No Trespass Law

[Holmsvc]

Just sent this to the entire committee.

Greetings, I just wanted to express to you my displeasure, outrage, and opposition to bill SB 2315. As a landowner, I do not need the State to determine for me how to manage my land. Bill SB 2315 will do just that very thing. The right to decide to post my land or to not post my land is ENTIRELY up to me, the owner. Proponents of this bill claim that this bill will protect landowner rights. I fail to see how taking the right to decide if my land will be posted away from me is protecting my right to decide what to do with my land. It is extremely hypocritical to claim to want to protect landowner rights when bill SB 2315 is designed to take away those very rights. I urge you to vote NO on bill SB 2315 and protect landowner rights instead of voting to take them away.


Sincerely,


(My Name), Landowner in North Dakota

Thank you!

 

[Sluggo]

Even thought I don't hunt, I contacted my senator and conveyed my opposition to SB 2315. After reading info about this, it seems to me that the landowners in support of this are suggesting that their new database will solve any problems this bill creates. I suggested they get the database up and running, let it prove itself out for a few years before changing the law. That magical database could be used today when hunters want to contact landowners and ask for permission.

 

[ndlongshot]

Whats the next hearing for this bill? Anyone have a timeline we can follow? Would like to stay active and keep talking to senators throughout the process.

Thanks.

 

[fireone]

Email the whole senate, that is what I did asking for a NO on 2315.

I don't understand how an electronic database could work. How could NDGF oversee who posted the property in the database? Landowner? Renter? Grandchild? Trustee? And who would authenticate who has authority to do so? Are we going to have the Posted Police to run this? The FBI and CIA couldn't do it. Land sells, renter changes, landowner dies, grandchild in Chicago won't answer the phone. Would you need signed affidavits to do electronic posting? Just sounds like a mess.

 

[Davey Crockett]

I have an email out asking all of the above questions , Hoping for some response .

 

[njsimonson]

Whats the next hearing for this bill? Anyone have a timeline we can follow? Would like to stay active and keep talking to senators throughout the process.

Thanks.

More public discussion may occur next week, possibly Thursday...I'll let you know more as I do...

In the meantime, keep buzzing your legislators with thoughts, ideas, compromises, possible amendments, etc. The more they hear from sportsmen, the better things will go for us.

 

[Allen]

Senators, I will try to keep this relatively short as I know you all keep busy schedules during the legislative season. Rarely do I feel the need to weigh in on pending legislation as I think it usually tends to work itself out. However, I am writing today to express my deepest opposition to SB 2315, the No Trespass law in your committee because of the incredible amount of damage this bill would do to North Dakota, our way of life, and the local economies of our small towns across the state.


As a landowner and hunter, I am well aware of the current laws regarding No Hunting and/or No Trespassing. In my opinion they are complete and sufficient enough for me to deal with fellow landowners and fellow hunters who seek to access my land. In short, there is no need for such a draconian change in how North Dakota handles property rights. The current law allows us landowners to exclude who we wish from our land with something as simple as a No Hunting sign at gates for fenced in land and at 880 yard intervals along unfenced areas. On the other extreme is the actual No Trespass rules, any property owner can seek prosecution of someone violating their property rights via prosecution under either the No Hunting provisions in the Century Code, or even the existing No Trespassing laws (which have a lower standard for notifying people that you don't want them on your property), and yet there were only 59 violations prosecuted this latest year according to NDGF.


