side I can see it being used in helping with feed lot retention, eradication of non native weeds as well. It could be used for a host of things that would never ever get a sniff of funding from the Leg but are very important.

However to me the biggest push should be to start is to help offset and mitigate the impact oil development is having on wildlife and native species of plants and non game animals.

I have never said this should be used to increase the amount of lands open to hunting, but it may. However if a program like a state run CRP is in place that will increase habitat and increase game populations as well. Increased populations means that opportunity for those seeking game have an increased chance of finding them. This means young people getting started will have a better chance of becoming hunters in adulthood.

Can I guarantee this? No, but I do think I am not to far off at all. Thus why I keep saying look at this as one should and do not buy into the BS scare tactics being used to try and defeat it.

My concern is the amount of money, but long range programs would and should be funded and projections of the cost figured in at the start. So if the goal would be 500000 acres of CRP type lands, then  10 year or 15 year contract at current market rates adds up.

Then there is the issue of invasive species and the potential cost of eradication of them. Cities that get water from rivers are really facing high cost. These funds could be used to deal with that as well. It could also be used in a prevention program to avoid this. Boat inspection sites upon entering, better monitoring of this is critical. Last week I was passed by a bait truck heading from MN into ND. The list goes on and on, and it is clear the state leg is more likely to take money from the G&F than provide it on things like this!

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

cynical's picture
cynical
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 10/27/04

The amount of money would be mind boggling.  I say no way.

"The only enemy of guns is rust and politicians."

"The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry."

William F. Buckley, Jr.
"Unarmed helplessness is for sheep and the French."  Ted Nugent

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
 -Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
-Thomas Jefferson

 

 

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

cynical Said:
The amount of money would be mind boggling.  I say no way.

So where should it be spent because it is going to be spent? Have you heard of any other proposed plans for this money? Has the Leg offered to put an amendment out to allow direct payments back to residents? Have they embraced getting rid of property taxes or reducing the sales tax or getting rid of it all together?

What do they plan to do with this and the surplus and do not forget we have a set aside already that is growing in rainy day funding?

If there was any reasoned plan out there I might agree with you but to simply say trust the Leg is not a plan to me!

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

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

Maybe 

Colt Said:

KurtR Said:
 Ya I'm tired of the sd side of oahe  being nd sides nursery. Get some slots and regs up there.

Kurt are you stirring this measure 5 pot?

 Adn

Redeyedteal's picture
Redeyedteal
Offline
Joined: 7/28/14

No

Storm Rider's picture
Storm Rider
Offline
Joined: 11/15/10

KurtR Said:
Maybe 

Colt Said:

KurtR Said:
 Ya I'm tired of the sd side of oahe  being nd sides nursery. Get some slots and regs up there.

Kurt are you stirring this measure 5 pot?

Kurt,

All this money is going to change the weather, winter/spring storms, and end EHD disease so the deer numbers increase.
 
Then all the deer will migrate South.


guywhofishes's picture
guywhofishes
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/4/07

Meelosh Said:

guywhofishes Said:

Meelosh Said:
Dunno guy. It is one of those feel good measures and has a name that rolls off the tongue easily. If it passes, I hope the promises made by the supporters are kept.

silly boy, like that'll ever happen

Such a cynic guy. At what age will I become as jaded as you?

About five more major elections (aka cycles of broken promises) should have you fully jaded.

"If you like your habitat, you can keep it."

 

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

guywhofishes Said:
The "Vote No on Measure 5" mailer I received yesterday says "ND Farmers and Ranchers know best how to conserve our resources" or some such phrase.

Q: What are farmers and ranchers in the Red River Valley doing to conserve the land, our hunting opportunities, our fishing opportunities?

It also says that the supporters of the bill don't really care about conservation - they care about the money and control it affords them. Reminded me of Red River Valley farmers attitude.

You guys out central and west have no idea what "caring farmers" are capable of once they pass a certain threshold of habitat destruction. There's a point at which habitat conditions are so miserable that they just quit even remotely considering conservation and move into "farm every square foot and manage water for farming period" mode and it's Katy bar the doors.

Sure, once you get 20-30 miles west it starts to moderate and the vast majority of farmers still care about habitat. But what's going on out here IS moving west - don't kid yourselves.

gst - before you have a heart attack, send me a PM before you come east next time and I'll take you on a local tour that will make you think we're driving around in Iowa, not ND.

