ranchodeluxe
New member
Fair enough, it only reflects on you.
end of season hunt
- Thread starter benelli-banger
- Start date
Fair enough, it only reflects on you.
Goosemaster
Well-known member
Yeah- if I go to sd, it's going to be real late. I don't want to see the dog trailor guys all over the plsce.
ranchodeluxe
New member
Well, I sure ain't gonna complain about having access to world-class hunting for free, even though a lot of you guys tend to bitch about lack of access. I'm not gonna take anyone by the hand and point it out. You have to have enough fire in the belly to find it.
Some of it is large blocks of cedar breaks, when the weather gets like it's been the last few weeks, that's where they go to survive. But there are bunches of little 40 acre, or 60 acre pieces, planted in food plots and managed for upland, more than waterfowl or big game. If people just want to look at it, then bitch about lack of hunting opportunities, I can't help.
I hunted the area on a 60-degree weekend in November, and on a 40-degree day in December, perfect weather. My buddy who owns the land says he very seldom sees anyone hunting either the big or small parcels. I only saw one deer hunter out of half a dozen, or so spots we drove by with roosters in the ditch, so I know they are loaded with birds.
Your next point is moronic, and I am now beginning to question your intellect.
The point I was making is that walk-in land still provides a benefit to US as SD residents, by contributing to funding our schools and other infrastructure. I know you don't care if our kids go to school ,or not. I don't think you ponder things that deeply.
You are one of those cry-baby out- of- state hunters. You are whining about private lands being leased for public access and think that money should go to land purchases instead. If you want to reduce your hunting options about 90%, just end the Walk-in program.
Can you point out a piece of land in SD that has been removed from the GPA program? You claim you have seen it, please point it out.
As far as people in-enrolling their private land, well, it's private land, unless you propose the Government confiscate it, how do you propose stopping a landowner from doing what is best for him, his family, and his business?
I think your generalization that GFP doesn't attempt to buy enough land for public access. Well, you should be here to see the political heat they have to take from the rancher who wanted to buy the land himself, the other locals who don't want increased traffic (city-slickers coming out to their sanctuary and hanging around, the tax assessor who wants the land developed, etc. You suggested a $3 fee to access Walk-in land, that fee is baked-in on your license fees. There is a certain amount set-aside for leasing/purchasing land. If there was not, you wouldn't see those little white signs on any fence posts in SD.
I am not concerned about how you present yourself, if you want to come across as a botard, your choice.
ranchodeluxe
New member
Great post! Praying for your wife and Family.
ranchodeluxe
New member
I used to commute between the Black Hills and Great Falls and used to ride through the Lewistown area a lot and see birds. It looked like good Western habitat. Back when there was no daytime speed limit, I took a hen to the face mask at 125 MPH on my Ducati, I think I was out for second, came to and I was coasting down the center of the road with no hands on the bars.
small munsterlander owner
Banned
Pretty sure I did not say end the walk in program I said something like maybe have a access fee 3$ 5$ & us that don't hunt crep or wia can't hunt them being as there private lands...
U just hate the feds & I get it but my example of guys not hunting thick tuff terrain was to your guys crying around Platte area hunting I have talked with guys from OH MI WI MN & OK. That all hunted Platte b4 not sure why nobody hunts the area by your friends???
I seen 3 or 4 bow hunters out in mid Nov just b4 rifle season we never hunted the area let him have it all...
Yes call me selfish I like more state owned lands less leased stuff better for them kids if they ever want to hunt??? Take a kid hunting & help him with home work win win ??? My spot I choose to hunt is not driven by the SD state tax base I'm sorry...
Last edited:
small munsterlander owner
Banned
If you have access to a 2013 SD hunting atlas look at page 13 north east of blunt at the intersection of 192 & 313 1 and a half mile west of that school there is a GPA... look at the on line & paper version since 2013 & until now that GPA is gone asked game & fish was told maybe just not printed or sometimes land change hand between agency's???
You are the guy calling names & nit picking spelling & constantly fed bashing the it only reflects on you comment is a 2 way street...
