Bills and resolutions that have passed and still alive for crossover

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,691
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
Too many to keep up with, out of 900 there were 600 that made the cut. Which ones are important and worthy of an email ? I'm still seeing some that I never knew existed.
 


zoops

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 17, 2015
Posts
1,796
Likes
155
Points
268
Is the one where a person over 70 or 75 gets preferential treatment in the moose lottery still alive?
 

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,691
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
This update was in the Minot paper today.

https://www.minotdailynews.com/news/local-news/2021/02/outdoor-related-bills-in-the-north-dakota-legislative-session-fewer-than-usual/




BISMARCK – The North Dakota Legislature holds a session every two years and every two years there are a number of bills introduced regarding outdoor issues. The Legislature is in session now and, somewhat surprisingly, the number of outdoor bills is less than usual.

“We’re down a little bit. Maybe that’s because of the electronic format, the uncertainty of how that works. Maybe that kept the numbers down,” said Scott Peterson, North Dakota Game and Fish Department deputy director. “In terms of quantity we’re down a bit and even more now that some are falling off the table.”

Every two years Peterson spends several hours a week at the Capitol, monitoring the progress of various bills and sometimes offering information to legislators or testifying before committees. This session is different though, due to coronavirus. Peterson says he has watched some hearings on his computer at the Game and Fish, which he says is a convenience at times but nevertheless isn’t quite the same as seeing legislators in person.

“You can’t really read any body language,” remarked Peterson.

Outdoor related bills sometimes are just not practical. Many are introduced for personal or emotional reasons and don’t stand up to scrutiny. Others result in lively debate in the Senate or House.

Senate Bill 2118, brought up at the request of Game and Fish, never got out of the Senate. It failed on a 21-26 vote. SB 2118 would have increased fines for certain Game and Fish violations – Class 1 noncriminal offenses from $50 to $100 and Class 2 noncriminal offenses from from $25 to $50.

Scott Winkelman, NDGF chief game warden, told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee he was requesting a “Do Pass” recommendation, noting that current fees have been in effect since 1985 and “do not reflect the inflation level to today’s economic value.”

Also testifying in favor of an increase in fines was John Bradley, executive director of the North Dakota Wildlife Federation. Bradley told the committee “it’s past time there is a rise in the fines to better align them with other state agency fines and to serve as a better deterrent.”

“It’s not a huge thing but apparently the Senate didn’t see it the same way we did,” said Peterson.

A bill that appeared dead on arrival passed the Senate. The “moose bill”, SB 2172, would allow residents 75 years of age or older to have two entries in the annual lottery for once-in-a-lifetime moose licenses.

“What’s really, really strange is that it received a unanimous do not pass out of committee but passed the floor vote,” said Peterson.

The Senate vote in favor of passage was 27-20 and the bill has been forwarded to the House for further consideration. Peterson said a second entry in the moose license lottery won’t always make a big difference in success in the drawing. As an example, he said, if a person had two chances rather than one in the 2020 lottery for a bull moose in Unit M9 the probability of being selected would have only increased from 1 1/2% to 2 1/2%.

A proposed bill, SB 2184, to reward hunter education instructors with deer licenses and bighorn sheep, elk, or moose licenses was crushed in the Senate 6-41. The bill was opposed by Game and Fish.

“I have to say we value our volunteers and can’t get by without them, but we already reward them in various ways,” said Peterson. “It was a nice gesture but with a lot of unintended consequences. It only relates to part of our volunteers.”

Mike McEnroe, Bismarck, who has been a hunter education instructor for 29 years, told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that “hunter education instructors volunteer because they want to teach” and “do not volunteer in order to receive license preferences.”

Game and Fish utilizes volunteers for fishing programs and other endeavors throughout the year. Additionally, with over 800 hunter education instructors, a great number of deer tags would be taken away from the general public. The bill proposed that deer licenses be issued to hunter education instructors “who provided instruction within the preceding calendar year” and that Big 3 licenses, which are coveted by sportsmen and very limited in number, be issued to “five year” instructors.

SB 2143 passed the Senate 43-4 and is headed to the House. The bill would allow big game hunters to wear “camouflage daylight fluorescent orange or fluorescent pink garments.” Currently big game hunters are required to wear solid fluorescent orange only. The bill was introduced by District 27 Senator Kristin Roers, Fargo.