In short, let me provide the following bullets:
1. The proposed changes would appear to sought by only a fairly small number of existing landowners based upon the number of recent prosecutions.
2. Ownership of land is a right that does come with some responsibilities. All landowners in ND obtained their land under the existing rules and could have chosen to relocate/buy land in neighboring states with No Trespass laws similar to this one.
3. The cost of Posting your property is minimal, 4 paper signs cost less than $4 total and provide legal notice to the landowner's intent for 160 acres of land. There is literally nothing else that costs so little when it comes to managing that much land.
4. Most hunters have an idea of where they are going when they start the day. More often than not, that plan tends to quickly become a game of searching for another place to hunt to finish out the day. This bill would quickly make the current unposted available land off limits and lower the overall quality of the day's hunt.
5. States that currently have No Trespass laws similar to the proposed are vastly different than ND in the amount of public land available, and other tradeoffs (such as SD where one can legally hunt road rights of way). Without similar provisions for ND's hunting population to access game, a great number of them will get even more discouraged and find other activities.
6. The amount of money spent in ND's rural communities: gas, food, ammo, clothing, etc are all going to fall if hunting becomes a sport where I start the day with a plan that has no reasonable option for putting more miles on my vehicle, spending more time away from home that I didn't properly prepare for (food!), and fewer opportunities to run out of ammo (yeah, there have been those days).




In summary, I ask that you consider what is actually best for the State, its people, and its economy over the relatively small fraction of landowners who simply "don't want to be bothered".

Sincerely,

Allen
Landowner, Hunter, Born and Raised N. Dakotan, and Voter

 

[Davey Crockett]

[FONT=&quot]Senators, I will try to keep this relatively short ??? Pretty sure they saw that and didn't even scroll down to see the author and thought this must be GST again and hit delete. Haha [/FONT]

- - - Updated - - -

Crap, I thought mine was short but I just looked , It's hard to get a point across without being long winded.

- - - Updated - - -

Greetings , As a landowner and hunter I have been closely watching SB 2315 , I don't wish to take away opportunity for hunters but I also take my property rights serious and they are very important to me. I am reading on social media how bad this bill is for hunters but I am getting 2nd 3rd and 4th hand information if not more. I have a couple of questions if I may, If this were to pass Is NDGF automatically on board to be in charge of the database for people to list their land and include it in their plots book as well as maintain a website for open hunting land ?

Also are recording devices allowed in any committee meetings and or special meetings besides the floor sessions ? If so I am seeking advice for a source where I could possibly get permission to view. I feel the public is getting left out and we end up getting opinions verses information on social media, Any information we get may or may not be spewed and flawed to meet that person's opinion or worse yet groups of people that twist the facts or give half truths to brainwash the public to meet their agenda . I'd just as soon make up my own mind with credible information. MN has thiers on Prairie Public tv. I feel the citizens of North Dakota have a right to a credible source of information to keep better informed during committee meetings, In today's world of social media there is no reason why it hasn't happened already. Thank you for your service and the live floor sessions but I think you can and should do a better job of keeping citizens informed with what goes on during committee meetings so we can at least keep each others honest and have civil discussions and discuss the facts rather than our opinions .

 

[Up Y'oars]

if they want to make all private land posted then all public land should be public. I have had run in with an ass N of Center multiple time trying to hunt school land and he acts like he owns it because he rents it what's going to happen when all land is posted

Obi, call the State Land Department and let them know the leasee's name. The department will contact that person and let them know he cannot dictate anything as he doesn't own it. They will make it very clear to him.

 

[Migrator Man]

The overnight rumor from the capitol has it that the Senate Ag Committee is in gridlock over this bill - they are hearing the overwhelming voice of sportsmen and that is making this process hard for them to side with the big money operations on the other side and the proponents of what they also are seeing as a bill with many flaws!

KEEP THE PRESSURE ON THEM! WE MUST DEFEAT THIS BILL! EMAIL THE COMMITTEE TODAY! ENCOURAGE A "DO NOT PASS"

Senate Ag Committee
Larry Luick – Chair – lluick@nd.gov
Jane Myrdal – Vice Chair - jmyrdal@nd.gov
Kathy Hogan - khogan@nd.gov
Jerry Klein - jklein@nd.gov
Oley Larson - olarsen@nd.gov
Arne Osland - aosland@nd.gov

If they are having a tough time passing it through the ag committee then the bill is going to be even harder to pass in the full chamber.

