SB 2315 - In Cmte 3/14 - ACTION REQUIRED!

Brian Renville

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Posts
4,144
Likes
64
Points
273
Location
Fairview, MT
would appear it's all out war now.

How many of us aren't suprised? :;:smokin

Anyone still think ND isn't going to statewide sanctioned pay to hunt? I can see guys now chasing animals to keep them on their property just like the elk herds here in MT.
 


njsimonson

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Aug 17, 2015
Posts
274
Likes
3
Points
115
Location
Capital City, ND
We will be awaiting the final amended version out of committee today. As I understand it, there are THREE sets of amendments and again, this is just generally speaking, I've seen NONE of these and only been told that is what's up for consideration in today's committee:

1) Everything's posted (original version from waaay back in January - it's been a long session, hasn't it!?)
2) Database where everything starts as posted (basically the same as above, only more confusing and expensive)
3) Database where everything starts as unposted (just confusing and expensive, with no deterrence to criminals)

We should have something by 5:00 pm, unless they go late, suspend the rules, etc.

All of the above - no matter which ones come out - are not the right answer. They don't prevent trespass, but by now we all know that was not the true goal here. The goal was to remove the posting requirement because a vocal few who own thousands of acres thought it too time consuming/expensive to post any more - and believe me, there are other options we can use to appease those few. The secondary goal of the special interests seemed to be to paint sportsmen as the villains, when in reality a few dozen criminals were the real issue.

You've all done a great job at representing your views, and those of sportsmen in general. In the coming days, you'll need to do it again. Things aren't solid in the house and this bill can still be defeated. Those I've talked to say, despite the special interests and sponsors dumping THOUSANDS of dollars on multiple dedicated lobbyists, this bill in any form will be a toss-up. Time to put our collective thumbs on the scale once again - BE HEARD, CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATORS, tell your Representatives to VOTE NO on SB 2315, because in any form, it's bad for public access, hunting and fishing in ND!

https://www.legis.nd.gov/contact-my-legislators

ShoreFishingSB2315.jpg
 

Attachments

ShoreFishingSB2315.jpg
Last edited:

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
like nj posted above it's all about having to post signs. over the years farmers/ranchers are getting bigger and bigger. small guys retiring and/or being pushed out. So the big operations don't want to have to post. I can understand their reasoning but this isn't the way to solve it. This is the way to drive one hell of a wedge between you and those who subsidize your way of life.
 

Kentucky Windage

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Posts
5,323
Likes
465
Points
368
Location
Wendy Peffercorn’s Bedroom
Posting land is not hard to do. Farmers and ranchers drive around ALL THE TIME.

- - - Updated - - -

I’m going to keep posting this: if private land is private, so be it. ALL public land becomes off limits to the private sector. This thing is way too one sided. The legislature needs to throw the general public a bone.

- - - Updated - - -

It’s not enough to say “we want a no vote.” If it becomes a yes vote, the general public is screwed. Amendments need to be made separate from the private land itself. The public needs to receive something from the legislature.
 


ndlongshot

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
1,781
Likes
120
Points
268
Posting land is not hard to do. Farmers and ranchers drive around ALL THE TIME.

- - - Updated - - -

I’m going to keep posting this: if private land is private, so be it. ALL public land becomes off limits to the private sector. This thing is way too one sided. The legislature needs to throw the general public a bone.

- - - Updated - - -

It’s not enough to say “we want a no vote.” If it becomes a yes vote, the general public is screwed. Amendments need to be made separate from the private land itself. The public needs to receive something from the legislature.

Agreed. There needs to be some repercussions if this goes down. Need to start taking care of ourselves in all of this. Its give and take, not just give, give, give.

More public lands, more habitat, and more funding for both.
 
Last edited:

Huntin1

Established Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2017
Posts
132
Likes
4
Points
93
Location
Jamestown
Apparently our legislature along with some farmers and ranchers in this state want hunting to stop, that is in effect what this law will do in time. Maybe not right away, but eventually, as people get tired of putting up the shit show that this will create, they'll just quit going.
 