In committee Roers testified that when she went shopping for clothing to wear for deer hunting “the only clothes that were cut for a female body were in blaze pink”, which she purchased, only to learn later that blaze pink is not legal attire for hunting big game in North Dakota.

“Here’s our take on this,” said Peterson. “If it is proven as visible to the human eye as orange we don’t really have a reason to oppose it. It is legal in some states such as Minnesota, but not in Montana. Our only concern is safety.”

HB 1120 proposes disabled veterans be “entitled” to purchase a deer license and be eligible to hunt “during the five days preceding the youth deer hunting season and during the deer gun season.” The bill has been heard at the committee level but not yet voted on in the House.

The Senate passed by a 45-2 margin SB 2036, the electronic posting bill. The bill calls for an expansion and “evaluation of the electronic land access database” developed during the previous legislative session. Three counties were selected as “trial” counties in that study. The expansion for the next two years will include all 53 counties in North Dakota.

HB 1411 which allows the use of an artificial light with a power source of not more than six volts while hunting coyote, fox, raccoon, or beaver at any time day or night. The bill has stirred up some emotions.

District 33 Representative Bill Tveit, Hazen, told the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee that the bill “is not a hunting bill, it is about predator control” and passage was necessary to correct “intentional misinterpretation by the Game and Fish Department” over previous legislation.

Stephanie Tucker, NDGF furbearer biologist, countered Tveit’s views by saying, “the legislature has already given people flexibility with NDCC 20.1-07-04 to shoot those depredating furbearers at night, any time of the year” and that if some “clarifying language” needed to be added, Game and Fish would support those adjustments.

Lawmakers revised the language of the original bill as presented in the House. A similar bill in the Senate, in all likelihood, will be set aside in favor of the House version that already has had considerable scrutiny.

The date for introducing new bills has passed so legislators now know what bills they must act upon. Feb. 26 is “crossover,” the day in which any bill that passes one chamber is forwarded to the other for its consideration. Legislators will be in recess March 1-2 and return to the 67th legislative assembly March 3.
 

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,691
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
Has anyone paid any attention to what's going on with HB 1420, The bill introduced by anti MJ lawmakers to legalize MJ ? I watched some of the testimony both for and against this morning, Probably the most contradictory bill I've seen and it's Interesting how many People on both sides of the issue are all of a sudden turning about-face.

I honestly don't care which direction it goes but it irks me that we voted for and passed medical use bill that the lawmakers butchered beyond acceptance and now the supply can't keep up with medical demand. This bill is a last ditch effort to dictate legalization and it will sabotage the MM program and escalate the corporate farming monopoly they created. Talk about reverse psychology at it's best and taking a crap on medical users. It's no longer "We the people" it's "They the dictators" .
 


johnr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
19,994
Likes
3,590
Points
803
Location
Dickinson
No Luke Simons anymore, they deemed him inappropriate and just like Mr. potato pants , poof.
 

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,691
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
FWIW , I'm 100% for getting rid of the medical program but at the same time I want to protect the patients. I say treat it like alcohol, tax it and hand the whole ball of wax over to the tax commissioner before they drag taxpayers any deeper into this rabbit hole.
 

db-2

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Posts
4,105
Likes
1,089
Points
473
Location
ND
Passed both house and senate with 100%.
Need written permission to place bait down and put up a trail camera from owner of land. Camera needs ID on them.
I would assume some land owner found a camera and maybe bait on his land so he ask the state to fix it for him. yes/no?

Not sure how often this happens and who the butthead is that does this but i can assure one, if that happens to me on my land, i would take care of it asap by myself and it would not happen again. i would not need or ask the state to take care of my problem and get law enforcement involve.

Have 8 food plots and 6 different owners. Have oral permission from all so now it will be in writing.

But yes, some buttheads, in the past, have felt the need to put up cameras next to me and have even found cameras over my plots, hidden, so they thought, in a tree. Now other than the ones i found over my plots i have not gone and taken. Maybe a game changer going forward.
(however in the past if there was an issue, i either took care of it myself or ignore, but no game warren, that will not change)

For me, i just do not get this one and then 100%. db
 

Mr. Stevenson

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2020
Posts
2,017
Likes
13
Points
186
FWIW , I'm 100% for getting rid of the medical program but at the same time I want to protect the patients. I say treat it like alcohol, tax it and hand the whole ball of wax over to the tax commissioner before they drag taxpayers any deeper into this rabbit hole.