 

[KDM]

I received a response to my email from Senator Oley L. Larson and my reply is below his. Enjoy

"Will you say the same thing when some one comes and squats on your land and leaves a big mess and then goes to court and the judge asks the squatter if he seen the posted sign when he jumped the fence or crossed in the middle of the property? And then he then just throws the case out?"


Thank You Mr. Oley for your prompt reply. The answer to your question is Yes. I will say the same thing as I have had to deal with similar situations already. However, SB 2315 has very little to do with people perpetrating illegal activities as we already have laws on the books that address the very situations you speak about. The issue you describe concerns a judge excising their discretionary powers in the disposition of a case, not the laws. SB 2315 will do nothing to address a judges power, nor force any judge to convict trespass violations to any greater degree. Nor will it prevent any future undesired events. What SB 2351 WILL do, is take my right to decide to post my land or not post my land from me and hand it over to the state. I find that extremely distasteful. Additionally, I find proponents of this bill completely disingenuous when they claim SB 2315 will protect landowner rights. That is a complete falsehood. Taking away the right of a landowner to decide on whether or not to post their land in no way protects the landowner rights. I again, strongly urge you to protect the rights of landowners to decide how to use their land and to whom they allow access by voting NO on SB 2315.


Thank You,


(My Name), Landowner in North Dakota

 

[eyexer]

that's a smug piece of shit for a legislator

 

[johnr]

Good on you KDM

you my friend are a quality North Dakotan that represents what I feel, we on this forum all feel, but don’t do the work to help like you just did.

Thank you

 

[KDM]

And another interaction with Senator Oley L. Larson.

"That’s not what the testimony speaks to and the law enforcement and the pesticide applicator spoke of at the hearing. The bill will be hugely amended and it will be moving forward out of the senate NOT in its current form I believe it will be a good bill because we are finally working with fish and game hunters law enforcement and the stockmen’s association. Thank you for staying involved please continue to provide solutions to this topic."


Thank you Mr. Oley. I was not present at the hearing, so I can not attest to what was or was not said at that time. However, I am unaware of how my not being present or my contrary position to those who testified diminishes my input into this matter. What I wanted to provide to the entire committee was my testimony, thoughts, and position as a landowner concerning SB 2315 and how I feel this bill is not in the best interests of North Dakota. Again, Thank You for your prompt replies and rest assured, I will be closely watching SB 2315 and its progression.


Thank You,


(My Name), Landowner in North Dakota

 

[Davey Crockett]

Good on you KDM

you my friend are a quality North Dakotan that represents what I feel, we on this forum all feel, but don’t do the work to help like you just did.

Thank you

Your painting with a pretty broad brush , I don't see this taking any rights away from anybody. What I do see is hunters complaining because they have to ask for permission to hunt if the land owner doesn't opt out of the program and have his/her land open to everyone. I've been down the road of hunters without permission wrecking a good hunt for hunters with permission , More than once. Guess what they said . :;:huh Well I didn't know it was posted.

Another point you some of you are missing is basic hunter safety and hunter etiquette where it's safer and more sportsman like to know if someone has been sitting all day in a stand waiting for the right one to show up. I've heard time and time again on here and from talking with hunters where someone will be walking a piece and someone else will stop on the road and shoot the deer. I'd say this could be an advantage to some hunters that are willing to do their homework and a disadvantage to others that arent and each one is in charge of their own destiny .

I have only received one reply so far.

" So…I am hearing that there are some amendments coming that may change the bill significantly but I am not sure what they are yet. As far as recording of the committee meetings…. They do an audio recording of committee meetings and take notes but the only way to hear or read them is to come to the capitol and ask. Two committees right now are having all their committee meetings recorded with the hope that all committees will have this done in the future. I am at times surprised at how paper dependent the process is here in Bismarck. I would have thought that more of it would be on-line but I think they are working towards that."










- - - Updated - - -

I'm not ready to jump on one bandwagon or the other until I see the revised bill in its entity.