What's the point of my post? I guess my point is that here in the east, where a lot of voters live, the land has been rendered "habitatless" and we could use targeted programs to generate some habitat to support local activities for outdoorsman. Outside of measure 5... what do the farmers and ranchers of ND have to offer voters in the eastern part of ND as an alternative if we stand with them and vote NO?

Access to their land if we drive the hour or five it takes to get to what you centrals and westerners take for granted?

People in places like Fargo need "after work" or half-day opportunities too. Right now we have very very VERY few. At least #5 would produce a glimmer of hope. Without targeted spending we're SOL for sure.

So... without running to the "hey - you're a farmer basher!" well, I'd appreciate some concrete evidence that voting NO would improve our lot out east.

Guy, we have had our back and forths on here, but most times I have never thought you an idiot.

So I would ask you to step back and consider something.

The RRV is some of the most fertile and productive farm land in the world. Not just the state or this nation, the world. If we had the growing degree days Iowa did we would kick their ass in production per acre in the RRV.

So my question is this, should those producers that invest their equity and earn their living from the worlds most productive farm land instead use these lands to produce wildlife and hunting opportunities for the recreational pleasure of those that choose to live there?

You yourself claim all you have to do is travel 30 minutes outside of this fertile valley and opportunities to hunt exist.

Why should you as a hunter not expect to earn the right to use someone elses lands for your recreational pleasure .

Most farmers and ranchers are pretty good about letting people hunt that are not assholes and come develop a relationship or at the very least introduce themselves.

But measures like this will continue to change that. When groups like The Nature Conservancy that form "official collaborations" with govt agencies like the EPA to pass regulation after regulation on agriculture that drives up cost and impacts our ability to use our own lands in the manner they do, starts pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into measures like this, they are not going to help over all access across this state one bit.

When these groups like the National Wildlife Federation that sued to prevent haying and grazing of private lands as agreed to under the CRP contracts, use these monies to buy land or drive up rental rates like CRP programs did, for every acre purchased and enrolled in some "access" program, there will be dozens that will be closed. That is not a threat as some on here will be quick to accuse, simply the truth in what will happen.

So combine that with the mandated spending that there is no means of holding accountable and why support this measure when there is a better option thru the Outdoor Heritage Fund?

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

Hardwaterman Said:
gst one more time simply claiming that because they employee someone in ND but are domiciled outside of ND does not make them a ND interest. Which is what the national farm groups are, the oil companies etc....  Because using the same logic DU and others also have employees in the state which would change things up, but again this is simply side tracking.

So the challenge to you is simple give us a list of percentage of ND domiciled business and organizations contribution levels. Money given to the Chamber from out of state is still out of state money, same as money given from out of state to state run farm org.

ron you are the one making the accusation the opposition is funded by out of state dollars just like the supporters are.

Perhaps they are I really do not know, but you have provided no proof to back up your claim.

We can see from the SOS reports that roughly 94% of the likely over $1,000,000.00 that has been given supporting this measure has came from out of state environmental groups, some of whom were part of keeping wolf hunting seasons closed in neighboring states. .

So all that is being asked here is to provide some sort of proof to back up your claims. The supporters of this measure such as Dick Monso have troubles doing that. They make claims dependent on who they are speaking to about what this measure will do and then never answer the questions that point out the disingenuous nature in what they claim .

Why doesn;lt Dick Monson come on FBO and list all the out of state groups they have accepted monies from so the ND voter can see? Maybe he can address the supporters claims this will help bring out of state hunters into ND while he fights tooth and nail to keep them out every legislative session.

Why doesn;t Steve Adair come on FBO and explain why "mandated allocation" of these funds is not the same a "mandated spending"?

Why don;t they explain why they chose a Washington DC based liberal environmental activist company to run this measure campaign rather than one here in ND?

Indeed ron, lets talk about the facts of this measure, you can start by providing some documentation to back up your claims of out of state dollars.

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

Hardwaterman Said:
yellow jacket I really do not think you understand how this works, they cannot before the measure is passed declare where any money is going to be spent, same as the current Heritage fund.

