HB 1021 - "The Database" End-Around

[Sluggo]

sluugo or are you saying if they landowner does nothing, basically the database is blank for that landowner??

Yes, if the landowner chose not to use the database by not entering their info, then it would show a different color, which would mean that the landowner will use paper signs or leave it unposted.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

If a landowner does nothing, the default position is, it becomes green. Granted, when you arrive it may be physically posted. The larger majority of us scout or are very familiar with the area.

If you're a sconni looking at the green spots on the app and then drive for hours only to find things physically posted, nothing changes from the way they do things now.

 

[bravo]

Include language concerning how it’s paid for, how it’s maintained, what happens if the app is unavailable etc., as long as it’s close to the quality of OnX I’m probably happy with it. Government takes lowest bidder so who knows. I don’t think G&F should foot the bill though. It does suck for the old timers with flip phones.

If a database is created, I’d like to think it’s possible to use it as sort of a copycat of montana’s block management program. Check in to a section of land, farmer gets a few drops in the bucket if they have their land enrolled. Maybe mix it with the plots program somehow? Just spitballing, haven’t had enough coffee yet.

 

[jdinny]

fritz man read the thread dont assume.
if you would read there is people concerned with default being green and paper posters and confusion and switching default to white or like no data would basically mean go check for yourself.
sluggo idea could actually work....

 

[Migrator Man]

None of this app talk matters anymore until they reintroduce a bill with the app idea back in the language. I have no problem building this app and making sure it works, but we do not need any hammers or sunset clauses built in for the cases that the app doesn’t work

 

[Sluggo]

When I first contacted my reps, I suggested that they should get the database up and running BEFORE changing the law. It could be used under our current regs to hold landowner contact info and could show the paper posting status of the land. This would allow the effectiveness of the database to be tested. If it sucks, we would know why and could either ditch the idea or tweak it. If it worked as expected, then change the law where posting could be done using the database if desired.

 

[TFX 186]

I hope you guys do realize that a data base still changes the way a lot of people hunt. It would restrict how some hunting is done and eliminate hunting for some people. Be careful which sportsmen that you pick and choose to throw out of the hunting arena.
PS. Good luck organizing a full data base with all landowners in agreement and getting someone other than sportsmen to pay for it.


Fish On!

 

[risingsun]

IF this data base would come to be, how many landowner/renters are going to put their REAL phone numbers down as contact info? IF the landowner/renter chooses to be on the data base, will he be REQUIRED to put a LEGIT phone number for contact info? I just have a hard time believing anyone would want to do that.

 

[Ruttin]

Why cant they just leave this law alone?? If you don't want folks on your land POST IT!! The current law is not broken for christ sakes.

 

[Zogman]

Sounds like a convoluted, cluster waste of time and resources to me.

 

[Uncle Jimbo]

The database is a just a stepping stone toward all land being posted. I would rather invest the money in access programs and conservation than throw it after a database without mandatory participation and unknown costs.

 

[Walleye_Chaser]

Any recent news or updates on what's going on?

 

[ndlongshot]

This agweek article looks like it was written by Daryl Lies.

[h=1]Want changes to private property laws? Quit being the nice guys[/h]By Agweek Editorial Board Today at 5:30 a.m.
[FONT=&quot]
9








[/FONT]
The North Dakota Legislature continues to work on a bill that could, potentially, strengthen private property rights in the state.

But to be perfectly honest, we're pretty pessimistic about the possibilities of lawmakers finding a solution that provides any relief to the landowners of the state. Instead, we would suggest that the state needs a culture change outside of changes to the Century Code.

