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

West River Lockout landowners are bad folks...

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Jinglebob said:
Liberty Belle said:
But SDH, you just told us it is against the law for us to shoot the deer and take care of the problem ourselves. What would you have us do to fix the problem without government involvement? Go on, give us a solution that will satisfy GF&P without violating our rights. We've tried to find a resonable and lawful solution for years and if you've got one, we're all ears.
Click to expand...

Yes, how would you solve this problem and keep the government out. I kind of like MRJ's idea about an insurance policy, but that would be getting the government involved.

Lets face it, the GF&P and the hunters have had free deer and antelope hunting for years and for years most people let any responsible (and a few not so responsible) people hunt and friends were made. When landowner got tired of slob hunters and found out there was a market for hunting, some have decided it was pretty easy to charge something for the agravation of having hunter on their land.

Now the GF&P wants to be the only ones to ride the gravytrain of fee hunting.

SD Hunter, what if me and a few friend wanted to come stay for free at your house and visit for several days and after we left some more friends of mine came and slept in your beds and ate your food and just had a good ol' time? Wouldn't you get a little tired of company after awhile. Even if we was to help you get rid of some pests? Like shootin' at your mice in the house. Don't worry, we'd be real careful and we wouldn't blow holes in none of your furniture. Shoot, we could even use blowguns if you wanted us too!

Thats pretty much what it's like when the hunters start pulling in here. "Fish and company, both start to smell after 3 days".

it's just way easier to put up with the wildlife than the hunters and the GF&P, for me.
Click to expand...

Guess I didn't make it clear that the ONLY thing I would want GF&P to do is provide names of a bunch of RELIABLE insurance companies that sell such insurance. It seems they are hard to find.

MRJ
 
BMR - do you honestly think eliminating all deer and antelope from my privately owned land is going to eliminate the species? You are kidding, aren't you?
No - no one signs any contract when they enter the lockout. A lot of them don't even post signs; they just wait until hunters ask so they can explain the situation to them. There is a contact person in each county that keeps a list of folks that are locked out and the number of acres they own. Unless the landowner contacted that person, his acres are not listed even if he is locked out, so the 4 million acres is probably too conservative.

The vast majority of the landowners are like us, they don't allow any game hunting on land that we previously allowed hunting for free. There are some who do allow only pay hunting and by doing so, they are giving GF&P an opportunity to violate the property rights that the lockout was designed to protect, but that's none of my business - and none of yours.
 
Liberty Belle said:
BMR - do you honestly think eliminating all deer and antelope from my privately owned land is going to eliminate the species? You are kidding, aren't you?
No - no one signs any contract when they enter the lockout. A lot of them don't even post signs; they just wait until hunters ask so they can explain the situation to them. There is a contact person in each county that keeps a list of folks that are locked out and the number of acres they own. Unless the landowner contacted that person, his acres are not listed even if he is locked out, so the 4 million acres is probably too conservative.

The vast majority of the landowners are like us, they don't allow any game hunting on land that we previously allowed hunting for free. There are some who do allow only pay hunting and by doing so, they are giving GF&P an opportunity to violate the property rights that the lockout was designed to protect, but that's none of my business - and none of yours.
Click to expand...

Liberty Belle--If BMR gets too worried about extinction I could always ship him or anyone a few thousand- thats about how many are in the river bottom hayfields each morning when the sun comes up- muleys and whitetails...

I heard the other day from a cowboy where they are finding lots of dead and dying deer along the river bottom...Definitely isn't because of the winter weather or lack of feed- must be another disease hit them- usually does when the population gets so huge....
 
Liberty Belle said:
BMR - do you honestly think eliminating all deer and antelope from my privately owned land is going to eliminate the species? You are kidding, aren't you?
No - no one signs any contract when they enter the lockout. A lot of them don't even post signs; they just wait until hunters ask so they can explain the situation to them. There is a contact person in each county that keeps a list of folks that are locked out and the number of acres they own. Unless the landowner contacted that person, his acres are not listed even if he is locked out, so the 4 million acres is probably too conservative.