MN & NE WY MT. all have a added $$$ fee to hunt there public lands i understand our license $ has $ taken out to acquire public lands already so do the above states + you pay extra $ that was my point maybe a SD state pheasant stamp??? Just ideas go ahead & shred away I'm sure I'm completely wrong 100% & dumb as all hell for suggesting such a added fee
Last edited:
jackrabbit
Active member
Good luck to your wife! My wife will be 3 years sober in 6 days. Tough times when trying to get it turned around and going to treatment, and it's always a daily battle to stay sober. But 3 years later, life is so much better for the both of us than it was 3+ years ago.
ranchodeluxe
New member
Ya, I know you don't care about our kid's education, that's probably why you never learned to spell, or punctuate.
Again, the access fee is baked-in, you are paying it when you buy your license. How would you manage the payment of this fee? Honor boxes on-site? Stop and pay the landowner? Hire a state worker at 50k a year to stand there and collect $3? Sounds highly efficient to me.
The Feds have nothing to do with State managed and owned Game Production Areas, so again, your point is moronic. Not sure who "My Guys" are? Once again your post is nearly unreadable due to your lack of spelling and punctuation. The crying was going-on right here on this website, by guys like you. I didn't say nobody hunts the area, I said I don't see anyone hunting it, and my buddy, who drives past these lands several times per week, seldom sees anyone hunting it. But yet, guys like you whine that my state should buy more land for YOU to hunt. My point is that we already have. If the opportunities are better in MN, or any other state, knock yourself out.
jackrabbit
Active member
Okay guys... enough. Are Small Munsterland's posts tough to read sometimes? Yes, but at least he is on here posting and moving conversation, providing insight. From what I've gathered over the years, he is very passionate in upland bird hunting. That's what we all have in common.
ranchodeluxe
New member
So, because it is not on the map means it no longer exists? Did you drive-by and see if it is still signed? Or did you just want something to whine about? If, in fact, the State sold it to a "greedy" outfitter for private access, it would be posted, as such. It doesn't happen, SDGFP is not in the real estate business. If it made sense to trade that piece for another, they would do it, but the net loss of access would be zero.
Yur rite, bi pinting out thit yur lac of spilling und punctitation makes u luk les than untelligent, that it riflicts badly in me.
As far as my "Fed" bashing. By pointing out the stupid shit that I see them doing, every day, that's "Fed bashing"? No, that's pointing-out the inefficiencies in our federal Government and making my point that I see the State of South Dakota managing our public lands far more efficiently than the Feds, who just grab land, at will (Bear's Ears, Staircase Escalante). I try to use examples, where you use blanket statements made based on your own un-informed logic, with very little offered in the way of evidence to back up your point.
No, you aren't dumb for stating your opinion related to charging for public access. At-least you offered a solution, although a bad one. Most folks will tell you that paying over $100 for a ten day out-of-state license is enough. You add a $3 fee and it will be more than eaten-up by the bureaucrats who would be required to manage it.
ranchodeluxe
New member
small munsterlander owner
Banned
Your correct that odd 3$ or 5$ or even 20$ to hunt more WIA CREP lands during your SD hunt period would stop many from coming or paying??? Same guys paying hundreds in gas & lodging won't pay a few more Buck's... I hear the same argument when guys justify paying a guided hunt or trespass fee...
Minnesota is nothing compared to SD pheasant hunt wise but there's plenty of WMA land to go hunt & shoot a bird or 2 each hunt we own lots of WMA & have a wia wear u pay a little extra $ to hunt WIA plus u can buy a actuall pheasant stamp not perfect waste of $$$ but many guys buy the stamp to collect...
SD residents are the only 1s I've ever herd argue state owned public lands are anything other then a good thing... Was tax bs same state is notorious for pay to play hunting & pay trespass fees...??? Evey other pheasant hunter east of the Mississippi says more donated or PF DU QF land acquisitions that benefit pheasants the better...
Did not make it out to that GPA yet meant to but have not I should of but I like to whine more... But if its gone it means nothing like u said I was curious why u asked for a example other then to nit pick again after I read ur response...
