What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General
General Discussion
Updated SB 2315 Online
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="njsimonson" data-source="post: 248942" data-attributes="member: 1507"><p>As expected, the final amended version of SB 2315 just went up on bill tracker. </p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/66-2019/documents/19-0896-02000.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/66-2019/documents/19-0896-02000.pdf</a> </p><p></p><p>I see they've added the infraction portion, and have now included members from an "agriculture committee" and "sportsmen committee" as public overseers of the database with the previous government appointees. Though I am guessing they mean "groups" (ie: NDWF, DU, etc.) and not "committees" and that will have to be clarified, further evidence of a rush job.</p><p></p><p>They've also made the guide language less extreme and don't specifically open unposted lands though they don't exclude guides from them either, as is how it is currently arranged. </p><p></p><p>No matter how this ends, it is apparent sportsmen were heard on the oversight issue and the reaction to the guiding language (much of the changes seems almost verbatim from some of this site's discussions). Fundamental issues still remain, and the addition of Section 8 at the last page creates more confusion as to whether or not this creates a guide for the next legislature, or if this will be the law (probably both, which makes me more concerned about the forced and kitchen-sink nature of this bill). </p><p></p><p>Now we wait and see what the Senate does. Thanks to everyone who reached out and contacted their legislators, it has been quite the experience. I'm still not in favor due to the lessened penalty and "free pass" which wasn't previously available, and that there is little in this bill that will prevent trespassing - only the hope of reducing posting duties. A good bill should have done both, this does neither.</p><p></p><p>But there's an old saying -- "A good compromise is one in which neither side is happy." <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="njsimonson, post: 248942, member: 1507"] As expected, the final amended version of SB 2315 just went up on bill tracker. [url]https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/66-2019/documents/19-0896-02000.pdf[/url] I see they've added the infraction portion, and have now included members from an "agriculture committee" and "sportsmen committee" as public overseers of the database with the previous government appointees. Though I am guessing they mean "groups" (ie: NDWF, DU, etc.) and not "committees" and that will have to be clarified, further evidence of a rush job. They've also made the guide language less extreme and don't specifically open unposted lands though they don't exclude guides from them either, as is how it is currently arranged. No matter how this ends, it is apparent sportsmen were heard on the oversight issue and the reaction to the guiding language (much of the changes seems almost verbatim from some of this site's discussions). Fundamental issues still remain, and the addition of Section 8 at the last page creates more confusion as to whether or not this creates a guide for the next legislature, or if this will be the law (probably both, which makes me more concerned about the forced and kitchen-sink nature of this bill). Now we wait and see what the Senate does. Thanks to everyone who reached out and contacted their legislators, it has been quite the experience. I'm still not in favor due to the lessened penalty and "free pass" which wasn't previously available, and that there is little in this bill that will prevent trespassing - only the hope of reducing posting duties. A good bill should have done both, this does neither. But there's an old saying -- "A good compromise is one in which neither side is happy." :) [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
What are you listening to these days?
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 10:32 PM
Weather forecast & predictions
Latest: CatDaddy
Yesterday at 10:20 PM
.357 VS 10mm
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 8:39 PM
2024 Bis-Man Reel & Rec Flyer
Latest: Honkerherms
Yesterday at 8:35 PM
Morel mushrooms
Latest: guywhofishes
Yesterday at 8:04 PM
L
Garden!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Latest: LBrandt
Yesterday at 12:20 PM
F
Epic Fail ?
Latest: Fester
Yesterday at 10:53 AM
Applicators license
Latest: Allen
Yesterday at 1:27 AM
S
Giant muskie
Latest: snow2
Saturday at 8:30 PM
Costa Rica Bill fishing
Latest: guywhofishes
Saturday at 6:55 AM
Preserving Spool Depth
Latest: svnmag
Friday at 10:36 PM
Sak
Thursday 5*16*2024 East End
Latest: Rowdie
Friday at 6:29 PM
Vanguard 257 Weatherby Magnum
Latest: 1lessdog
Friday at 3:46 PM
Craftsman 5000-Watt Generator
Latest: Zogman
Friday at 3:46 PM
7
Sak
Newtown 5/17
Latest: 701FishSlayer
Friday at 1:45 PM
W
Project ideas for a 13yo
Latest: Wall-eyes
Friday at 12:41 PM
Velocitor/Stinger/Interceptor
Latest: svnmag
Thursday at 8:34 PM
RR
Red River 5-16-24
Latest: Captainbrad
Thursday at 9:23 AM
Sak
Sak - New Town Area 5/4
Latest: grumster
Thursday at 9:03 AM
Northern Lights
Latest: Rowdie
Thursday at 7:53 AM
Friends of NDA
Forums
General
General Discussion
Updated SB 2315 Online
Top
Bottom