2019 ND Legislature and ND Sportsmens Etree

[espringers]

As a fella who has a couple of friends from out of state I like to duck hunt with, I would support it. Born and raised here. But, now live in Minnesota.

 

[zoops]

That is surprising to see an increase in NR licenses even though water conditions have been mediocre at best. Probably also why any time I go looking for birds there are already NR on them. Seemed like until the last few years you rarely saw other waterfowl hunters past Halloween; now it's barely a drop off. I see no need for allowing 3 trips, but a bill like this comes up every legislative session.

 

[eyexer]

kinda sucks when residents of ND have to go to saskatchewan to actually be able to get decent hunting

 

[Migrator Man]

kinda sucks when residents of ND have to go to saskatchewan to actually be able to get decent hunting

It will soon be the last frontier.

 

[Migrator Man]

Well the Grand Forks Herald editorial board has jumped into this issue by throwing their support for the no trespass law. You can tell when reading their editorial that they are not very well versed on the subject. They say it won’t affect hunters because people who allowed access before will probably still allow access. They obviously don’t realize that many of the people who do not post do not care if people hunt because they rather not be bothered. Every landowners will be bombarded with calls if this law passes. Here are my questions:

1. Will the NDGF end all wildlife depreciation payments to landowners? I suspect no

2. Will ND open the public right of ways to hunting ?

3. I suspect the coyote and predator populations will skyrocket because most hunters that would typically shoot them won’t be able to without permission. Would people bother to even hunt coyotes as much? Is the legislature ready to deal with that problem?

4. License sales will plummet dramatically due to less open land and the remaining land being overrun with too many people. Is the legislature prepared to fund the NDGF with general funds because of lost revenue?

The legislature better have good answers to these questions otherwise they are going to have to answer to the voters of ND.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

That Grands Forks editorial comes as a surprise to me considering that their writer is Brad Dokken.

The editorial opinion piece:

https://www.grandforksherald.com/op...ew-north-dakota-land-should-be-assumed-closed

This below would be more Brad Dokkens thinking:

https://www.grandforksherald.com/sp...spass-bill-appears-likely-legislative-session

Brad Dokken: Another N.D. trespass bill appears likely this legislative session

By Brad Dokken on Dec 30, 2018 at 6:51 a.m.
AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to Facebook
153Share to Twitter
Share to Reddit
Share to Email

Share to Copy Link

Mike McEnroe, past president of the North Dakota Wildlife Federation, said a trespass bill inevitably will be introduced during the upcoming legislative session. (File photo/ Brad Dokken, Grand Forks Herald)

Sportsmen's groups are bracing for another trespass bill as the 2019 session of the North Dakota Legislature approaches.

The session gets underway Thursday, Jan. 3.


In terms of hunting and fishing legislation, a trespass bill, if passed, stands to have the biggest potential impact on North Dakota's outdoor heritage, said Mike McEnroe of Fargo, a retired biologist and part-time lobbyist for the North Dakota Wildlife Federation and the North Dakota Chapter of The Wildlife Society.
Attempts to pass a trespass law that would prohibit hunters from accessing private land without permission even if it's not posted are nothing new. A bill introduced during the 2017 North Dakota legislative session triggered heated debate between sportsmen and farm groups before being defeated by a 17 to 28 margin in the state Senate.
"I think there's probably no doubt" similar legislation will be introduced for the coming session, McEnroe said.
Earlier this year, Terry Steinwand, director of the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, organized two meetings between sportsmen's groups—representatives from Pheasants Forever, United Sportsmen, the North Dakota Wildlife Federation, Cass County Wildlife Club and the North Dakota Bowhunters Association attended—and the North Dakota Stockmen's Association in an effort to reach an alternative to a trespass law.
The Stockmen's Association is among the leading proponents of trespass legislation.
Long story short, the two sides failed to reach a solution.
"The first meeting I thought went fairly well," Steinwand said Friday. "The second meeting pretty much degraded into—it wasn't a shouting match, that's absolutely not true—but it really got into the guts of the philosophical differences between the two, and it was getting no place in a hurry."
Minnesota and South Dakota long have had laws on the books requiring hunters to have landowner permission before entering private land even if it isn't posted. In North Dakota, by comparison, hunters generally can access private land unless it's posted by the landowner.
Farmers and other proponents of a trespass bill say the posting requirement puts an unfair burden on landowners because of the time, effort and expense required to place the signs.
Sportsmen's groups, meanwhile, say a trespass bill won't solve the problem of hunters accessing land they shouldn't. Out of more than 100,000 hunters who take the field every year in North Dakota, the Game and Fish Department reports only about 100 hunting without permission convictions annually, McEnroe said.
No doubt, a trespass law would be a big change for North Dakota hunters. But growing up in Minnesota, where I'm also a landowner and where obtaining permission is an accepted cost of doing business as a hunter, I like the convenience of knowing I don't have to place signs to make a case if a trespass incident occurs.
Even so, trespassing is among the most common violations Minnesota conservation officers encounter every fall.
It all depends on what you're used to, I guess.
"We certainly understand there are some landowners that have problems," McEnroe said. "We also tried to explain a trespass bill won't necessarily solve the problems (landowners say they're) having. If people are not obeying the signs that are up that say 'No Hunting or Trespassing' or 'No Hunting or Trespassing Without Permission,' why would anybody think there's going to be less of a problem if you don't put signs up at all?
"That's a pretty drastic step for 100 cases a year when we've got 100,000 hunters a year out there."
The upcoming legislative session will be Steinwand's seventh as Game and Fish director, and some version of a trespass law has come up during five of the previous six sessions, he said.
"This isn't anything necessarily brand-new," Steinwand said. "Now whether or not it's got more traction than in the past, I guess I don't know."
That being said, all the signs point to a trespass bill coming down the pike sooner rather than later. Stay tuned.
Bills and updates
Last session, McEnroe said the North Dakota Wildlife Federation looked at about 33 bills that dealt specifically with hunting and fishing, along with several bills involving other natural resource issues, and he expects about the same this year.
"Typically in a legislative session, there's 40 to 60 bills that deal with outdoor topics, so I'm sure there'll be any number of small bills," he said.
Again this session, the North Dakota Game and Fish Department will track hunting and fishing legislation and post updates on its website at www.gf.nd.gov.
The updates will include a brief description of each bill, along with the bill sponsor and hearing schedule. To view each bill in its entirety, click on the linked bill number.
In addition, the ND Resident Sportsmen's Etree will post regular updates on bills and issues of significance that come up during the session.

