Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mark Mazaheri" data-source="post: 241529" data-attributes="member: 5087">Yesterday I was told that 2315 is going to be reviewed a joint committee of Ag &amp; Natural Resources, but the final vote will come from the Ag Committee.&nbsp; From there, it goes to a vote on the House floor. Any changes from the Senate version would then be reviewed by a conference committee compromised of both House &amp; Senate members.There are several issues to be addressed.1) guides/outfitters should be prohibited from hunting on unposted land without permission.&nbsp; There's a big difference between freelance hunting and running a commercial operation on someone's land.2) there should be a penalty for illegal/unauthorized posting that is equal to the penalty structure for hunting on posted land without permission.3) NDGF should not have to pay for any of this.&nbsp; Originally the State IT department was going to cover it, then the sponsor slipped in a $250,000 bill to NDGF. If the Ag groups are pushing for it, they can pay.&nbsp; 4) areas posted in RED as &quot;ABSOLUTELY NO HUNTING&quot; should still provide landowner contact info, if for no other reason than safety.&nbsp; If I find a calf outside the fence, who would I call?5)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mark Mazaheri, post: 241529, member: 5087"] Yesterday I was told that 2315 is going to be reviewed a joint committee of Ag & Natural Resources, but the final vote will come from the Ag Committee. From there, it goes to a vote on the House floor. Any changes from the Senate version would then be reviewed by a conference committee compromised of both House & Senate members. There are several issues to be addressed. 1) guides/outfitters should be prohibited from hunting on unposted land without permission. There's a big difference between freelance hunting and running a commercial operation on someone's land. 2) there should be a penalty for illegal/unauthorized posting that is equal to the penalty structure for hunting on posted land without permission. 3) NDGF should not have to pay for any of this. Originally the State IT department was going to cover it, then the sponsor slipped in a $250,000 bill to NDGF. If the Ag groups are pushing for it, they can pay. 4) areas posted in RED as "ABSOLUTELY NO HUNTING" should still provide landowner contact info, if for no other reason than safety. If I find a calf outside the fence, who would I call? 5) [/QUOTE]

Verification

What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA