The Harding County Alias has returned

[SJ]

SH isn't the first trapper who I have heard blame weather for all lamb losses. Weather and natural causes kill some lambs and calves and all producers know this but when predators kill another 10% or more this puts most producers out of business.
I also notice the producers get blamed for not watching their sheep close enough. I would think that a good trapper would know which producers have sheep in his area and be working these ranchers year around. If you have sheep and coyotes in close proximity you will soon have coyote killed lambs.

This gets to the DN question:
DN's ranch is in an area where there are always coyotes on his land. JJ was stopped from hunting in January and RY was thought to be trapping on DN's place as he had been seen out there several times. On the 10th of June JJ and CB found the den in DN's lambing pasture the pups were still in the hole and were small cottontail in size. They had been there since birth it appeared. Also over the next 4 months several more adult coyotes were taken from the air on DN's place. In Oct. RY was asked to pull his equipment, the thought being that having no predator control and knowing it is better than a false sense of security with RY.

(NOTE) In 1996 a producer at Camp Crook lost 50-60 lambs out of a band of 200 head while thinking that RY was protecting his flock. These losses were within 3 miles of RY's doorstep, and were discovered by an aerial pilot (Not JJ!!) After spending the next two weeks sleeping in the pickup with his flock, the producer rounded up and sold all of his sheep.

Since asking the trapper to leave, DN's losses have been minimal using only aircraft. One BIG problem with the ADC program in Harding County is that the trapper has repeatedly refused to work with any aerial hunter besides LB, and you know that LB is a convicted felon, don't you?

The aerial hunters are required to report their kills to GF&P but the trapper doesn't report anything to the pilots, so it has become easier for producers to just use the aerial programs. The trapper, RY, has also made it clear that he will not call in a predator district pilot to stop the killing and seldom uses the State aircraft.

It wasn't always this way. At one time RY had his own favorite pilot (not LB this time!) and used him to the point of costing the predator dist. $25,000 plus per year. This dynamic duo was very costly and, even with the large amount of flying expenses, most of the producers were losing lots of lambs to coyotes since the troublesome twosome weren't hunting for most of the rest of the county.

 

[Liberty Belle]

Thanks for posting for the "Harding County alias" SJ. You must have had to drive quite a distance to get this posted too! I wish "alias" would learn to use the computer as well as he does everything else. I appreciate you taking the time to do this for him, even though his server will let him on ranchers.net when yours won't!

And no SH, "alias" is not JJ.

 

[Anonymous]

Alias: "SH isn't the first trapper who I have heard blame weather for all lamb losses."

That's a damn lie!

I never blamed weather for all livestock losses.

I pointed out that "SOME PRODUCERS" blame all their losses on predators when many of those losses were caused by weather and other problems.

Another statement taken out of context by the Cave Hill Dwellers, imagine that?

No wonder you chose not to leave your name.


Alias: "I also notice the producers get blamed for not watching their sheep close enough."

"MOST PRODUCERS" are very good at keeping track of their sheep and discovering predator losses before they get out of hand. Unfortunately that is not always the case.


Alias: "I would think that a good trapper would know which producers have sheep in his area and be working these ranchers year around."

The trappers do know which producers have sheep but it's not the trappers job to count sheep and check for predator losses. That is the producer's job.


Alias: "If you have sheep and coyotes in close proximity you will soon have coyote killed lambs."

Nobody knows that better than I do. I also know that once you remove a pair of coyotes, new coyotes can move in and start killing. Unless someone is checking for losses, the losses from coyotes that move back in may go unreported. Shipping head counts are AFTER THE FACT.


As far as the DN / RY story, there is two sides to every story. If DN was experiencing heavy losses he should have reported it immediately and proper measures could have been taken. Anyone can complain after the fact. If RY was busy working other complaints on the ground, we could have had our pilot in there. It seems you guys would rather complain about UNCONFIRMED predator losses AFTER THE fACT than cooperate with anyone from GF&P to minimize those losses.

I don't feel sorry for anyone that sustains heavy losses IF they are unwilling to document those losses and unwilling to take the initiative to call for help.

I'll bet that statement will be taken out of context to read, "I don't feel sorry for anyone that sustains heavy losses." ANY BETS?


alias: "(NOTE) In 1996 a producer at Camp Crook lost 50-60 lambs out of a band of 200 head while thinking that RY was protecting his flock. These losses were within 3 miles of RY's doorstep, and were discovered by an aerial pilot (Not JJ!!) After spending the next two weeks sleeping in the pickup with his flock, the producer rounded up and sold all of his sheep."