​

 

[eyexer]

nothing coming out of the Red River valley surprises me.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

I believe today (Jan. 14th) is the last day a new Bill can be introduced. Brad Dokken, outdoor writer for the Grand Forks Herald has been connected at the hip with retired federal biologist Mike McEnroe for years always going back to Mike as a source for McEnroe's opinion such as the article above. In each piece they have to list McEnroe's affiliations. He worked for the USFWS, he is the past president of the ND wildlife federation and the forever lobbyist for the wildlife society. What they omit is that everyone who is anyone that actually knows McEnroe doesn't trust him any further than they could throw him.

This is why the Grand Forks Herald opinion piece comes as a complete 180 degrees. The opinion piece below:

Herald editorial board

North Dakota homeowners, be sure to post "no trespassing" signs on your front door, lest would-be intruders feel it's OK to make themselves welcome in your parlor. Same goes for your businesses and vehicles.

​

Actually, don't bother, because everybody knows it's wrong to enter someone's home without an invitation, or a store after business hours. Signs, therefore, are unnecessary and would be an inconvenience to the property owner.
Why, then, must North Dakota landowners spend the time and money to post signs on private rural acres to declare trespassers are similarly unwelcome?
All of that might change if legislation is — as expected — introduced during the current session of the state Legislature. That's good, because creating an environment of assumed closed land is a common-sense proposal that is overdue.
Here's the problem: Openness is assumed on North Dakota private lands unless otherwise posted. That means hunters may access, without permission, any land on which the property owner has not erected actual signs declaring it closed.
That's directly the opposite of laws in many other states, including neighboring Minnesota and South Dakota. There, all private land is closed to hunting without permission of the landowner. For example, in South Dakota, unapproved access on land by a hunter is only allowed in the case where game has been shot legally on adjacent land and the hunter needs access to retrieve the game. The hunter must make a beeline to the game and must do it unarmed.
As reported recently in the Herald, farmers and other proponents of a trespass bill believe the current North Dakota rule puts an unfair burden on landowners, who are forced to spend time and money placing signs and, later, making sure the signs remain in place. We agree — that is an unfair burden.
This isn't the opening salvo of a new debate. It's been discussed in the past, too, including in 2017 when a bill was introduced and prompted heated conversation. The 2017 bill died in the Senate, 28-17.
Sportsmen's groups say a new trespass law won't solve the problem of hunters inappropriately accessing land. They're probably right, since trespassing still happens in Minnesota and South Dakota, where openness is not assumed and where permission is required for all land entry.
There also are concerns about tracking down property owners to seek permission. We understand that inconvenience, but it's not one that cannot be overcome, as evidenced in other states.

​

​

However, use of private land really shouldn't be a sportsmen's decision. It should rest solely with the landowner.
Further, any landowner who currently allows hunting probably will allow access in the future. And the landowners who take the time now to post their land probably won't allow hunting if a new law is passed. So, again, how will a new law adversely affect hunters in a common-sense world?
What should happen is this: The Legislature should indeed create a law that assumes private land is closed to hunting and all other entry. Then, North Dakota sportsmen should do what all responsible hunters do — visit with landowners, politely ask for access and develop relationships that result in hunting opportunities.
Landowners deserve this courtesy.