One thing is certain though that there will not be any type of program like CRP or full funding for matching fed dollars on conservation programs without this passing
! If you are satisfied with the current direction of habitat, water shed issues, then so be it. If not, then you have to look at this as it really is, a vehicle to be able to fund and direct programs and efforts to retain habitat, keep waters clean, and preserve or restore areas that have already been damaged!

Hardwaterman Said:
meelosh fair enough, I may disagree with you but on merits of the measure not the boogey man tactics of gst and Fritz!!!!

"boogeyman tactics"???????

Seems you are quite familiar with using them yourself ron.

Lets be honest ron the supportes have just as much "boogeyman" claims going on as any one, they are claiming the very future of hunting is at stake. Really hunting will cease to exist if this measure fails?

Oh and one thing ron the "boogieman" is most often found in stories that are not true.

Please show me one thing I have posted regarding this measure that is not true.

cynical's picture
cynical
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 10/27/04

Hardwaterman Said:

cynical Said:
The amount of money would be mind boggling.  I say no way.

So where should it be spent because it is going to be spent? Have you heard of any other proposed plans for this money? Has the Leg offered to put an amendment out to allow direct payments back to residents? Have they embraced getting rid of property taxes or reducing the sales tax or getting rid of it all together?

What do they plan to do with this and the surplus and do not forget we have a set aside already that is growing in rainy day funding?

If there was any reasoned plan out there I might agree with you but to simply say trust the Leg is not a plan to me!

Just got a flyer in the mail from North Dakotans for Common Sense Conservation.
Says this measure would take $150,000,000 every year to buy up land and take it out of productive use.  Is this true?  That is a lot of money and if I were a farmer or rancher I wouldnt want to compete against whomever is bidding against me. 

"The only enemy of guns is rust and politicians."

"The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry."

William F. Buckley, Jr.
"Unarmed helplessness is for sheep and the French."  Ted Nugent

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
 -Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
-Thomas Jefferson

 

 

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

yelowjackt Said:

Hardwaterman Said:
yellow jacket I really do not think you understand how this works, they cannot before the measure is passed declare where any money is going to be spent, same as the current Heritage fund.

One thing is certain though that there will not be any type of program like CRP or full funding for matching fed dollars on conservation programs without this passing! If you are satisfied with the current direction of habitat, water shed issues, then so be it. If not, then you have to look at this as it really is, a vehicle to be able to fund and direct programs and efforts to retain habitat, keep waters clean, and preserve or restore areas that have already been damaged!

no I get it...and no I am not satisfied with the status quo. This measure has potential to be extremely beneficial to ND however it also has the potential to allow non ND interests a larger foot hold in our state. I am just not sure I want to take that gamble with amount of monies in question…is it my fault, yes for not being more active in the measure or measure writing process, but it is what it is and I myself am not comfortable with the measure.

In my opinion the State needs to step up and take the initiative in these matters and establish some options…with our $1.6 billion surplus why can’t more funds be allocated to NDGF and more lucrative programs like PLOTS or a state funded CRP type program…if this state is really concerned about conservation and our future then this needs to occur. I feel our legislators should be taking these matters into consideration without the need of a measure…programs and wording could be more specific and funds could be allocated in more reasonable increments…will this happen NO…but it is what I would like to see

They did thru the Outdoor Heritage Fund. They can be held accountable for these expenditures as they are not mandated. It is time to push groups to bring forth good accountable programs that can be funded and when this is done we can hold our elected representatives accountable to fund them thru this legislation.

If groups like DU want they can bring forth their programs thru this process and if they are good effective programs we can push our representatives to fund them.

We can do this every two years, this measure requires a 25 year time frame before the oppportunity is brought forth to address it again.

The way this measure is written with mandated spending requirements, the industrial commission on has a say on about $18,000,000.00 and will have NO CHOICE but to fund the other $112,000,000.00 worth of programs every year no matter what they are for or the consequences of them. And we have no real means to address these consequences for 25 years.

To me that is not very responsible or accountable.

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

Hardwaterman Said:

cynical Said:
The amount of money would be mind boggling.  I say no way.

So where should it be spent because it is going to be spent? Have you heard of any other proposed plans for this money?

Indeed there is ron, it is called the Outdoor Heritage Fund.

Some people believe in the adage walk before you run.

Develope responsible accountable, effective programs and then increase funding accordingly.

guywhofishes's picture
guywhofishes
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/4/07

gst Said:

guywhofishes Said:
The "Vote No on Measure 5" mailer I received yesterday says "ND Farmers and Ranchers know best how to conserve our resources" or some such phrase.