Emphasis on "WERE DISCOVERED BY AN AERIAL PILOT".

WHY WEREN'T THEY DISCOVERED BY THE PRODUCER??????

WHAT CAN WE DO AFTER THE FACT?????

It's not our job to check sheep for coyote losses.

Again, I have heard these types of livestock loss reports before and usually one or two things is involved. Either the producer was not checking his sheep close enough for predation or livestock losses from natural causes were being blamed on predators.

We cannot do anything about livestock losses from predators that we are unaware of.


alias: "One BIG problem with the ADC program in Harding County is that the trapper has repeatedly refused to work with any aerial hunter besides LB, and you know that LB is a convicted felon, don't you?"

First, LB is not the only private pilot that RY has worked with. I know of two others so that is your second lie. I guess I should consider that an improvement huh?

Knowing first hand how difficult some private pilots can be to work with, it's not surprising that RY would prefer to work with pilots that work with him.


alias: "The aerial hunters are required to report their kills to GF&P but the trapper doesn't report anything to the pilots, so it has become easier for producers to just use the aerial programs. The trapper, RY, has also made it clear that he will not call in a predator district pilot to stop the killing and seldom uses the State aircraft."

RY reports his take to the private pilots he works with and he uses the state plane when he needs it.

I'm still wondering why the complaints about RY are not coming from the producers RY works on but rather those who prefer to work with JJ?

I'd say there is a skunk in that woodpile.

What are you complaining about anyway if your private pilot can handle the problem without any help on the ground?


alias: "At one time RY had his own favorite pilot (not LB this time!) and used him to the point of costing the predator dist. $25,000 plus per year. This dynamic duo was very costly and, even with the large amount of flying expenses, most of the producers were losing lots of lambs to coyotes since the troublesome twosome weren't hunting for most of the rest of the county."

You just got done saying that RY refused to work with any private pilot other than LB, now you tell me that he worked with another pilot.

You can't even keep your stories straight and you expect anyone to believe you on anything else?

If this is true, now it's the other way around. You guys get the service of JJ that other producers are also paying for.

What a Hatfield and McCoy situation.



~SH~

 

[SJ]

You need to reread the post SH. I don't think he said LB was a private Pilot. LB was a State contracted Pilot.

As far as the man with the 200 hd of sheep. He was an old man and RY was supposedly a good friend and he was under the usumption RY was watching them and taking care of the coyotes. So much for a good friend. You are right he should have never trusted or taken RY for his word.

I think JJ is giving the producers the best bang for their buck, all they have to do is call. He will even answer his phone.

Name the two other pilots.

Sh's statement; "I'm still wondering why the complaints about RY are not coming from the producers RY works on but rather those who prefer to work with JJ? "[

Someone checked today and RY has 8 permission slips. Does that tell you anything?

SJ

 

[Anonymous]

SJ: "I don't think he said LB was a private Pilot. LB was a State contracted Pilot."

LB is not an employee of the state therefore he is considered a private pilot whether he's under contract or not.


SJ: "As far as the man with the 200 hd of sheep. He was an old man and RY was supposedly a good friend and he was under the usumption RY was watching them and taking care of the coyotes. So much for a good friend."

"Supposedly"?

As if I would take your word for anything considering what a witch hunt some of you Cave Hill Dwellers are on. Speculation, conjecture, and conspiracy theories. That's all you ever bring to the table.

It is not the trappers job to check for coyote predation, period!


SJ: "I think JJ is giving the producers the best bang for their buck, all they have to do is call. He will even answer his phone."

As long as all producers are paying for JJ's service whether they receive it or not right? Quite a racket!


SJ: "Name the two other pilots."

Do your own detective work. I'm not dropping names. I'll let your conspiring minds assume that I made it up. That's how you operate anyway.


SJ: "Someone checked today and RY has 8 permission slips. Does that tell you anything?"

Sure does! Tells me that you folks are lying again because a while back it was 12. How could the number go backwards? I'll tell you how. Because a handfull of Harding Co. Cave Hill Dwellers are on a witch hunt again, that's how.

Many of us have releases at home that we never send in. Considering the "witch hunts", that sounds like a good idea.