The vast majority of the landowners are like us, they don't allow any game hunting on land that we previously allowed hunting for free. There are some who do allow only pay hunting and by doing so, they are giving GF&P an opportunity to violate the property rights that the lockout was designed to protect, but that's none of my business - and none of yours.
Click to expand...


LB I was just pointing out what the liberal media might use against you.


Is anything about the Lockout written down, A web site or your objectives?
 
BMR - by the liberal media, do you mean Tony Dean's website? Too late for the warning, he's already misquoted me and most of my friends. We lay wake nights worrying about it. :wink: he he he :p

The lockout website is: http://www.sdlockout.com/ and there is enough reading material on there to keep you busy for a while. The folks who run the website have been really busy this winter so it hasn't been updated for quite a while.
 
Did some reading LB and I agree with this man

"Richard Meyers, a rancher from Belle Fourche, urged every landowner to get behind the lockout and to stay united on this issue. He said, "The only way to speak is with one big voice". He commented that because ranchers and farmers are fiercely independent, government has the notion that … 'if you ignore them long enough they will go away'….. 'we can't and won't go away - is the message that needs to be sent.'

What I have been saying all winter that lip service to the lock out won't work. All hunters including for pay hunters should have been locked out. The big money boys would have made more noise in Peirre. More power to the folks that stuck to their guns.
 
Soapweed.............."It's their land. Whoever owns the land or owns the cow, can do with their possessions whatever they please."

I think your a little off there Soap.You have an obligation to be a good steward of the land and to treat the cow humanely.
 
Juan said:
Soapweed.............."It's their land. Whoever owns the land or owns the cow, can do with their possessions whatever they please."

I think your a little off there Soap.You have an obligation to be a good steward of the land and to treat the cow humanely.
Click to expand...

I do agree with you on that, Juan. But on the other hand, South Dakota ranchers from west of the river don't need east river hunters, Canadian ranchers, and even us Nebraska ranchers telling them how to tend their shop. That is my point. It's their land, they can run it their way. Now if there was just an emoticon for folding my arms against my chest and stomping my feet, maybe I could get my point across. :wink: So there :!: :shock: :)
 
BMR: Did some reading LB and I agree with this man

"Richard Meyers, a rancher from Belle Fourche, urged every landowner to get behind the lockout and to stay united on this issue. He said, "The only way to speak is with one big voice". He commented that because ranchers and farmers are fiercely independent, government has the notion that … 'if you ignore them long enough they will go away'….. 'we can't and won't go away - is the message that needs to be sent.'

What I have been saying all winter that lip service to the lock out won't work. All hunters including for pay hunters should have been locked out. The big money boys would have made more noise in Peirre. More power to the folks that stuck to their guns
Click to expand...
I'll relay your sentiments to Meyers – Dick will get a kick out of it. Let me tell you a little about Richard Meyers. He is a retired law enforcement officer (DCI) and a former GF&P Commissioner. The present head of GF&P, John Cooper, hates Meyer's guts because Dick makes no secret of the fact that he thinks GF&P is being run like the KGB and is very vocal with his opinions.

You and I agree with this statement by Dick, which is why both Meyers' and our ranch stay locked out and we would just as soon have everyone do the same. The vast majority involved in the lockout are just that – locked out – but it isn't any of our business if a few of those landowners allow pay hunters.

For some of these guys, budgets are tight and they are hanging on to the home ranch as hard as they can, so they are willing to put their private property rights in jeopardy for the cash needed to pay the bills. They support what we're trying to do, but their economic situation dictates their actions. I guess not everyone can afford the courage of their convictions.
 
Soapweed,I do hope you were generalising about the Canadians telling these people what to do with thier own land.I chose to stay out of this topic,its thier land and NONE of my business! The reason I wanted to answer this time was there are alot of times I really don't agree with some of what some Canadians on a few of these threads say and are not nessasarly speaking for all Canadians,that happens ALOT in Bull Section.Just wanted this to be clear.We are not one entity just because we reside under one flag!
 