Q: What are farmers and ranchers in the Red River Valley doing to conserve the land, our hunting opportunities, our fishing opportunities?

It also says that the supporters of the bill don't really care about conservation - they care about the money and control it affords them. Reminded me of Red River Valley farmers attitude.

You guys out central and west have no idea what "caring farmers" are capable of once they pass a certain threshold of habitat destruction. There's a point at which habitat conditions are so miserable that they just quit even remotely considering conservation and move into "farm every square foot and manage water for farming period" mode and it's Katy bar the doors.

Sure, once you get 20-30 miles west it starts to moderate and the vast majority of farmers still care about habitat. But what's going on out here IS moving west - don't kid yourselves.

gst - before you have a heart attack, send me a PM before you come east next time and I'll take you on a local tour that will make you think we're driving around in Iowa, not ND.

What's the point of my post? I guess my point is that here in the east, where a lot of voters live, the land has been rendered "habitatless" and we could use targeted programs to generate some habitat to support local activities for outdoorsman. Outside of measure 5... what do the farmers and ranchers of ND have to offer voters in the eastern part of ND as an alternative if we stand with them and vote NO?

Access to their land if we drive the hour or five it takes to get to what you centrals and westerners take for granted?

People in places like Fargo need "after work" or half-day opportunities too. Right now we have very very VERY few. At least #5 would produce a glimmer of hope. Without targeted spending we're SOL for sure.

So... without running to the "hey - you're a farmer basher!" well, I'd appreciate some concrete evidence that voting NO would improve our lot out east.

Guy, we have had our back and forths on here, but most times I have never thought you an idiot.

So I would ask you to step back and consider something.

The RRV is some of the most fertile and productive farm land in the world. Not just the state or this nation, the world. If we had the growing degree days Iowa did we would kick their ass in production per acre in the RRV.

So my question is this, should those producers that invest their equity and earn their living from the worlds most productive farm land instead use these lands to produce wildlife and hunting opportunities for the recreational pleasure of those that choose to live there?

You yourself claim all you have to do is travel 30 minutes outside of this fertile valley and opportunities to hunt exist.

Why should you as a hunter not expect to earn the right to use someone elses lands for your recreational pleasure .

Most farmers and ranchers are pretty good about letting people hunt that are not assholes and come develop a relationship or at the very least introduce themselves.

But measures like this will continue to change that. When groups like The Nature Conservancy that form "official collaborations" with govt agencies like the EPA to pass regulation after regulation on agriculture that drives up cost and impacts our ability to use our own lands in the manner they do, starts pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into measures like this, they are not going to help over all access across this state one bit.

When these groups like the National Wildlife Federation that sued to prevent haying and grazing of private lands as agreed to under the CRP contracts, use these monies to buy land or drive up rental rates like CRP programs did, for every acre purchased and enrolled in some "access" program, there will be dozens that will be closed. That is not a threat as some on here will be quick to accuse, simply the truth in what will happen.

So combine that with the mandated spending that there is no means of holding accountable and why support this measure when there is a better option thru the Outdoor Heritage Fund?

In fertile soil areas (eastern 5th of the state) edge to edge farming is just how it's gotta be? Nothing can be done? You offer me no hope? No ideas?

So voting NO won't help my cause then is what you are saying. YES is my only hope?

 

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

Cynical if you do the math, $112,000,000.00 will HAVE to be spent on anything the panel brings forth or the industrial commission will be in violation of the constitution.

They will only have a say over about $18 million of the $150,000,000.00.

One guess what a group like the National Wildlife Federation would do if that were to happen?

The groups and the lawyers behind writing this measure are not stupid. This measure was written specifically to allow that loophole.


labhunter66's picture
labhunter66
Offline
Joined: 3/7/07

 

Don Flamingo Said:
 The measure wont pass this time around.  The oil revenues arent going anywhere though so if it doesnt pass something similar will be brought to the table down the road.  This bill will waste so much money on equipment and buildings for endless projects  that it will be ridiculous.  the plots program is the best program i have ever seen for hunters in this state.  vastly increased funding to the plots program is what we need imo.  The prices of corn have dropped dramatically also so things can change in a quick hurry out there.  I think we need to vote no and work on getting more money into the plots program.  Everything else is up to mother nature and economics.

