Count me in. I'd like to reiterate that I'm anything but anti-farmer and rancher. I do have a big problem with big ag groups. They've done a good job making hunters and fishermen out to be the farmer's enemy though dishonest means. This fiasco got so muddied because they were constantly moving the goal posts, i.e. it was about DAPL protesters, it was about poachers, it was about property rights, it was about not putting up signs. Since there was a common sense solution to each one of those problems that had nothing to do with this bill, and they still tried to force it through, it became pretty clear that this was just about chipping away at the presence of outdoorsmen and women. Like I've said before, once interest in being outdoors in our state has dwindled, the farm bureau and stockman's association will have less opposition to put every square inch of the state into production and keep the peasants out. ND will be one big private garden. The one legislator (who's name I forget) who's debate devolved into a confusing rant about how hunters are responsible for federal laws in Washington that don't let him drain sloughs and he's sick of it shows where a lot of their heads are at.
To me, it got to be that I opposed the bill not only on how it affects how MY property is managed, our small businesses, or hunting access. But the fact that it had to be pushed through as incomplete as it was. Kept in the dark until the last minute time after time, no mention of funding, sneaky sunset clauses. Asking questions was "getting into the weeds, just pass it and we'll figure it out later". The snooty emails about how they should picnic on my lawn, leave trash and shoot at my dog to see how I like it. I spent 45 days face to face with those protesters, trust me when I say I'd like nothing more than for them to be punished. This bill would not have done a thing to them. Then for land owning rep's to tell us in session "good luck shooting a mule deer again if this doesn't pass", everything will be off limits. Flat out embarrassing. This was not urban vs. rural. It was just a poorly written bill. For an objective outside view, there is no doubt who was on the wrong side of how this all went down.
Landowners understand that if we don't want someone on our land, we have to post it. Most will grant access to posted land if they are asked. The rest, who never allow access anyway for one reason or another (and I know a few) were probably for this bill. Most hunters will either see a sign and not ask, and will move on to hunt somewhere else. Some do ask. The overwhelming majority do not "feel entitled" and enter as they please.
To end my final rant on this bill, I am all for a solution that works for everyone. I'd like to be a part of some type of round table talk, have a few beers and get to down to what the problems are and how to solve them. I'll volunteer to get a group going to fix some fence, pick up trash, nail up a few signs (call before enter, walk-in only), lobby to get a few more wardens out there, call in any R.A.P. violations I see, anything to show that we're not all the FB made us out to be.
cheers