Last edited:
ranchodeluxe
New member
Again, how would you manage that fee so that it does not get eaten by administrative and bureaucratic process? If I understand you correctly, you would assess this fee per use, correct? When I wheel up to the GPA ( which I already pay for as a taxpayer in the State of SD), I would be assessed this fee. Honor box? Staffed by GFP?, honor system and you send the fee to the state? How do you collect this fee efficiently?
So guys justify paying more (trespass fee) by bitching about the amount of the license fee? I don't have enough bread crumbs to find my way back if I address that one.
In SD, we live within our means. We aren't going to go out and buy tens of millions of dollars worth of land for some guy from Minnesota's pure joy. That's why my state is in far better financial condition than most.
If you are insinuating that, by pointing out that my State does buy land for public access, a lot of it, in my lifetime, that it means I am against it, ya, that makes sense, doesn't it? If you look at my other posts on the subject (bashing the Feds, as you called it), it would be hard for any objective person to conclude that I am against State-owned land? No, just pointing out that, in my belief, we do pretty damn well with the resources we have, and the resources that come available. If I were wrong on that point, this thread would not exist, as nobody would give a shit.
First of all, you can't just take private land. It has to become available. Either through the process I mentioned previously, or through private treaty, gift, etc. It's easy to say that more land in SD should be publically-owned, and I agree, but when 91% of the state is in private hands, it tends to stay that way. That's how those family farmers, (or greedy pay to play outfitters, depending on your point of view), stay in business, feed the mouths that mean-mouth them, etc, stay in business. So, when a parcel becomes available, and it meets this criteria, we buy it for your enjoyment. Isn't that fair? Read it and tell me what you have to bitch about? If it doesn't post as a link, you may have to copy/paste.
http://gfp.sd.gov/land-acquisition.pdf
Last edited:
ranchodeluxe
New member
Just doing some rough figuring: My buddy has an offer in on a quarter section of land in the Platte area for $400,000. It has 110 tillable acres, so it makes sense. He can contract with the farmer and take a percentage of the crop, thereby off-setting his cost to satisfy his pheasant addiction. Those acres would likely be planted in food/cover crops if it were public, this in order to maximize the access that so many desire. Without even figuring out how to finance the purchase, interest, etc just doing simple math, using SMO's numbers.
$400,000 divided by an access fee of $3 equals 133,333 use-days required to pay for the land, again, not figuring interest, maintenance, admin costs and assume that the State is 100% efficient in the use of the money and every penny goes to pay the mortgage. Let's assume it sees significant use, say 5 use-days, per day, for the length of the season, roughly 77 days,385 use-days, per season. It would take 346 years to pay for that piece of land. Use an access fee of $20, it still takes 51 years. That's what you are up against. Well, that and the land is no longer taxable, so everyone else who owns private land in the State is asked to shore it up ( I know, I know, you don't care about our tax base). I'd say we do pretty well if you look at it even in these simple terms. But then, if your the type who wears rose-colored glasses as you walk past the pie-in-the-sky factory, well, you can't be helped.
$400,000 divided by an access fee of $3 equals 133,333 use-days required to pay for the land, again, not figuring interest, maintenance, admin costs and assume that the State is 100% efficient in the use of the money and every penny goes to pay the mortgage. Let's assume it sees significant use, say 5 use-days, per day, for the length of the season, roughly 77 days,385 use-days, per season. It would take 346 years to pay for that piece of land. Use an access fee of $20, it still takes 51 years. That's what you are up against. Well, that and the land is no longer taxable, so everyone else who owns private land in the State is asked to shore it up ( I know, I know, you don't care about our tax base). I'd say we do pretty well if you look at it even in these simple terms. But then, if your the type who wears rose-colored glasses as you walk past the pie-in-the-sky factory, well, you can't be helped.
small munsterlander owner
Banned
When u buy your hunting license In. MN they ask do u want a 3$ WIA access validation same type public land access fee I payef in WY & MT & NE if they catch on the land with no validation I don't know what happens??? I'd assume SD would do same & ask do u want to buy a pheasant stamp...