~SH~

 

[SJ]

No witch hunt just the facts. Is everyone that disagrees with GF&P a conspirator or a witch hunter?

You need to do a little investigative work on your own. but then again I wouldn't if I didn't want the truth. Kinda like revealing sources if you don't have any.


Who contracted LB? Who was he working for? Who was his Boss under this contract? Who did he have to answer to? Whose rules did he have to follow? Did he run under the same rules as JJ as far as trespass?

 

[Itrap4u]

My two cents, if someone is going to come on here and make alligations against a mans creditabilty then you should have the pair to state who you are and not go by Harding County Alias? Passing information second or third hand!!! It gives it a witch hunt mentality when such is not stated.Thats all continue on!

 

[Anonymous]

SJ: "No witch hunt just the facts."

"FACT"S my butt!

Since when did lies become facts?

You posted this:

Alias (previous): "SH isn't the first trapper who I have heard blame weather for all lamb losses."

That wasn't a fact, that was a damn lie!


You posted this....

alias: "One BIG problem with the ADC program in Harding County is that the trapper has repeatedly refused to work with any aerial hunter besides LB, ....."

That wasn't a fact either, that was another damn lie!


Don't tell me about facts when you don't even know what the word means.


SJ: "Is everyone that disagrees with GF&P a conspirator or a witch hunter?"

Only those who make up baseless allegations and dig up dirt on GF&P employees are witch hunters. Like some of you Harding Co. Cave Hill Dwellers do!

There is a big difference between having a difference of opinion on issues such as the Open Fields Doctrine and making up lies about people.


SJ: "Kinda like revealing sources if you don't have any."

Perfect example of your conspiring mind. I do have sources for those who requested information on the legality of para planes and I have the names of the two private pilots that RY worked with other than LB. You assume that I don't have them because that is how your conspiring mind works. PRESUMPTION OF GUILT!

I simply refuse to play your little games.


SJ: "Who contracted LB?"

The state and the predator control districts did just like they did with many other private pilots.


SJ: "Who was he working for?"

The state and the predator districts.

WHO WAS HE SERVING???

The producers he was flying.


SJ: "Who was his Boss under this contract?"

The Regional Supervisor.


SJ: "Who did he have to answer to?"

The state trapper responsible for the area he was flying.


SJ: "Whose rules did he have to follow?"

Federal and state aerial hunting laws just like JJ has to.


SJ: "Did he run under the same rules as JJ as far as trespass?"

Yes.


WHAT'S YOUR POINT??????????????

If you think you have a point, MAKE IT!



~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

SD trapper,

You are exactly right. How much lower can anyone stoop than to hide behind an alias while they publicly trash someone on an internet that they don't have the courage to address face to face.

Speaks volumes doesn't it?


~SH~

 

[SJ]

I guess we will just agree to disagree.

 

[SJ]

If RY has told you he hasn't been confronted on these issues face to face, he is not telling you the truth.

 

[Jinglebob]

SH

I just couldn't resist! :lol:

SJ: "Kinda like revealing sources if you don't have any."

SH-"Perfect example of your conspiring mind. I do have sources for those who requested information on the legality of para planes and I have the names of the two private pilots that RY worked with other than LB. You assume that I don't have them because that is how your conspiring mind works. PRESUMPTION OF GUILT! "

As to PRESUMPTION OF GUILT. Would that be like a CO asking to see someones license during hunting season! :shock: :lol:

Or coming on to someones land on the PRESUMPTION that there might be someone breaking a law.

You don't have to answer, it was a rhetorical question. :wink:

And you'll notice I didn't misquote or anything!

 

[Liberty Belle]

SH: "You just got done saying that RY refused to work with any private pilot other than LB, now you tell me that he worked with another pilot.
You can't even keep your stories straight and you expect anyone to believe you on anything else?"

The pilot RY was working with that cost the district so much money was the permitted pilot who trained LB and who has since been grounded because he can no longer pass his flying physical. According to his neighbors, that hasn't stopped him from hunting coyotes with RY in his own neighborhood, even though he no longer has a pilot's license and is not permitted for aerial hunting.

Alias has no trouble keeping his stories straight, you're the one trying to tangle things up. I sincerely wish that alias had time to figure out his computer to answer these posts himself. Unfortunately, he has two full-time occupations, fills a position on the predator control board, and is also a permitted predator control pilot. He does not have the time to devote to straightening out your tangles of misinformation. We're just appreciative of the time he spares to get the facts out, even though someone else has to post them.