Last edited:

Crankn

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Posts
870
Likes
22
Points
186
Location
Glenfield/Sutton Area
Once again not all farmers and ranchers want this bill! I am a farmer and landowner and I am against this bill, Been texting and emailing my rep.s constantly to vote NO!
 

fireone

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Posts
772
Likes
49
Points
151
Once again not all farmers and ranchers want this bill! I am a farmer and landowner and I am against this bill, Been texting and emailing my rep.s constantly to vote NO!

I have coffee with a bunch of farmers every morning and most of my relatives are/were farmers. Haven't heard one of them back this anti-public hunting bill. It is a small percentage pushing it from ND Stockmen and Farm Bureau. I know some of the past officers from the Corn Growers and the Soybean Growers, they say it's a dumb bill, bad public relations. But the squeaking wheel gets a bill in the legislature.
 

cpete00

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
180
Likes
7
Points
103
I tried to warn people about Cindy Beck years ago when she was first running. But she had that coveted "R", so that's all that mattered. She has always been and will always be shady.
 


ndlongshot

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
1,781
Likes
120
Points
268
Once again not all farmers and ranchers want this bill! I am a farmer and landowner and I am against this bill, Been texting and emailing my rep.s constantly to vote NO!
Thank you crankn. I think most realize its a minority pushing this.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
well if the legislature passes this they damn well better immediately come up with some way to fund G&F. Then some way to fund depredation on hay and come up with some way to control yotes. I think sportsmen will tell em to fuck off when it comes to controlling deer and yotes.
 

Ruttin

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
1,409
Likes
1,007
Points
403
Location
ND
Eye,

They'll just send in the state trappers and federal boys with the choppers to curb that problem... eliminate the need for hunting once and for all
 

pointer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
1,166
Likes
143
Points
238
Location
south central nd
Well let's see, I think the combo tag is 52 bucks times that by how many thousand, then the thirty for a deer tag and on and on with the tax on sporting equipment, if you are the CEO of Dicks losing this money is nothing, makes them feel good. Reality is however a lost art form, the G&F will just shoot more deer to check to see the status of CWD. Stupid people with power hungry issues will still be elected, and I will wait to see if this bullshit passes before I buy any licence, it will eliminate the way I hunt, and will eliminate some of the access to shore fishing my favorite spots. My rant is what will this solve, not a damn thing
 


Bkrenz

New member
Joined
Apr 6, 2019
Posts
2
Likes
0
Points
31
If I was a hunter with out land I would be a yes on this bill. Then do my home work and find a place to hunt. It will cut down on your competition. I have 9500 acres and put one sign back up 6 times last year. Funny thing is. After deer season the sign always stayed on the post? I guess I don’t care either way on this bill I just ordered hard steel signs and that should the driving all over every year to post.
 

1bigfokker

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
1,229
Likes
179
Points
238
Put the signs on with 3" lag bolts. Found out that those assholes don't carry tools and the signs can't be ripped off.
 

Meelosh

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
1,302
Likes
12
Points
171
That’s a short sighted way of looking at things. Less hunters is not a good thing.
 

Riggen&Jiggen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Posts
532
Likes
22
Points
158
Location
Burlington
Unless I have not heard where are the state and national conservation and Hunter organizations? Once the hunters are gone where are they going to get their funding?
 

Kentucky Windage

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Posts
5,323
Likes
465
Points
368
Location
Wendy Peffercorn’s Bedroom
If I was a hunter with out land I would be a yes on this bill. Then do my home work and find a place to hunt. It will cut down on your competition. I have 9500 acres and put one sign back up 6 times last year. Funny thing is. After deer season the sign always stayed on the post? I guess I don’t care either way on this bill I just ordered hard steel signs and that should the driving all over every year to post.

My guess is the person doing it is still going to shoot stuff on your land when you’re not around. That what this bill doesn’t stop. Doesn’t stop people from breaking the law. We already have a law in place that makes that activity illegal.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 197
  • This month: 160
  • This month: 148
  • This month: 137
  • This month: 119
  • This month: 95
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 88
  • This month: 81
Top Bottom