Tony Dean apologizes?

[Southdakotahunter]

If the gfp gave you the licenses LB, you would still open your self to compliance checks.

What i would hate to see happen is the rancher gets the tags, shoots the deer and they go to waste. I think that would happen.

 

[P Joe]

If the gfp gave you the licenses LB, you would still open your self to compliance checks.

What i would hate to see happen is the rancher gets the tags, shoots the deer and they go to waste. I think that would happen.

I don't think that would happen, but there is a bad apple in every bunch!

Here is my take, if us landowners applied for a tag, filled it, allow reasonable doe hunting to take place, then after the main season is over, we should be able to bring a GF&P official out and say hey, I have 50 deer on my land and would like another 10 shot, he agrees, or says well lets do 7 this year. I get 7 permits for me or whoever I want to give them to to go ahead and shoot 7 does. But here is the catch, if the tags are free, so is the hunting. It wouldn't feel right to me nor would it be right to GF&P if they gave you/me 7 tags and we turned around and made $700 dollars on the deal.

I beleive I have a right to manage the bucks on my land, and rarly don't let any one, except the 3 neighbors I hunt with, shoot a buck on my land. Once I've filled, I let "reasonable" people hunt all the does they want.

Now if they can't fill my need to get rid of a few does, then by all rights I should be able to do that myself or hire it done if need be!

 

[Liberty Belle]

You're right P Joe, if there are doe tags left over and you have deer damaging your hay and your grass, GF&P should either come out and shoot the wildlife that is causing the damage or give the leftover tags to you to manage the wildlife for them. It wouldn't cost GF&P anything, the tags are going to waste anyway, and as a landowner, you should be able to protect your feed from depredation. I think the idea of landowners selling those tags is a mute point since GF&P couldn't even sell them for a whole lot less than $100 apiece!

 

[per]

Can I assume that your native population has the right to hunt year round? Maybe they would be willing to come in and cull some does. That used to be how we handled our over population of wildlife. That generation of natives are too old now and the next generation is not that interested anymore.

 

[Southdakotahunter]

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.

 

[Liberty Belle]

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:

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?

 

[Southdakotahunter]

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?

 

[publichunter]

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.

 

[P Joe]

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.

Some of you have to remember that GF&P was very corrupt and really did screw with some of the ranchers out in harding, buffalo and meade counties a few years ago. They have a right to be bitter.

I don't agree with how they are trying to change things nor did I like how some of the bigger leases got involved with it one way or another, but I guess it's not my problem to change either. I don't like the idea of the lock out because, to me, it makes their problems with GF&P the hunters problem also. Which isn't right.

I think they could have gotten farther with their cause and still allowed hunting because I think they turned quite a few against them with the lockout idea. I think they could have pushed the idea of "GF&P checking hunters anytime, anyplace" and got a supportive reaction back from hunters. I know I don't like that thought, and most people won't, but when you're told you can't hunt here until IT changes(like we had control over it??), it kinda leaves a bad taste in your mouth!

Sorry didn't mean to make this about the lockout. :roll: :roll: but I think you have to understand a little bit on how the GF&P did crap on some people.

 

[mwj]

P Joe you and your friends have a good chance for policy change. Call and write to your elected reps. till they are sick of it and encourage everyone of your friends to do the same. You can complain all you want but you have to be proactive to change things. If hunters and sportsmen were half as organised as a lot of the anti groups you would me surprised :shock: 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.

 

[Southdakotahunter]

Actrually the hunters are very organized. Thats why we still have open fields.

 

[mrj]

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

 

[P Joe]

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.

 

[Southdakotahunter]

Isnt the walk-in program an "incentive"?? or are you wanting something for doing nothing.

 

[Northern Rancher]

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.

 

[Southdakotahunter]

your 100% correct NR

 

[Mrs.Greg]

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.

Great post Corey

 

[Liberty Belle]

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.

Where ya been NR? I was sure you'd jump in with your opinion before this. And, as usual, you've got your facts all wrong. The only lack of logic here is reflected in posts like yours and the hunters posting here that can't stand the thought of landowners protecting themselves from abuse by a governmental agency.

How do you know what illegal activity is committed behind locked gates – personal experience? And did you get caught? Do you allow cops to come into your house unannounced to see what crimes they might catch you committing, and if not, why not?

Most of us in the lockout have never charged a dime to let anyone hunt our land and don't ever intend to charge, although that is our right if we wanted to put up with the liability issues involved in this sue-happy country.

The lockout was never about stopping hunting, it was to prevent an out-of-control state agency from further violation of our property rights. I must say, it has been working perfectly, much to the chagrin of GF&P, SDWF, Tony Dean, and a bunch of hunting groups that think they should have the right to tell landowners what we can and cannot do on our land.

Landowners have lost nothing in this fight. The losers are hunters who used to hunt over four million acres of prime hunting land for nothing. Until hunters begin to work with the landowners to rein in GF&P, there is no reason for us to open our land ever again.

And ya know what? Hunting season is a lot more fun since we've been locked out. My father-in-law used to tell me that he looked forward to hunting season about like he looked forward to a three-day blizzard! We're kinda getting' used to this peace and quiet.

Sorry about that… :wink:

 

[P Joe]

Where ya been NR? I was sure you'd jump in with your opinion before this. And, as usual, you've got your facts all wrong. The only lack of logic here is reflected in posts like yours and the hunters posting here that can't stand the thought of landowners protecting themselves from abuse by a governmental agency.

You have just said it ABUSED

Open Fields is not broken and works just fine, The stuff you proposed would have changed nothing. The problem was some GF&P ABUSED their power.

Landowners have lost nothing in this fight. The losers are hunters who used to hunt over four million acres of prime hunting land for nothing. Until hunters begin to work with the landowners to rein in GF&P, there is no reason for us to open our land ever again.

Your right hunters have lost the most out of this, but tell me again why you are making this problem the hunters problem?? They don't have any more power over GF&P than landowners do.

But according to you and your side kicks, it cost so much to keep the states critters feed, so it is costing the landowners too, and according to some of your "locked out ranchers" it must cost $1500/deer/year to keep them feed

 

[Southdakotahunter]

I dont think its a pay to hunt thing entirely, but some how some think "fine..if the gfp is gonna be that way, its gonna be pay to hunt now"

They get things mixed up, such as entering a farm house/buildings without a warrent with checking someone hunting on the land for a license. Some think they should have to wait on the road to check for licenses. I know i have never been checked for a license on private land, but im sure it happens. There are even others, that allow coyote hunting on their land, yet say they are in the lockout. somehow, coyote hunting is not hunting to them, or the gfp wouldnt check them for a license or something, dont know the real reasoning behind that. I hear protecting my herd and such as to the reasoning, like the deer and goats that are eating up all this feed for their animals, is not some sort of a threat to their ranch?
Then, they try to make laws that say the wildlife accidents caused by god should come with a $200 payment by the gfp, as long as the driver didnt initiate the accident, like the deer is gonna tell on em?? They testify at hearings in favor of the law they want to pass, they have locked out to hunting, yet complain there are too many deer. Its nuts! After all is said and done, they are not even responsible if one of their cattle get onto the hwy and cause a wreck, but for heaven sake, lets make the gfp pay for a deer wreck........gosh dang game and fish department anyway...who do they think they are??

They says the lockout has been a great success, yet i know of ranchers who are no longer in the lockout anymore because the antelope herds are getting out of hand. I wonder why?

So successful, their website has been taken down