SH: "As long as all producers are paying for JJ's service whether they receive it or not right? Quite a racket!"

Racket? How do you come up with this stuff? JJ works for the predator district and hunts coyotes everywhere in the district unless someone has not signed the permission slips for him to hunt over them. All of us benefit from his hunting, whether he actually shoots a coyote on our land or not. If one is killed on my neighbor's land, that's one less to worry about in my sheep.

SH: "Many of us have releases at home that we never send in. Considering the "witch hunts", that sounds like a good idea."

Aren't you required to send your permission slips to the state GF&P? The aerial predator control pilots have to have their permission slips signed and sent to Pierre before they even think of hunting. What makes trappers so special? Or is that another rule that Pierre enforces for the predator district pilots and chooses to ignore for GF&P employees? Are we supposed to just take the trapper's word for it that he has them signed? We've found some of them can't be trusted. And if the trapper is lying, who is going to do anything about it - the new panel GF&P is setting up? Oh, please - don't make me laugh.

SH: "alias: "One BIG problem with the ADC program in Harding County is that the trapper has repeatedly refused to work with any aerial hunter besides LB, ....."
That wasn't a fact either, that was another damn lie!
Don't tell me about facts when you don't even know what the word means."

You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the leg. I, and a whole lot of other folks, including at least one from GF&P, heard RY say, at the annual Multi-District Predator Control annual meeting in Belle Fourche, that he refused to work with any other pilot from the predator district besides LB when he came to the meeting with LB and the no-longer-licensed pilot I mentioned above in an attempt, using a petition with forged names on it, to get LB on the payroll for the predator district. It didn't work, but RY darn sure said it and we have the witnesses and the minutes to prove it. Line YOUR facts up before you start attacking someone who has his facts verified in black and white.

SH: "baseless allegations" "conspiring mind" "making up lies" "PRESUMPTION OF GUILT"

Now you're sounding like the one of those "black helicopter" conspiracy theory nuts. Do us all a favor, proof-read your posts and then take a couple deep breaths before you post them, okay? Maybe you'll quit coming across as a screaming maniac. I know you aren't as strident and unbalanced as your posts indicate. Lighten up a little!! Life is too short to give yourself ulcers over someone else's problems.

SD Trapper: " My two cents, if someone is going to come on here and make alligations against a mans creditabilty then you should have the pair to state who you are and not go by Harding County Alias? Passing information second or third hand!!! It gives it a witch hunt mentality when such is not stated.Thats all continue on!"

Read my answer to SH above. And what about you? Are you also a GF&P employee with an ax or two to grind? I noticed you haven't given your name either. Why don't you fellows quit twisting other's statements to mean what you want them to say? How about bringing some facts and real information to the board instead of these "witch hunt" accusations, and sly innuendos?

 

[Anonymous]

LB: "The pilot RY was working with that cost the district so much money was the permitted pilot who trained LB and who has since been grounded because he can no longer pass his flying physical."

I'll take that as your admission that alias's statement regarding RY's refusal to work with anyone other than LB was a lie.

Thank you!


LB: "Alias has no trouble keeping his stories straight, you're the one trying to tangle things up."

Keep telling yourself that. I just caught alias in two lies.

Lie #1 - That RY refused to work with any pilot other than LB

Lie #2 - That I blame weather for all lamb losses.


While you make allegations of "tangling things up", I listed the lies.


LB: "Aren't you required to send your permission slips to the state GF&P?"

If they are requested yes. I have permission slips on hand all the time that I keep on file in case they are requested.

If I claim to have written permission on a piece of property and cannot provide the release upon request, I would have some explaining to do wouldn't I?

The fact remains, I don't set equipment or work a complaint without having a release signed.


LB: " Or is that another rule that Pierre enforces for the predator district pilots and chooses to ignore for GF&P employees?"

Another shot from the Harding Co. grassy knoll rings out. LOL! It never ends!


LB: "Are we supposed to just take the trapper's word for it that he has them signed? We've found some of them can't be trusted."

Who made you the release police?

If my supervisor asks for releases, I can provide them.


LB: "You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the leg."

Talk is cheap!


LB: "Line YOUR facts up before you start attacking someone who has his facts verified in black and white."

Hahaha! ah......ok?