 

[bravo]

We have land, it's posted with a phone number. If we're not hunting you'll probably get a "good luck, shoot me a text how you did". I've found a deer or two shot and left from the road. Sometimes some atv tracks going thought it. Annoying, but not a problem that isn't covered by current law. I fail to see how this bill will beneficial at all. I've emailed the ag committee, as well as my district's senators twice with no reply.

 

[Davey Crockett]

It's a blanket policy , Sort of like ND speed limit law. You might not see the sign right in front of you but you know what the law is if it's not posted otherwise. All the pig hunters have to do now the way the law stands is tear down the sign and they are free to roam as long as they deny tearing down the sign. If they get caught they didn't see any sign and they get off scott free.


If this passes it's the end of the line for the pig hunters when they get caught , which a lot of them do but they know they will get off . NDGF won't even attempt in most cases because they know they have a good chance of getting thrown out of court. We will have to wait till the final draft but if it looks decent there is a good chance I'll be on board with it for the simple fact that it gives NDGF incentive to do their job without getting thrown out of court.

 

[Obi-Wan]

It's a blanket policy , Sort of like ND speed limit law. You might not see the sign right in front of you but you know what the law is if it's not posted otherwise. All the pig hunters have to do now the way the law stands is tear down the sign and they are free to roam as long as they deny tearing down the sign. If they get caught they didn't see any sign and they get off scott free.


If this passes it's the end of the line for the pig hunters when they get caught , which a lot of them do but they know they will get off . NDGF won't even attempt in most cases because they know they have a good chance of getting thrown out of court. We will have to wait till the final draft but if it looks decent there is a good chance I'll be on board with it for the simple fact that it gives NDGF incentive to do their job without getting thrown out of court.

those that ignore the present laws now will not change their ways with new laws

 

[bravo]

It's a blanket policy , Sort of like ND speed limit law. You might not see the sign right in front of you but you know what the law is if it's not posted otherwise. All the pig hunters have to do now the way the law stands is tear down the sign and they are free to roam as long as they deny tearing down the sign. If they get caught they didn't see any sign and they get off scott free.


If this passes it's the end of the line for the pig hunters when they get caught , which a lot of them do but they know they will get off . NDGF won't even attempt in most cases because they know they have a good chance of getting thrown out of court. We will have to wait till the final draft but if it looks decent there is a good chance I'll be on board with it for the simple fact that it gives NDGF incentive to do their job without getting thrown out of court.

I definitely get what you're saying, but I don't think it's an issue. Pigs are gonna pig. I don't think anybody tears down signs and hunts freely, thinking that the confrontation with the landowner and resulting court date are worth a pheasant. Most slobs I think see something from the road as an quick easy opportunity and hope they don't get caught. This is also why I spent a bit more on the orange metal signs.

 

[Davey Crockett]

those that ignore the present laws now will not change their ways with new laws

Right, I agree. But if this passes and they get they caught NDGF will be inclined to get involved and write a ticket since they now have a low that is enforceable.

I've been so frustrated with NDGF in the past but I understand now why they never wanted to prosecute , Time and effort wasted because of a loophole in the law and they get thrown out of court. Let NDGF do their job. It's those guys that will free up a few tags and pad a healthy fine. we are talking 100% conviction and prosecution rate VS maybe 10% if you can even get NDGF to write a ticket the way the law stands now.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll email NDGF in the morning and find out what the current conviction / prosecution rate is on trespass citations.

- - - Updated - - -

I definitely get what you're saying, but I don't think it's an issue. Pigs are gonna pig. I don't think anybody tears down signs and hunts freely, thinking that the confrontation with the landowner and resulting court date are worth a pheasant. Most slobs I think see something from the road as an quick easy opportunity and hope they don't get caught. This is also why I spent a bit more on the orange metal signs.

They have the mentality that even if they do get caught it's worth it because they will most likely get off on a technicality. A blanket policy would put an end to technicalities.

- - - Updated - - -

Again I am not saying I am in favor or against one way or the other quite yet but I will in the end, I'm just calling a spade a spade right now.