North Dakota is the only state in the region where anyone can come onto land that isn't posted for no trespassing. If you listened to any of the debate on the bill in the Legislature this year, you may have heard comments to the effect that the law has "been working for 90 years." For hunters or people who live in cities, that's probably true. The existing law provides ample opportunities for hunting on private land.
However, to suggest that the law has been working for landowners is ridiculous. If it were working, ag and landowner groups wouldn't be advocating, session after session, for a change.
Simply put, the law isn't working. For many of us, it never did.
Landowners are tired of the time and expense required to post their land and of the fact that not posting their land means they won't know who is on their land. Do you know how far 880 yards is? Landowners do. That's how often they have to put up a no trespassing sign in order to make their land properly posted.
Landowners are tired of seeing people on land that is posted and hearing excuses for why they're there. Sometimes the trespassers "didn't realize" the land was posted, because they must have walked in through those 880 yards that didn't have a sign. Sometimes they may have taken a sign down. Sometimes, they just lie about why they're there.
Landowners are tired of outdoors groups advocating for things that make it harder to use land for agricultural purposes. They're tired of hunters taking for granted that landowners pay the taxes and upkeep on the land.
Landowners are tired of worrying about whether they'll be liable if someone goes on their property without permission and gets hurt. They're tired of worrying about their livestock — or, more seriously, themselves or their loved ones — being shot. They're tired of property damage and trash left on their land.
They're just tired.
Maybe the law did work 90 years ago. But life has changed in the past 90 years, and this law needs to change, too.
However, the voices of the people who like the law the way it is are louder and angrier than the voices of the landowners, and many of the legislators lack the intestinal fortitude to stand up for property rights. They might say they're for liberty in a commercial or on an election sign, but they're a little less willing to do the right thing when they think they might not get reelected.
So, what can we do if the law doesn't change? Here's what we suggest: Do away with the "North Dakota nice" way of handling things.
If you like the law the way it is, go ahead and leave your land unposted. Let anyone in. But for everyone else, post your land. All of it. Put up more signs than the law requires. Only allow hunters on your property who agree to abide by your rules. Only allow hunters who agree that the law needs to change. If you see someone on your posted land, don't just sigh and let it go. Call law enforcement and have them removed. If you don't, it'll allow opponents of property rights to keep saying there isn't a problem.
Take a look at how the lawmakers who represent you have voted on this issue. If they have a problem with property rights, let them know you'll be voting for their opponent next time around. And then, actually do it. We have a lot of people in North Dakota who bloviate on the importance of property rights, local control and independence. It's about time we elect people who actually stand up for those principles.
It's time landowners use some tough love to get the message across. Quit being the nice guys. Change the culture and remind people that if they want to come on private property, they better be willing to work with landowners.

 

[guywhofishes]

wow... just wow

 

[ndlongshot]

"Landowners are tired of outdoors groups advocating for things that make it harder to use land for agricultural purposes. They're tired of hunters taking for granted that landowners pay the taxes and upkeep on the land."

 

[risingsun]

Putting up more posters than needed as he says, pretty much says the money/cost and time to post argument doesnt hold much water.

 

[guywhofishes]

I am really shocked by that article. What on earth is going on that they’re so aggressive/nasty?

- - - Updated - - -

“If you like the law the way it is, go ahead and leave your land unposted. Let anyone in. But for everyone else, post your land. All of it.”

 

[feather_duster]

the "time and expense" argument to post land is getting exhausting......I can write off a fish house but then complain about posted signs that cost 50 cents....right.

 

[Duckslayer100]

Landowners are tired of seeing people on land that is posted and hearing excuses for why they're there. Sometimes the trespassers "didn't realize" the land was posted, because they must have walked in through those 880 yards that didn't have a sign. Sometimes they may have taken a sign down. Sometimes, they just lie about why they're there.

^^^ How in the hell is this new law going to stop that????

 

[Migrator Man]

Landowners are tired of seeing people on land that is posted and hearing excuses for why they're there. Sometimes the trespassers "didn't realize" the land was posted, because they must have walked in through those 880 yards that didn't have a sign. Sometimes they may have taken a sign down. Sometimes, they just lie about why they're there.

^^^ How in the hell is this new law going to stop that????

Why aren’t they calling these people in the first place! Why are we not focusing on ways to make the current trespass laws more enforceable? If one sign is up they should be charged with trespassing plan and simple. If there is not enough law enforcement or prosecution then maybe that needs more funding. In the end it is the will of the people to set our laws and WE don’t want the law changed!