LB: "I, and a whole lot of other folks, including at least one from GF&P, heard RY say, at the annual Multi-District Predator Control annual meeting in Belle Fourche, that he refused to work with any other pilot from the predator district besides LB when he came to the meeting with LB and the no-longer-licensed pilot I mentioned above in an attempt, using a petition with forged names on it, to get LB on the payroll for the predator district."

alias (previous): "One BIG problem with the ADC program in Harding County is that the trapper has repeatedly refused to work with any aerial hunter besides LB, ....."

Did anyone besides myself notice how "any aerial hunter" miraculously became "any other pilot from the predator district"???? And you accuse me of tangling things up and twisting words to change the meaning. Too funny!


LB: "Lighten up a little!! Life is too short to give yourself ulcers over someone else's problems."

What would make you think that these trivial debates are giving me ulcers. They almost put me to sleep.


LB: "How about bringing some facts and real information to the board instead of these "witch hunt" accusations, and sly innuendos?"

When you think you can contradict anything that I have stated with opposing facts, you just bring it. You certainly haven't had much success in that area so far.



~SH~

 

[Liberty Belle]

Twist and spin, twist and spin. Aren't you getting dizzy?

LB: "Aren't you required to send your permission slips to the state GF&P?"

You sure danced around this, but you didn't answer the question. Are you or are you not required to send your permission slips to the state GF&P. And if not, why not? Another GF&P double standard? If I remember right, you claim to have 400 of them signed. Can you prove it?

SH: "Did anyone besides myself notice how "any aerial hunter" miraculously became "any other pilot from the predator district"????"

You know and I know that "alias" was talking about pilots hired by the predator control district. Why don't you talk to some of the other folks who heard RY say this at a well-attended public meeting? Or don't you want to hear what they have to tell?

How about having a visit with the Harding County States attorney about the complaints he got concerning the forged petition presented to the board by LB, RY and three others that they quickly withdrew when they were found out? I can give you the phone numbers for the states attorney or the president of the predator board if you really want to know what transpired.

LB: "How about bringing some facts and real information to the board instead of these "witch hunt" accusations, and sly innuendos?"

This invitation is still open. Those shots from the grassy knoll seem to be coming from your direction.

 

[Jinglebob]

SH;

LB: "Are we supposed to just take the trapper's word for it that he has them signed? We've found some of them can't be trusted."

SH- "Who made you the release police?

If my supervisor asks for releases, I can provide them."

SH, this is the main problem that I, and I think some others, have with the GF&P. No accountability to the very people whom they are supposed to be working for. GF&P is a beauracuracy (sp). The top positon, nor any others as I understand it, is not an elected official, but appointed. So the voters have no recourse if they don't like the way the department is being run. Other than to complain to the Governor or a board appointed by the Governor. Very similar to any other law enforcement other than Sheriff.

I realise that you are not accountable to LB other than as someone who works for a department that is funded by tax dollars. So it would seem that if you are only accountable to your supervisor, then the supervisor or at least the person holding the top job should have some way to be held accountable for the actions of the deptartment, or anyone who works for that department.

And I am by no means saying that you are a poor worker. I have no idea as to your capabilities other than the fact that it sounds like you have been at your job for a long time. I know that you were doing the same job many years ago when you were at my place, so that would speak to the fact that you must be good or you would no longer hold your position.

But can't you see the frustration that some of us feel?

We have problems with how certain things are done by GF&P and some of the people who work for them. Do we not have a right to recourse? And not just what many of us feel is "lip service". It's not like we want to abolish the whole department. Maybe we just want a little more say into it's policies. After all, if the current policy's are so good, they ought to be able to convince us of it.

When ever anyone writes on here of a problem with GF&P, you are so quick to rush in a defend as if you were personally attacked, when as far as I can see, no one has accused you or made any comments about the way you do your job. I admire your loyalty. But shouldn't you be more towards policing your own agency? Perhaps you are only seeing one side of the issue.

I presume you are a landholder from some of your past postings, so you are in a unique position as to seeing both sides of the arguments. But what about the people who have a problem away from where you work or people you have personally worked with? Isn't it possible that there could be some employee's of GF&P who are not perhaps as dedicated as you? Or as honest? Or maybe you are just hearing their side of the story with no real personal involvement in some of the incidents. I am aware that there are probably horsepeople and cattle people who abuse animals under their care, but I just don't know about any. But that isn't to say that it isn't happening.