I'm saying if I drive to SD from wear ever or fly & want to hunt public land only a 3$ 5$ & even a 20$ access fee to hunt CREP or WIA lands won't stop guys some yes but they can hunt state lands & WPA fed stuff if they don't want to pay a few bucks extra or buy a pheasant stamp ... If u go all the way to SD & don't want to pay a access fee of 3$ or 5$ extra when u buy your license that's pretty cheap I don't pay the 3$ in MN cuz I don't hunt WIA don't like the private land thing not because I don't have 3$ I buy a pheasant stamp instead...
small munsterlander owner
Banned
I see now why pheasants forever was started in MN & many of the 1st WMA pheasant run tracts were donated to PF etc. Sounds a lot easier then what SD has going on land acquisition wise & land sale options wise...
ranchodeluxe
New member
Sounds great, results in very little usable revenue. The people who come here to hunt private land won't buy it. Maybe you could provide an option of being able to pay a separate fee of, say $25. That would entitle you to take one extra bird on your daily bag limit, private or public). I am in favor of common-sense revenue producers that would fund public access. I think the posts I have made in the past will bear that out. What I am not in favor of, is what I see happening at, say, the Sturgis Bike Week. The mentality has been that if they will pay $20 for a campsite, they will pay $50. If they will pay $4 for a beer, they will pay $9. If they will pay $3 for a hot dog, they will pay $6. If they can afford to come here, they can afford to pay the bullshit citations we write them. It goes on and on. One thing that makes me sit on my wallet more than anything, is someone thinking I will pay anything to get what I want. I have slept in my truck on more than one occasion because a greedy motel owner could see I was tired and tried to charge $199 for a $39 room. The next time, I drive right on by that guy's place.
In the latest SD Pheasant hunter survey 73% of people who responded, half in-state, half out, said that they were able to hunt private land with no access fee. This seems to indicate that, perhaps it is not as hard to find private land to hunt than we think.
UGUIDE
Active member
Great post RD. I will chime in and add that UGUIDE could not be started at todays land prices. The market would not support it. What people pay $1000/person for a package hunt now would have to pay about $4,000/person/package for to get a farm paid for in 20 years and all the expenses associated with managing for pheasants, etc. Those economics are a scary thought.
waterdog09
Active member
I will chime in about the state purchasing land in SD. It is extremely difficult for them to do so. Not because they don't have the means but because the state and GFP officers that look at the land and evaluate whether or not to purchase can only spend what the land is worth, say based off the previous years tax for said property. And they have to compete for these lands with other land owners and conservation groups. Two years ago a couple buddies and I were done hunting a piece of crep that we had just got our 3 man limit on and were at the truck getting checked by a CO. We got to talking with him about crep lands and the state purchasing new pieces for public access. He stated that earlier in the year (2014) I believe. There were 7 sections of land going up for sale/auction all together in a large block and these were adjacent to a GPA across the road. He and his boss went to the land auction and put a bid on the 7 sections for what the tax value said the land was worth. Needless to say they did not get the land at auction. DU came in and put a bid in for over $2K more a acre than what anyone else was willing to pay. Now when he told us this I didn't think this was a bad thing, but this is where my whole outlook on DU took a turn. He stated that after they had purchased the land, I believe he said somewhere in the neighborhood of $18 million or something like that, they took the land and put all 7 sections into a conservation easement and then sold it a couple months after that to a rancher. They did not do any type of habitat rehab on it or even put a single dollar into the property. They simply put it into a easement and sold it. Now that land is basically untouchable and can't be turned into anything. The state was more than willing to spend the money and turn it into a GPA and but the money into the habitat for all to enjoy. But DU came and put all that land into something that really not a lot of people would have a use for. After that conversation he stated that he would never support DU again by going to a banquet or buying raffle tickets and I can say that after that neither have I. So when it comes to buying land in SD it's not as easy or cut and dry as most might think. And I am sure that most land owners in SD already know this but it was a eye opening conversation to say the least for myself and my friends.