|
| Author |
Message |
Southdakotahunter
Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 496
Location: Southeast rural South Dakota
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:42 am Post subject: |
 |
|
The only problem is the stubbornness of some who wont call the gfp for nothing. Kind of like you have said before.
also, in order for that to work, i think the rancher would need to prove they put forth a good faith effort to control the herd during the regular season, like they should. They should get squat if they dont allow hunting.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Liberty Belle
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 1679
Location: northwestern South Dakota
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Southdakotahunter wrote: |
The only problem is the stubbornness of some who wont call the gfp for nothing. Kind of like you have said before.
also, in order for that to work, i think the rancher would need to prove they put forth a good faith effort to control the herd during the regular season, like they should. They should get squat if they dont allow hunting. |
SDH, the lockout just kills ya, doesn’t it? GF&P IS only problem we have out here and you can be darn sure we aren’t going to call them, unless it’s to invite our sweet little CO out for supper before the bull dogging.
You can rest assured that no one in the lockout is going to be asking for those tags, but I don’t see why landowners like P Joe shouldn’t get the leftover tags for nothing if they want to take care of their own deer depredation, do you?
You must have missed this:
| Liberty Belle wrote: |
It may interest you to know that the ½ mile stretch of land between my friend’s ranch and his church had 18 dead deer and neither my friend nor any of his neighbors are in the lockout. How do you explain GF&P’s management practices there? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Southdakotahunter
Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 496
Location: Southeast rural South Dakota
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i didnt miss that at all LB. Im on the ball! Sounds too me like the landowners there need to request a few hunters to take care of the problem. I do know the gfp has plenty of programs where the rancher can get into contact with plenty of folks wanting to hunt.
Every year the gfp has a program where hunters put themselves on a list wanting to hunt, and all the landowner has to do is call.
Maybe you think the peoples game needs to be micro managed? What if the gfp came to you and told you you cant have any tags because they want to build the herd up. then went to your neighbors and told them they have 65 deer that need to be taken off of their land because of overpopulation. Dont ya think its better to just say there is x amount for the entire county?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
publichunter
Member
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 149
Location: central, SD
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LB the big question is did your friend let anyone hunt?
GF&P is only the scapegoat you and a very few others make them out to be. 97% of the rest of sd doesnt seem to have the same perceived problem as you and the few in your lockout do.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
P Joe
Member
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 414
Location: Central SD
|
|
| Back to top |
|
mwj
Member
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 436
Location: central Illinois
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Southdakotahunter
Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 496
Location: Southeast rural South Dakota
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Actrually the hunters are very organized. Thats why we still have open fields.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
mrj
Rancher
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 2755
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Those "very organized" hunters is a large part of the reason for problems between landowners and GFP in SD.
The GFP bows to hunter groups giving them more 'rights' than landowners, it seems. GFP seems to operate like those NGO's, having governmental powers and tax income, yet answering only to sportsmen and not to the people raising the game for them in most instances.
There is NO encouragement for landowners trying to recoup some of the costs of depredation through reasonable fees for allowing hunters to use our land, while motels, restaurants, stores, and bars are all reaping the benefit of hunting season with no costs of raising that game that lures customers to them.
mrj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
P Joe
Member
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 414
Location: Central SD
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mrj wrote: |
There is NO encouragement for landowners trying to recoup some of the costs of depredation through reasonable fees for allowing hunters to use our land, while motels, restaurants, stores, and bars are all reaping the benefit of hunting season with no costs of raising that game that lures customers to them.
mrj |
There in lies the problem, I understand that it cost you/I something for the deer that eat on us, but is that cost ever relized??? Can you put a price on something you never had in the first place??
I get the leases, they are providing trophy bucks and lodging, guilding, all that stuff.
What I don't get is why a rancher/farmer thinks he deserves a $1000 bill for letting someone walk aross their land. Especially when they might take an animal that is costing them. I look at it like they are charging an exterminator for property access to come and kill the mice in there house.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Southdakotahunter
Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 496
Location: Southeast rural South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Isnt the walk-in program an "incentive"?? or are you wanting something for doing nothing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Northern Rancher
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 7204
Location: saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anarchy-the absence of government or control resulting in lawlessness
2. disorder and confusion
Every now and then I visit these posts and fail to see the logic. Am I right in assuming the lockout ranchers want to deny game wardens access to check hunters. But they still want to be able to allow paid hunting on the same property. If that isn't a recipe for definition one I don't know what is. Anybody reading the myriad of posts and seeing the bitterness and lack of logic involved can see how this issue definately fills the bill for definition number two. If you have nothing to hide what is the problem with allowing a game warden access-we do-I don't feel violated by this in the least. If you operate on leased ground or receive ANY form of government funding you better be prepared to accept some involvement in your operation. Anybody who doesn't is really nothing better than a garden variety hypocrite. I've hunted for alot of years and ranched for longer-I KNOW that if you turn somebody loose behind a locked gate with no chance of being checked the temptation to break the game laws will be pretty great. You accept and abide by the laws of the land as a good citizen-you don't pick and choose the ones you and your cronies find that fit your agenda Has this attitude come about in the last five years or so-I never encountered anything quite like it when I used to travel to South Dakota pretty regular-it isn't a change for the better if it has.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Southdakotahunter
Member
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 496
Location: Southeast rural South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| your 100% correct NR
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sportsmen do not get along sometimes because they think the other guy is getting a better deal so they take there marbles and go home I guess that is human nature but it doesn't make much sense.