• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

SD Lockout meeting in Faith - Where's SH?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
Lockout Gains Momentum

A large group of interested landowners met Thursday evening at the Faith Livestock Barn to get informed about SD Lockout and the reason behind the actions being taken by private landowners. After a brief welcome and introductions by Llewellyn Englehart, the meeting began with an informational session lasting about 90 minutes. Robert Johnson gave a background of the origins of the Lockout movement almost two years ago. Larry Nelson spoke on the Open Fields Doctrine and the changes that were proposed at the 2005 Legislative Session, ultimately killed in the House after fierce lobbying by the Governor’s Office. Clark Blake, a sheepgrower, discussed the aerial hunting and the grounding of all paraplanes for predator control. The final segment was a commercial trapper and the problems the trappers are having with the Wildlife Division of Game, Fish, & Parks.
During the course of the presentations, the group was informed that the Attorney General of South Dakota interprets section lines as open to public whether they are developed or not and the public can have access to the section line. If you, as a landowner, have a fence across the section line without a gate it can be considered a nuisance. The public access on a section line is considered to be 66 feet wide, 33 feet either side of the line. In the opinion of the Attorney General the public may pass on the section line by foot or any other means whether the section line is developed or not.
Another point of contention was state trappers and conservation officers being allowed to trap fur-bearing animals in direct competition with the licensed trappers they are supposed to regulate. In the 1970’s state trappers and conservation officers were not allowed to sell furs. That restriction was lifted from state game employees a few years ago. When the regulators are also competitors the system is out of balance.

There were several questions fielded by the presenters. In addition there were several comments from those present on problems or incidents concerning game officers in their area over the past twenty years. Most of those that spoke up had negative experiences and felt that the Wildlife Division was running roughshod over the people whether it is landowners, hunters, or trappers.

By the conclusion of the evening another 70,000+ acres were added to the Lockout in the Faith and surrounding area. Since the end of the 2005 Legislative Session, as a direct result of the defeat of SB 122, over a quarter of a million acres have been added to SD Lockout. That number will continue to grow as meetings are already scheduled for April 16th at Oelrichs, Edgemont, and Buffalo Gap. For more information check the website at www.sdlockout.com. Soon the bright orange signs of SD Lockout will be popping up all over.

Contact Persons:
Llewellyn Englehart 605-244-5402
Delbert Burdine 605-244-5446
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
5,962
Reaction score
0
Location
Western South Dakota
It was an interesting meeting. I notice that most people who spoke or I visited with all said that they didn't have a problem with most of GF&P officials, just a handful who are making a mess of things.

The most interesting thing I found out was a man there who showed me two cancelled checks. He had a school section lease and the lease payment was made out to Commissioner of School lands. He bought the very same chunck of land and the check was made out to the Commissioner of Game Fish and Wildlife. :shock: :???:

So, since when does the GF&P get the money of land that was provided by the state for the purpose of paying for the educatioon of students?!!!!!
Somethings is very much wrong in Denmark. And Pierre! :mad:

It was great to get to meet you face to face Liberty. For those who frequent this site I can tell you that Liberty is a real nice lady. Enjoyed the evening and I would suggest all attend any of these meetings in your area. Wish SH or John Cooper or someone with info from the GF&P had been there to answer questions.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Quote: "Another point of contention was state trappers and conservation officers being allowed to trap fur-bearing animals in direct competition with the licensed trappers they are supposed to regulate."

State trappers do not regulate. Conservation officers regulate.

State trappers are currently not allowed to take coyotes or beaver for their fur based on GF&P policy.

State trappers used to be able to trap all furbearers including coyotes and beaver on their vacation time, with their own equipment. Due to THE APPEARANCE OF a conflict of interest, state trappers can no longer trap coyotes and beaver for their fur.

Coyotes and beaver are our primary target animals and that is the reason for the "conflict of interest" policy on those two species. We would invariably be accused of "sandbagging" complaints and selling state fur by insecure private trappers.

State trappers are allowed to trap raccoon, badgers, fox, mink, muskrat, and bobcats on our vacation time if we choose and will continue to do so.


"In the 1970’s state trappers and conservation officers were not allowed to sell furs. That restriction was lifted from state game employees a few years ago. When the regulators are also competitors the system is out of balance."

Sounds like an insecure private trapper who can't handle competition to me.



~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
smalltime: "are you a conservation officer or state trapper sh?"

What's your name and where are you from?


~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Why didn't I answer smalltimes question?

I'll answer smalltime's personal questions when he/she reveals his/her name and where he/she is from to level the playing field.

I don't provide personal information to an alias.




~SH~
 

smalltime

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
600
Reaction score
0
Location
SD
I appologize for the cheap shot at your level of courage. It takes plenty to take an unpopular position on issues and sign your name to it. John Timmons White Owl
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
5,962
Reaction score
0
Location
Western South Dakota
SH;
Now that that brave fellow replied, are you going to answer his questions.I agree with his above statement about courage, so I guess you'd say that I am "cheerleading"? rah, rah, rah! :)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Thank you John apology accepted!

That takes more courage than supporting the Open Fields Doctrine.

I am a State Trapper responsible for Haakon, Jackson, and Bennett Counties.

I have also been involved in the cattle/beef industry my entire life and grew up on a ranch near Lowry, SD. Until recently I fed cattle for a branded beef program. I am absolutely passionate about the cattle/beef industry and still stay very involved in all facets of it.

I have done enough research on the issues surrounding the cattle/beef industry to know without question that R-CALF has done more damage to this industry than they have done anything to help it. Unfortunately, in SD, most ranchers are only privy to R-CALF's bias on these issues.

Their current BSE "fear mongering" to stop Canadian cattle from coming south and their total disregard for the precautionary measures that have been taken by both countries is a classic example of R-CALF's shallow, self defeating view of the world.

Ranchers.net is one of the few sources of information to present the facts on these issues as compared to Johnny Smith's "keep my commission dollars rolling in" view of these issues. Here you can see the entire debate and the facts that refute the baseless allegations.

Welcome to the truth smalltime.



~SH~


Scott Huber
Kadoka, SD
 

Latest posts

Top