​

 

[Allen]

One thing I am sure of is that a no-trespass bill will increase land prices. One of the reasons I love hunting is to get out and walk a bunch of new land every year. As I get lazier with time, it may just be time to buy my own piece of hunting land and charge a farmer some rent. Agricultural interests have generally been against this kind of land purchases in the past because it creates more competition and higher land prices. There are often unintended consequences.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Not necessarily true Allen. I rented two quarters of land for 31 years and then the landlord died. At auction an anesthesiologist from Bismarck ran me to $1900 on the better quarter. I didn't even bid on the poor quarter which he purchased for $1550. This is $1200 sand.

The guy doesn't hunt and bought it to diversify his portfolio. He rented it out and wanted 3% return on his money or $50 rent per acre. I turned it down. I don't disagree that 3% is out of line. He paid too much. His renter took big losses in the drought of 2017 and had a poor crop in 2018. The 3 year contract expires this year and I wonder if his renter is going to continue or ask for a reprieve or lower rent.

Allen, lots of probable's to consider when buying land and then collecting a rent check. Current bank variable interest rates are 4 to 6 percent. If a person wants to lock in long term it is higher. Rent collected is 3 percent. Obviously the math says none of this works unless you are buying land with cash.

Several years ago when CRP was still going strong some land came up for sale. I sat down with Game and Fish and we ran all the numbers from coverlocks to CRP to plots and every program out there. The idea was.....could a fellow buy land with borrowed money, place it into all the programs out there and would those programs make the interest payment. The answer was no.

 

[eyexer]

there's plenty of people with the kind of cash it takes to buy quarters of land around here. many people from the south have moved here and they are used to buying or leasing land to hunt on down there. wouldn't surprise me a bit if a trespass law happens these people would buy plenty of land. In fact they would probably even join up with buddies and pay whatever it takes to get it.

 

[Holmsvc]

if the big money wants a no trespass, it’s going to happen

They have wanted it and it has failed

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Eye, I guess I'm not following your reasoning. If these guys from down south already have the cash, why can't they purchase land now and post it?

 

[dean nelson]

Eye, I guess I'm not following your reasoning. If these guys from down south already have the cash, why can't they purchase land now and post it?

Because they're too lazy to go out and put a sign up that's what it all boils down to!

 

[PrairieGhost]

North Dakota homeowners, be sure to post "no trespassing" signs on your front door, lest would-be intruders feel it's OK to make themselves welcome in your parlor. Same goes for your businesses and vehicles.

I think I have read that for about ten years now and all it does is convince people that the writer is stupid. What kind of fool compares a house where one lives, eats, and sleeps to security on the south 1/4. Simply retarded.

 

[zoops]

I think I have read that for about ten years now and all it does is convince people that the writer is stupid. What kind of fool compares a house where one lives, eats, and sleeps to security on the south 1/4. Simply retarded.

Agree. I'd almost never hunt an unposted spot if it's within half a mile of a house without asking. A random quarter 15 miles from where a guy lives is just a wee bit different.

 

[eyexer]

Eye, I guess I'm not following your reasoning. If these guys from down south already have the cash, why can't they purchase land now and post it?

because there's enough unposted land to satisfy them currently. When that changes they'll whip out the check book.

 

[Migrator Man]

because there's enough unposted land to satisfy them currently. When that changes they'll whip out the check book.

That’s how it is in WY. A lot of the nice ranches with good hunting land are being bought up by rich people. The former ranch that was run by locals and let people on no longer have access to these land. Locked up by the rich .....

 

[PrairieGhost]

I think the outfitters are the trumpet that triggers the end if hunting as we know it. They started a few short years ago and look how fast the leases, pay to hunt and posted signs went up. They were the germ that heralds the end. Like other states the more wealthy will buy it up, but unlike other states we have very little public land to go to. The ranchers out west will be declaring extreme fire danger every year. The outfitters win.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

I think the outfitters are the trumpet that triggers the end if hunting as we know it. They started a few short years ago and look how fast the leases, pay to hunt and posted signs went up. They were the germ that heralds the end. Like other states the more wealthy will buy it up, but unlike other states we have very little public land to go to. The ranchers out west will be declaring extreme fire danger every year. The outfitters win.

In the mid seventies it was extremely rare to see a posted sign in my area. Then the electric turbine generators and coal mines ramped up. Pipefitters, iron workers and large amounts of labor were required. On opening weekend of the pheasant opener it was bumper to bumper traffic on the gravel roads. The posted signs went up galore. At the time, mid 70's, there was no such thing as an outfitter or guide.

Retired federal agent PG, everyone knows you have a dim view of property, free enterprise and landowners. But you are consistent injecting your "commercialization of wildlife" theme into these discussions.