Mrs.Greg said:
Soapweed,I do hope you were generalising about the Canadians telling these people what to do with thier own land.I chose to stay out of this topic,its thier land and NONE of my business! The reason I wanted to answer this time was there are alot of times I really don't agree with some of what some Canadians on a few of these threads say and are not nessasarly speaking for all Canadians,that happens ALOT in Bull Section.Just wanted this to be clear.We are not one entity just because we reside under one flag!
Click to expand...

I realize what you are saying, Mrs. Greg. Sorry if you thought I was generalizing; I wasn't. My opinion is for the western South Dakota ranchers to make their own decisions to determine their own destiny. They don't need my Nebraskan advice; they don't need the advice from the very vocal eastern South Dakota hunter; and they don't need the advice from 'some' of the Canadian ranchers who are so freely giving it. This is my personal viewpoint, for whatever it is worth. Like you, I have tried to stay out of the fray, but since it was still flapping in the wind after a dozen hard-fought pages, I just couldn't resist rolling up my sleeves and diving in. Sorry. :wink: :)
 
I was involved in this discussion when it was first posted on bull session. I dropped out when I realized that facts and common sense had no place in this discussion. Only self-righteous emotion was allowed. When people start referring to you as some kind of communist or ignorant because you don't agree with them, the discussion is over.

My question to you soapweed is, if the posters on this forum are from Canada, Neb., etc, why should they not respond? I thought this was a discussion forum? Are the readers only allowed to give an atta-girl-boy? If one does not want to hear the other side of an issue, why post it here in the first place? Should I start to pm you to get permission to respond to a post? How about the contents of my posts? Do I need your approval? Is this no longer a discussion forum?
 
fedup2 said:
I was involved in this discussion when it was first posted on bull session. I dropped out when I realized that facts and common sense had no place in this discussion. Only self-righteous emotion was allowed. When people start referring to you as some kind of communist or ignorant because you don't agree with them, the discussion is over.

My question to you soapweed is, if the posters on this forum are from Canada, Neb., etc, why should they not respond? I thought this was a discussion forum? Are the readers only allowed to give an atta-girl-boy? If one does not want to hear the other side of an issue, why post it here in the first place? Should I start to pm you to get permission to respond to a post? How about the contents of my posts? Do I need your approval? Is this no longer a discussion forum?
Click to expand...

Sorry if I offended you, fedup2. Guess I was fed up, too, with the whole darned topic. Closure on the subject would be wonderful.

Just take me with a grain of salt. Everyone else does, including my wonderful wife, fine children and loyal old dog. :cry: :wink:

Have a great and productive evening.
 
I was not offended Soapweed. You gave your opinion and that is what a discussion forum is for. I to, have slammed my fingers in my desk drawer every time I have been tempted to respond to this thread. I tried to be brief when I posted and maybe I was too brief. It was not my intention to offend either, only to make a point. Have a great evening also.
 
Discussion is one thing, but 14 pages of it? And I bet so far NOT ONE person has changed his stance on the subject.

Private property means it belongs to you. You make the decisions. Period.
Click to expand...
Amen! How about we give this issue a rest? We can take care of our land and our problems without the advice of folks who don't even understand the issue - thanks anyway.
 
I have been away for a little while, and was asked by LB what to do with the critters without getting the government involved.

Well, you cant start shooting, if ya do and someone finds out......to the clink ya go. If ya just let them die....well, maybe you dont have a conscience....but any rancher/farmer i know wouldnt allow that to happen if its up to them, thats not the way we are. If they died of starvation, i guess the gfp would want to investigate why they all died, so that wont work either. I am thinkin your in between a rock and a hard place. You dont want to control them on your land by allowing hunting which will then allow the gfp to come on your land and check licenses, but you dont want them to eat your grass or drink the water either.

I wish i had the magic answer, but i dont.
 
Well for all the holier than thou's on here if the padlock gang doesn't want to hear opinions that disagree with theirs why post it on a public forum-I thought free speech was the bastion of democratic society-not you can post on here if you agree with me. Some pretty rude people on here have pretty thin skins when their views are challenged at all.
 

Latest posts

Top