isaak
Tenderfoot...
Posts: 1
|
Post by isaak on Apr 15, 2011 13:25:57 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Apr 15, 2011 13:35:41 GMT -6
Thanks for the article!
|
|
|
|
Post by calvin on Apr 15, 2011 16:11:21 GMT -6
Figures...same with the roads out there. A loader was heading down one road yesterday to fix rat damage and fell through (road collapsed) while he was enroute. Had to fix the first collapse before getting to the next. Busy road workers out there. Almost lost my truck to one two days ago. Luckily the front end cleared but the rear broke through. Had my front end gone down (with a diesel engine over it) I suspect I would have broken parts. Wasn't a shallow hole, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Apr 15, 2011 17:58:27 GMT -6
I witnessed on county blacktop road last fall with at least 12-15 feet of water over it.....had to see it to believe it.
|
|
|
|
Post by motrapperjohn on Apr 16, 2011 16:08:25 GMT -6
Where is the Dakota guys that wAs griping about the NR trappers, tell him to get his greedy but out there and kill those rats
|
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Apr 16, 2011 17:48:50 GMT -6
Motrapperjohn, that was South Dakota, this is North Dakota.
North Dakota doesn't have problems with Minnesota trappers since they already had reciprical regulations.
|
|
|
|
Post by TurTLe on Apr 18, 2011 9:15:08 GMT -6
I think he was complaining more about the fact that the MN guys were trapping in South Dakota when he couldn't trap in MN.
Personally I'm happy for South Dakota going reciprical. To many MN guys want their cake and eat it too. Too many have the "I'll come trap your animals, but don't even think of coming to trap mine attitude."
As long as rat prices stay fairly high, I don't think there will be a lack of rat trappers up in that country.
|
|
|
|
Post by robertw on Apr 18, 2011 11:42:33 GMT -6
South Dakota should be applauded for what they did concerning reciprical permit privledges.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackhammer on Apr 18, 2011 12:10:54 GMT -6
I think you would find the Minnesota guys trapping rats out there all almost supporting a NR season for Minn.Of the fifteen or so I know only one isn't in favor of letting NR into Minn.I'm not going to apologize for going there trapping.It's seems like the guys who don't leave their back porch to go trapping who are against non resident seasons.I'm glad we have a big state though.Maybe next spring I'll go north beaver trapping even though I'm betting us southern guys are looked at as NRs in certain areas.
There are so many rats in South Dakota especially off the road there are not near enough harvested.If a local trapper can't find all the rats he wants to catch there he is lazy.But I can't blame them one bit for wanting reciprocal.But it won't surprise me if they eventually close the spring season for all NRs if the rat market stays strong.
|
|
|
|
Post by calvin on Apr 19, 2011 22:23:15 GMT -6
Make no mistake, a small portion of SD trappers got the NR issue passed. They didn't ask the business owners or the road workers or ranchers...and neither groups are NOT happy with the change.
Makes no difference to me. I agree with NR across the board and hopefully this will force the issue but as blackhammer suggests (and I agree), I think once NR is passed for MN, then there will be a push to shut down the spring rat season by the same small number that passed the last restriction. Time will tell.
Kind of like the last time the DNR tried to mandate trapping tags on the traps. A small group said no...and so it was.
No worries, by the time it's all figured out the Dakotas will be so full of out of staters it will be a parking lot. I/ll stay home and trap beaver, I suspect.
|
|
|
|
Post by TurTLe on Apr 20, 2011 5:19:25 GMT -6
It will only be a parking lot as long as prices hold. Will be hard to justify driving any distance for $2 rats. Like everything, this too will pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 20, 2011 8:19:18 GMT -6
having small groups dictate trapping rights, is nothing limited to SD.
I would like to see every state that allows NR trapping, to go reciprical. This MN thing has gone on long enough. If such would have been the case 20 years ago- we would have had NR trapping in Mn long ago. For too long, MN trappers have been lucky enough to have their cake, and Edith too..............
|
|
|
|
Post by blackhammer on Apr 20, 2011 8:26:09 GMT -6
Reciprocal is pretty vague when you look at how NRs are restricted in so called reciprocal states.I agree with the premise but when you look at some states regs there isn't a level playing field in many cases.Hope Mn goes there but I'm not holding breath on it.I would like to drive 15 miles and trap all these Iowa trout streams I know fairly well sometime in my trapping future.
|
|
|
|
Post by thebeav2 on Apr 20, 2011 8:34:05 GMT -6
Even with Mn trappers going to SD there were only 100 or so Non res licenses sold. So no It won't be a parking lot. Even If rat prices drop you have to remember It's a numbers game and with tons of rats and unlimited areas to trap you only have to catch more fur. I could stay home and catch 500 $2.00 rats or go to SD and catch 3000 $2.00 rats do the math.
The non res Issue Is easy. Just go over the MTA and the DNR s heads and get It done. Go to the legislature once you do that everything will fall In line. That's what we did In WI.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 20, 2011 8:51:16 GMT -6
I agree- thats going to have to be the solution- and I know people working on that now-
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 20, 2011 8:57:36 GMT -6
blackhammer- I know reciprical has different meanings ot different folks- and there are many states that are very limited in what NR can do compared to residents.
for me, reciprical means the issuing of lics only- that NR lics should be issued by states, to other states only if trapping is allowed in that home state. Obviously, taling Mn here as the lone holdout.
as far as not allowing trapping on cats, etc- that can be simple as well- if a state doesn't allow non resident trapping on certian species, then residents from that state can't trap the same here.
or a national oganisation- could take the reins and work to having all states, have the same for NR as R.
|
|
|
|
Post by calvin on Apr 20, 2011 9:12:04 GMT -6
Beav, the pothole region of SD is not all that huge. Maybe I was where every out of stater went but the parking lot deal isn't far off already (where I was). Coupled with out of staters typically planting lots and lots of traps and I doubt many have seen competition like this (already). Now with the amount of guys "going next year", I suspect this is going to be a circus real soon. And yes, I can see the local trappers frustration with this when you have 5-7 floats stacked up on a narrow stretch of open water by a pipe flow. I, along with others, had floats stolen or shot up in certain areas. Aint going to get better (if the price holds).
As far as the "unlimited amount of area to trap" Not the case in the spring out there. If your not on a main road, you may be up to our axels in gumbo. Many main roads shut down daily as well. Also, want to pee off the locals and road guys...just drive around their hay bails or on a muddy un-used road. Just saying.
Yes, should have been done long ago. Hopefully, this will force the issue...whether I take part in it or not. People already going past the DNR and MTA on this issue. Waiting for either has caused it to take so long so far. Good for those guys...who ever you are.
|
|