There's the rub. Medical is being abused for backdoor recreational legalization. Doesn't matter. Pump our water full of estrogen, legalize pot and cultivate a passive population.
 


Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,691
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
This session has been eriely quiet[/QUOT


Haha a few minutes after you typed that we lost the live feed on the senate appropriations as they were going over the NDGF budget. I think you jinxed it. There has been good live coverage this year , I make a point to watch an hour or so every morning and late evening.
There's both video and live coverage so you can watch anytime.

I'd challenge everybody to watch at least a little and " Keep an eye" on their Senators and reps. to see how involved they are and vote accordingly. I have no idea how some of these career lawmakers ever get votes and there are others not from my district that deserve recognition for their good work
 

Trapper62

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Posts
560
Likes
93
Points
200
Location
Bottineau County
Passed both house and senate with 100%.
Need written permission to place bait down and put up a trail camera from owner of land. Camera needs ID on them.
I would assume some land owner found a camera and maybe bait on his land so he ask the state to fix it for him. yes/no?

Not sure how often this happens and who the butthead is that does this but i can assure one, if that happens to me on my land, i would take care of it asap by myself and it would not happen again. i would not need or ask the state to take care of my problem and get law enforcement involve.

Have 8 food plots and 6 different owners. Have oral permission from all so now it will be in writing.

But yes, some buttheads, in the past, have felt the need to put up cameras next to me and have even found cameras over my plots, hidden, so they thought, in a tree. Now other than the ones i found over my plots i have not gone and taken. Maybe a game changer going forward.
(however in the past if there was an issue, i either took care of it myself or ignore, but no game warren, that will not change)

For me, i just do not get this one and then 100%. db


So does this mean that a renter who is actively farming rented land now has to get written permission to place a camera on that land?
 

Pigsticker

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
263
Likes
60
Points
157
Location
Minot
For all those above who were wondering, the legalization of marijuana for recreational was just killed in the senate...
 


AR-15

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Posts
2,311
Likes
210
Points
288
North Dakota will be the 53rd state to legalize MJ, 6 miles away it's legal
 

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,691
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
Here is the recording of this mornings live stream where NDGF goes in-depth about their budget and operations and where the money comes from and goes. Worth listening to if you have a question or opinion on what NDGF does and doesn't do for us. You have to fast foreword a little because the live stream doesn't start right away.



https://video.legis.nd.gov/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20210325/-1/19793
 

Bed Wetter

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Posts
7,094
Likes
433
Points
368
Location
Cold
Looks like I’m done hunting in ND.


https://bismarcktribune.com/news/st...1b2177f.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1

North Dakota House passes electronic land posting bills

North Dakota's House of Representatives on Thursday passed a pair of bills to advance electronic posting of land.

Sen. Robert Erbele, R-Lehr, introduced Senate Bills 2036 and 2144. The latter would make electronic posting equal to physical posting and penalties, and also would define a "fence." It also would allow only lawful hunters and anglers to access fenced, unposted land, for hunting and fishing activities only.

The House Energy and Natural Resources Committee amended the bill to make trespassing onto fenced land a Class B misdemeanor and any subsequent offense within two years a Class A misdemeanor.

A Class B misdemeanor carries a maximum punishment of 30 days in jail and a $1,500 fine. A Class A misdemeanor carries a sentence of up to 360 days in jail and a $3,000 fine.

The House passed the bill 86-6. The bill goes back to the Senate for concurrence on amendments.

Senate Bill 2036 would continue an electronic posting pilot project for another two years and expand it statewide. Landowners still would have the option to physically post their land with signs.

The House on Thursday passed the bill 91-2. The Senate earlier passed it 45-2. The bill goes to Gov. Doug Burgum, who has three legislative days to act upon receiving it.

The bills came after an interim legislative committee's study and pilot project for electronic land posting in Ramsey, Richland and Slope counties. Seventy-nine landowners participated in the project, closing access to their private land via online means. The bills follow years of debate in the Legislature over private land access and trespass issues.
 

Rowdie

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Posts
9,925
Likes
1,632
Points
563
So if this passes, do landowners need to electronically post it? If they don't is it still open to hunt?
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 159
  • This month: 133
  • This month: 116
  • This month: 108
  • This month: 104
  • This month: 86
  • This month: 82
  • This month: 76
  • This month: 75
  • This month: 74
Top Bottom