You have talked about what transpired at a trail, but after seeing the OJ fiasco, I'm not too sure that I would believe entirely what was said at a trail or use it for a defense of an issue.

I enjoy your posting, tho' I don't agree with all that you write, but probably more than you realise. It's fun to "discuss" with someone who doesn't just resort to name calling. But you can be soooo sarcastic at times. And I realise that you probably get tired of re-hashing the same old argument time after time.

Maybe you should go a little easy on some of us who don't have your skills for disscussion.

You might win me over with reasoable arguments and facts, but you will never win me over with name calling and hyperbole.

Keep posting and maybe try to look at it from our side once in awhile. We are talking about our homes and lives here, not just debating cold hard facts.

 

[Anonymous]

Darnit Jinglebob, now I have to reply.

I like your posts, you do seem to see things from closer to where I sit, but I want to relate a few personal views I have to go along with your reply.

There are just as many problems with elected officials and it is not a perfect system either. Sheriff's don't make as many arrests as troopers do, because if they arrest the wrong person, they are out of a job. That compromises a level of their job. I certainly don't feel that way about all sheriff's, but for some counties, that is a valid concern. You can go too far the other direction right or wrong. I agree with you that everyone needs to be held accountable for their work, but we need to have some law enforcement so I don't get killed just trying to drive on the road.

If you look at the GFP website: http://www.sdgfp.info/Commission/Chronology.htm

1909 -- Creation of the Department of Game and Fish. Governor appointed W.F. Bancroft as state game warden. A Game and Fish Commission was established, and it consisted of the Governor, the Attorney General, and the State Game Warden. Bancroft was given the privilege of appointing a county game warden in any county of the state upon the recommendation and request of the board of county comissioners.

1911 -- There were 58 county game wardens in the field. The inherent drawbacks for such a system were apparent to Bancroft, and he reported to the Governor, "Too much politics is entered into the recommendations of the county game wardens by county boards."

1913 -- The county game warden system was abolished and enforcement put into the hands of eight deputy state game wardens. The greater efficiency of the new system was soon apparent. Eight deputy wardens made 65 arrests their first year, as compared with 46 arrested by 58 wardens the year before.


Now don't get me wrong, there can be too much law, but I think most in my area feel they don't see the warden enough, and want to see him more to catch the trespassers and road hunters. Game Wardens and GFP needs to be accountable. Even though LB doesn't think the new review board is going to do anything, I think it is a step in the right direction, and that is a good thing. That's what is really important is discussing this issue like adults at the table and coming up with answers to your problems. There are flaws in GFP like any state government, but it is possible to fix those problems and progress is hopefully being made. Those folks east of the river think differently about a lot of things, and hunters and landowners think differently also sometimes. Just look at the minutes of the West River Working Group from Pierre and east! For every person that feels one way on an issue, you will find another who feels totally opposite. You did not see many landowners ER who wanted transferrable licenses or even wanted wardens to ask permission. I live WR, but folks here are pretty split on these issues, probably because there are a few stupid pheasants here. How do you balance that out? I think that is exactly what is happening.

Jinglebob: "When ever anyone writes on here of a problem with GF&P, you are so quick to rush in a defend as if you were personally attacked, when as far as I can see, no one has accused you or made any comments about the way you do your job. I admire your loyalty. But shouldn't you be more towards policing your own agency? Perhaps you are only seeing one side of the issue."

Obviously SH takes a lot of pride in his job, which is exactly as it should be. If he responds as if he were personally attacked, good. How do you feel when Tony Dean bashes WR landowners, personally attacked I hope and you should be upset. When you place blanket statements you include everyone. I have seen where SH disagrees with GFP on transferrable licenses, and you could probably find others. If you ask any employee of a business or government they might think some of the other employees could do better or be fired, I don't know, but that was not what was in question. I bet you know some ranchers who could use some lessons, and don't tell them. You can control what you do, not others unless you supervise them. I'm all for those licenses too, but we have to work together to find compromises that work, because a lot of other folks are dead set against it, which is their right to disagree.

I shouldn't have posted because I'm gonna get bashed for playing Devil's Advocate, but I see both sides of the arguments and everyone gets a say. Like I said before, talk to your trapper or warden or sheriff or whatever or invite 'em out for coffee at the table where you can get it off your chest to the person you need to deal with. That's where the rubber meets the road. Yeah there are some who fail us and that person needs to be accountable, but there are a lot who unnecessarily suffer from the wrongs of a few.