Didn't the audit of the Game & Fish Department say the PLOTS program was an unrealistic program or something along those lines?  

I live out west and the landscape is changing on a daily basis.  I highly doubt the legislature will do what is needed to stem the tide of habitat destruction.  I have some concerns with the overall bill and is a very large sum of money but it's going to take a large sum of money to have any significant impact.  Right now the state is rat holing a bunch of money instead of taking care of the issues that need to be taken care of. Unfortunately I think this is the only way something meaningful will get done.  I don't think we can afford to wait and see what the legislature does and react from there.

Meelosh's picture
Meelosh
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/26/06

labhunter66 Said:
 

Don Flamingo Said:
 The measure wont pass this time around.  The oil revenues arent going anywhere though so if it doesnt pass something similar will be brought to the table down the road.  This bill will waste so much money on equipment and buildings for endless projects  that it will be ridiculous.  the plots program is the best program i have ever seen for hunters in this state.  vastly increased funding to the plots program is what we need imo.  The prices of corn have dropped dramatically also so things can change in a quick hurry out there.  I think we need to vote no and work on getting more money into the plots program.  Everything else is up to mother nature and economics.

Didn't the audit of the Game & Fish Department say the PLOTS program was an unrealistic program or something along those lines?  

I live out west and the landscape is changing on a daily basis.  I highly doubt the legislature will do what is needed to stem the tide of habitat destruction.  I have some concerns with the overall bill and is a very large sum of money but it's going to take a large sum of money to have any significant impact.  Right now the state is rat holing a bunch of money instead of taking care of the issues that need to be taken care of. Unfortunately I think this is the only way something meaningful will get done.  I don't think we can afford to wait and see what the legislature does and react from there.

They said the goal of 1 million acres was unrealistic given current conditions and funding.

Is it impious to weigh goose music and art in the same scales? I think not, because the true hunter is merely a noncreative artist. Who painted the first picture on a bone in the caves of France? A hunter. Who alone in our modern life so thrills to the sight of living beauty that he will endure hunger and thirst and cold to feed his eye upon it? The hunter. Who wrote the great hunter's poem about the sheer wonder of the wind, the hail, and the snow, the stars, the lightnings, and the clouds, the lion, the deer, and the wild goat, the raven, the hawk, and the eagle, and above all the eulogy to the horse? Job, one of the great dramatic artists of all time. Poets sing and hunters scale the mountains primarily for one and the same reason--the thrill of beauty. Critics write and hunters outwit their game primarily for one and the same reason--to reduce that beauty to possession. The differences are largely matters of degree, consciousness, and that sly arbiter of the classification of human activities, language. If, then, we can live without goose music, we may as well do away with stars, or sunsets, or Iliads. But the point is we would be fools to do away with any of them. 

cynical's picture
cynical
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 10/27/04

gst Said:
Cynical if you do the math, $112,000,000.00 will HAVE to be spent on anything the panel brings forth or the industrial commission will be in violation of the constitution.

They will only have a say over about $18 million of the $150,000,000.00.

One guess what a group like the National Wildlife Federation would do if that were to happen?

The groups and the lawyers behind writing this measure are not stupid. This measure was written specifically to allow that loophole.

yeah,  I smell a rat.  A big fat NO!

"The only enemy of guns is rust and politicians."

"The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry."

William F. Buckley, Jr.
"Unarmed helplessness is for sheep and the French."  Ted Nugent

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
 -Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
-Thomas Jefferson

 

 

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

Guy, what is being said is that perhaps even if this measure were to pass, some of the most fertile farmland in the world will likely stay in agriculture production.

Farmers are optimists, they have seen $7 corn and the profits that exist when that happens. Every year they put millions of dollars into the ground they are optimistic that there will be an economic windfall such as $7 corn.

How many dollars/acre do you think it would take to get a farmer to put tiled RRV farmland back into CRP?

CRP worked earlier because of the large numbers of older farmers looking to get out. Whole farms were enrolled and towns dried up. Jobs were lost and rural economies were impacted as these dollars went to Nevada and Arizona rather than the local town.

Now it is a younger generation farming. Things are different.

Why should YOUR desires for recreation trump someone elses desires for cheap food or a job at the fertilizer plant or an implement dealer ect.....