Go ahead and drop those bombs now, I'll be under the desk!

 

[Anonymous]

Deleted!

 

[Anonymous]

LB: "Twist and spin, twist and spin."

That's your MO LB, not mine!

When you don't like my response, you accuse me of twisting and spinning but you can never back that allegation by pointing it out. I don't know how I could be any more straight with you.


LB: "You sure danced around this, but you didn't answer the question. Are you or are you not required to send your permission slips to the state GF&P."

I never danced around a damn thing Betty!

SH (Previous): "If they are requested yes. I have permission slips on hand all the time that I keep on file in case they are requested."

I answered your question. It's not my fault you can't comprehend the written word.


LB: "If I remember right, you claim to have 400 of them signed. Can you prove it?"

I don't remember saying that I CURRENTLY have 400 releases signed. I may have said that I have worked on 400 landowners over the years or that I have had 400 releases signed over the years. I'm not sure that I still have all of my outdated releases from 18 years ago for landowners I am no longer responsible for.

My landowner list currently numbers 493. Some of those landowners were from Pennington Co. which I am no longer responsible for and some were residents of the small towns in my area that had skunk and coon problems which do not require releases.

I am not sure of the exact number of releases I currently have. What I am sure of is that I have a release signed for every coyote or beaver complaint I work on.

Can I prove that I have a release signed for every coyote and beaver complaint I work on. Yes I can. Will I? No I won't! Why won't I? Because I don't participate in witch hunts willingly. I'll just let you assume that I can't back my claim because you will anyway.


LB: "You know and I know that "alias" was talking about pilots hired by the predator control district."

That's not what alias said. Alias needs to say what he means.


LB: " Why don't you talk to some of the other folks who heard RY say this at a well-attended public meeting? Or don't you want to hear what they have to tell?"

LB: "How about having a visit with the Harding County States attorney about the complaints he got concerning the forged petition presented to the board by LB, RY and three others that they quickly withdrew when they were found out? I can give you the phone numbers for the states attorney or the president of the predator board if you really want to know what transpired."

I am not RY's supervisor and I could really give a damn what he MAY HAVE said in some predator district meeting years ago. Gosh you folks dwell in the past a lot. Get a life!


~SH~

 

[Jinglebob]

Sandgrubber;

I read little if any that I would disagree with.

Yes, I would love to have the GF&P officer come to my place and visit and I think that is one of our problems. As I've stated before, the only officer that i have ever had anythoing but respect for, was the one who lied to me and I've know others who were very good people and did a great job. I ain't never run one off yet! Unless it was the coffee or tea I made for them. LOL

I'm afraid that the actions of many of us in the last few years have not permitted a neighborly relationship to be fostered between landholders and the GF&P. And vice versa. Maybe we need to start talking about what we agree on and then discuss what we disagree on.

There is a lot of frustration west river as to not getting laws passed that have a bigger effect on us than those east of the river, when the majority of the voting population lives east of the river and maybe doesn't understand some of our unique problems.

Your grasp of the system is admirable. One of the things that I see as an improvement would be to have the head of the GF&P be an elected position. If a deputy sheriff causes problems or illegalities, he has to answer to the sheriff who has to answer to the voters. In our county there have only been 2 or 3 sheriff's in my lifetime (47) I've known them all. We tend to keep a good one and not rock the boat. As for the deputy sheriff's, I think there has been turnover, because of various resons, but seems like many are there for a long time. Just as CO's. When we have had good CO's it seems like they get transfered to somewhere else. Maybe this isn't a prime area. I don't think they have much chance of advancement if they get advanced by tickets as we seem to be pretty law abiding around here. Who wants to poach a deer when he has good beef to eat. LOL


As for the east river west river split, I fail to see why we have to have the same exact rules for both sides. After all, gooshunt regs have very little effect on me and I would wager that praire dog problems have very little effect east of the river, tho' they probably have problems also. We live in two very different areas and as I posted somewhere else, I sure wish they would have split the Dakotas north and south instead of eat and west. Two totally different ecosystems and rainfall areas that produce different problems and advantages.

Enjoyed your comments.

I don't want to see the GF&P get thrown out, maybe just a little more say so by those who run the largest majority of wildlife on private land in this state. We feed them, we should get some say in how they are managed.