Meelosh was spot on about the responsible usage of dollars for the entire state and all those that live here.

I would guess that the people in western ND where these dollars are generated would rather they go to roads and infrastructure than taking these world class fertile farm lands out of production so people in Fargo can walk out their back door to hunt.

labhunter66's picture
labhunter66
Offline
Joined: 3/7/07

 

Meelosh Said:

labhunter66 Said:
 

Don Flamingo Said:
 The measure wont pass this time around.  The oil revenues arent going anywhere though so if it doesnt pass something similar will be brought to the table down the road.  This bill will waste so much money on equipment and buildings for endless projects  that it will be ridiculous.  the plots program is the best program i have ever seen for hunters in this state.  vastly increased funding to the plots program is what we need imo.  The prices of corn have dropped dramatically also so things can change in a quick hurry out there.  I think we need to vote no and work on getting more money into the plots program.  Everything else is up to mother nature and economics.

Didn't the audit of the Game & Fish Department say the PLOTS program was an unrealistic program or something along those lines?  

I live out west and the landscape is changing on a daily basis.  I highly doubt the legislature will do what is needed to stem the tide of habitat destruction.  I have some concerns with the overall bill and is a very large sum of money but it's going to take a large sum of money to have any significant impact.  Right now the state is rat holing a bunch of money instead of taking care of the issues that need to be taken care of. Unfortunately I think this is the only way something meaningful will get done.  I don't think we can afford to wait and see what the legislature does and react from there.

They said the goal of 1 million acres was unrealistic given current conditions and funding.

OK, well the legislature isn't going to provide any funding so we can rule that out. Funding from a source such as this certainly could be used to fund a hunter access program or supplement the PLOTS budget but there are no guarantees of a program like that.  Of course, there are no guarantees in any program.  It's a tough call but I think something needs to be done sooner rather than later.

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

gst again you make the it an issue that non domiciled entities are supporting this. But refuse to acknowledge that non domiciled ND entities are opposing it as well.

So common sense claims that all the money will be used to buy land, could be or it could be that none of it goes that way. Again scarce tactics is all. In regards to worrying about someone competing if I want to buy land I compete with a farmer getting Fed subsidy is that fair? See the reality is as I said before, the measure is going to pass or fail based on the merits that people see it has.

The scare tactics are not affecting people like the PETA scare did before, more and more people are seeing the two competing ads running and feed back from my contact with people has been positive towards the measure and negative towards the scare ad!!

The most telling thing so far that I have heard from those I have talked with, is that the FU,FB,Chamber ad is actually pushing people towards support!! They do not trust Ag interests on conservation efforts, hmmmmm wonder why?

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

How many dollars/acre do you think it would take to get a farmer to put tiled RRV farmland back into CRP?

It depends on how many million the EPA fines him for point source pollution.  They are going to be watching those tiles.  I guarantee it. 

Fritz the Cat's picture
Fritz the Cat
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

cynical,

Just got that flyer in the mail also. Plainsman likes to say Farmers Union is far left and Farm Bureau is too far right. I am a member of both. Nice to see them coming together to oppose something that is off the charts.

Guy, Randy Kreil used to say farm the best and preserve the rest. His wife is a sponsor of this petition. I don't think they are coming to your aid.

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

cynical Said:

Hardwaterman Said:

cynical Said:
The amount of money would be mind boggling.  I say no way.

So where should it be spent because it is going to be spent? Have you heard of any other proposed plans for this money? Has the Leg offered to put an amendment out to allow direct payments back to residents? Have they embraced getting rid of property taxes or reducing the sales tax or getting rid of it all together?

What do they plan to do with this and the surplus and do not forget we have a set aside already that is growing in rainy day funding?

If there was any reasoned plan out there I might agree with you but to simply say trust the Leg is not a plan to me!

Just got a flyer in the mail from North Dakotans for Common Sense Conservation.
Says this measure would take $150,000,000 every year to buy up land and take it out of productive use.  Is this true?  That is a lot of money and if I were a farmer or rancher I wouldnt want to compete against whomever is bidding against me. 

but you have to have a seller.  farmers don't sell land.  so it's kind of a mute point

 

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

labhunter66 Said:
 

Meelosh Said:

labhunter66 Said:
 

Don Flamingo Said:
 The measure wont pass this time around.  The oil revenues arent going anywhere though so if it doesnt pass something similar will be brought to the table down the road.  This bill will waste so much money on equipment and buildings for endless projects  that it will be ridiculous.  the plots program is the best program i have ever seen for hunters in this state.  vastly increased funding to the plots program is what we need imo.  The prices of corn have dropped dramatically also so things can change in a quick hurry out there.  I think we need to vote no and work on getting more money into the plots program.  Everything else is up to mother nature and economics.

Didn't the audit of the Game & Fish Department say the PLOTS program was an unrealistic program or something along those lines?  

I live out west and the landscape is changing on a daily basis.  I highly doubt the legislature will do what is needed to stem the tide of habitat destruction.  I have some concerns with the overall bill and is a very large sum of money but it's going to take a large sum of money to have any significant impact.  Right now the state is rat holing a bunch of money instead of taking care of the issues that need to be taken care of. Unfortunately I think this is the only way something meaningful will get done.  I don't think we can afford to wait and see what the legislature does and react from there.

They said the goal of 1 million acres was unrealistic given current conditions and funding.

OK, well the legislature isn't going to provide any funding so we can rule that out. Funding from a source such as this certainly could be used to fund a hunter access program or supplement the PLOTS budget but there are no guarantees of a program like that.  Of course, there are no guarantees in any program.  It's a tough call but I think something needs to be done sooner rather than later.

yea it pretty much boils down to do nothing (what's going on now) and hoping for a change to the continued downhill run of habitat and access.  Or actually doing something that could very well make the necessary changes.  You have to decide if you want to try or not try at all.

 

Fritz the Cat's picture
Fritz the Cat
Offline
Joined: 5/24/08

Plainsman Said:

How many dollars/acre do you think it would take to get a farmer to put tiled RRV farmland back into CRP?

It depends on how many million the EPA fines him for point source pollution.  They are going to be watching those tiles.  I guarantee it. 

Wind bag

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

yea it pretty much boils down to do nothing (what's going on now) and hoping for a change to the continued downhill run of habitat and access.  Or actually doing something that could very well make the necessary changes.  You have to decide if you want to try or not try at all.

I sure hope sportsmen don't sucker for the scare tactics.  I would hate to have my grandchildren never experience the part of North Dakota we all enjoy ------- enjoyed yesterday.  It's going down the tubes.  We hunters are happy in the field with a gun or bow in our hand, but those against it will be just as happy feeling the thickness of the wallets they sit on.  You better do something for yourself right now, because tomorrow will be to late.  Some will say that is a scare tactic, but think about it.  If this fails and everything is plowed where are you hunting?  Who is going to pay the flooding damage?  Who is going to clean up our water?  We know what's going to ruin it.  They wreck it we pay for it, and subsidize the destruction. 

Scarecrow's picture
Scarecrow
Offline
Joined: 10/25/10

Plainsman Said:

yea it pretty much boils down to do nothing (what's going on now) and hoping for a change to the continued downhill run of habitat and access.  Or actually doing something that could very well make the necessary changes.  You have to decide if you want to try or not try at all.

I sure hope sportsmen don't sucker for the scare tactics.  I would hate to have my grandchildren never experience the part of North Dakota we all enjoy ------- enjoyed yesterday.  It's going down the tubes.  We hunters are happy in the field with a gun or bow in our hand, but those against it will be just as happy feeling the thickness of the wallets they sit on.  You better do something for yourself right now, because tomorrow will be to late.  Some will say that is a scare tactic, but think about it.  If this fails and everything is plowed where are you hunting?  Who is going to pay the flooding damage?  Who is going to clean up our water?  We know what's going to ruin it.  They wreck it we pay for it, and subsidize the destruction. 

Last time I checked there was over 1 million acres of public grasslands in ND. Problem solved.

RSL's picture
RSL
Offline
Joined: 9/25/09

 eyexer Said:

but you have to have a seller.  farmers don't sell land.  so it's kind of a mute point

In this weeks Bottineau Courant there are 6 ads for bids on farm/pasture land for sale in Bottineau County that total 2,136 acres.  Bids for 5 open in October and in November for the 6th.

Knock yourself out - buy some land to hunt on and lease it to the farmer next door to farm for you!

Steve.

Pages