SB 2315 / Lockout

johnr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
20,663
Likes
5,288
Points
913
Location
Dickinson
ND lock out...hahaha.

Its like the internet tough guy who is so brave and strong on a sign/post. It would be awesome if our deer/wild life could read, and only eat crops on the lock out land, and of course test the fence strength of that lock out land also.

ND has a pretty good thing going, and we once again are going to let some small little group ruin what the rest of us dont want.

I am a land owner, so my skin is in the game.

Majority rule is so American, we must change it..:;:help
 


eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,739
Likes
718
Points
438
Location
williston
Hopefully the wording would be that the “owner” has to electronically post it. That would somewhat present renters from doing it. The state should then randomly survey landowners and ask if they electronically posted. If they didn’t and it was shown posted then it would have to be removed and fine the piece of shit that posted it.
 

fireone

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Thread starter
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Posts
782
Likes
67
Points
168
As soon as sportsmen start to wiggle on their position, they are lost. Maybe, possibly, could be, might be able... you are DOA. That was the whole point of pushing the test trial in 3 counties. Wear you down, tire you out, split your unity.

Less than 2% of land owners in those 3 counties signed up for the test trial. E posting is as popular as the clap with both sportsmen and landowners. Don't give 'em a foot, not an inch, nothing.

If these guys want to run this anti public hunting idea then they should do by initiated measure and let everybody see how popular it is. No balls.
 

zoops

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 17, 2015
Posts
1,855
Likes
230
Points
288
Hopefully the wording would be that the “owner” has to electronically post it. That would somewhat present renters from doing it. The state should then randomly survey landowners and ask if they electronically posted. If they didn’t and it was shown posted then it would have to be removed and fine the piece of shit that posted it.

Seems as though much of the land I look at on Onx is not posted by the owner, so there must be a stipulation in most leases that the renter can post the land. As we know a lot of land out there that is owned by people who live hundreds of miles away, some who probably could hardly find the piece of land if they had to. Seems a bit convoluted how that would work with E-posting - I suppose the owner could grant the renter the ability to have access to their ability to post it.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,739
Likes
718
Points
438
Location
williston
At least it would be a hurdle. And when investigated you’d have electronic means to know who posted it
 


catchindeers

Active Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2019
Posts
53
Likes
35
Points
75
I was out in southwestern ND last week and finally saw a few of these "ND Lockout" signs. They were on pay to hunt land that's leased by cannonball. That land has never not been posted solid. Still have yet to see these signs on any land that used to be unposted or non pay to hunt property. Shows who's really pushing this agenda.

This is exactly what I have seen where I hunt. The couple land owners that have these signs are ones that have always posted their land, never let anyone hunt, and get mad if you even turn around on an approach by their land. They are also ones that if they see you out sitting, they will drive up and down the road or if you are walking they will pull up and watch until you are done. I also own a little bit of land and oppose this.
 

Pheasant 54

★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Posts
474
Likes
191
Points
155
Exactly they need to make the effort to post digitally or physically otherwise it should remain open to hunting. Most of the land open to hunters is absentee landowners that could care less if I hunt their land.

Talk about confusion!

You know who won’t obey this new posting law are the same people who do not obey it now and many of them are not even hunters. When are they going to propose a law to actually reduce the trespassing? Some hunters may trespass but they are not the crux of the problem. They need to quit blaming hunters and come up with some stiffer trespass penalties!

Everyone better be careful and not get lulled into a state of complacency, That 2 % is going to explode if the electronic posting passes .
 

johnr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
20,663
Likes
5,288
Points
913
Location
Dickinson
This is exactly what I have seen where I hunt. The couple land owners that have these signs are ones that have always posted their land, never let anyone hunt, and get mad if you even turn around on an approach by their land. They are also ones that if they see you out sitting, they will drive up and down the road or if you are walking they will pull up and watch until you are done. I also own a little bit of land and oppose this.

I was on Plots land north of Dickinson about 15 miles, just east of Hwy 22 when a guy that had a house just on the south side of the plots land came out at 100mph on his 4 wheeler, pulled right up to my wife sitting in the pickup at the other end of the plots land and chewed her ass for me hunting the land to close to his buildings.
Asked a game warden the next week about it, and he said he had many reports of this very guy, and what we were doing was not anything he should have been concerning himself with.

I could drive right up to the dickhead place all these years later, and would about bet he has lock out signs, and still hassles the people hunting the plots land.

fucking dicks in every profession.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,739
Likes
718
Points
438
Location
williston
Why the hell hasn’t the game and fish set the record straight with that asshole. I’m quite confident if this would pass we would win with an initiated measure. I think the majority are fed up with farmers being treated as some special breed. And we can throw in making it legal to hunt ditches on top of it.
 

catchindeers

Active Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2019
Posts
53
Likes
35
Points
75
I was on Plots land north of Dickinson about 15 miles, just east of Hwy 22 when a guy that had a house just on the south side of the plots land came out at 100mph on his 4 wheeler, pulled right up to my wife sitting in the pickup at the other end of the plots land and chewed her ass for me hunting the land to close to his buildings.
Asked a game warden the next week about it, and he said he had many reports of this very guy, and what we were doing was not anything he should have been concerning himself with.

I could drive right up to the dickhead place all these years later, and would about bet he has lock out signs, and still hassles the people hunting the plots land.

fucking dicks in every profession.

Yep, these are the types of land owners that are in favor of this bill unfortunately.
 


Mort

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
2,971
Likes
68
Points
288
Location
NW ND somewhere
I was on Plots land north of Dickinson about 15 miles, just east of Hwy 22 when a guy that had a house just on the south side of the plots land came out at 100mph on his 4 wheeler, pulled right up to my wife sitting in the pickup at the other end of the plots land and chewed her ass for me hunting the land to close to his buildings.
Asked a game warden the next week about it, and he said he had many reports of this very guy, and what we were doing was not anything he should have been concerning himself with.

I could drive right up to the dickhead place all these years later, and would about bet he has lock out signs, and still hassles the people hunting the plots land.

fucking dicks in every profession.
Thats just down right appalling of that dick, what makes me wonder if whoever owns the land got in a pissing match with him and decided to make that land plots next to his buildings. As long as you walk/shoot in opposite direction of the building, he's doesn't have a leg to stand on.
 

Retired Educator

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Posts
3,253
Likes
225
Points
283
Location
North Dakota
I apologize if these comments have already been discussed as I'm so tired of this discussion. I did read comments about owners being the only one allowed to post. Makes sense as all maps list the landowner not the renter. If you are using Onyx and want to hunt land my wife and I own that is who you will find, but the renter is listed nowhere. I don't post so it makes no difference to me. I also know some renters who rent pretty poor farmland because there is lots of cover for deer so that makes it worth renting. They then have a private hunting area. In my opinion, farmland is more difficult to post than pasture type land. Farmland with no fences needs a poster every 1/2 mile, pasture only needs a sign at the gates.

I also know a few acquaintances that post their land and what they rent and get pissed when someone hunts without permission. They piss and moan but have never contacted law enforcement and pressed charges.

Landowner tags are another sore spot for me. There are landowners who only hunt that land listed on their license but there are others who think the landowner tag covers the whole unit. Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot that they feed the deer all year so they are entitled to shoot whatever and wherever they wish. As a general rule, when deer get in the winter hay they do a lot of damage. Spread out in most crops, negligible. I'm not a farmer but have run a combine the past few years and rarely see where much crop is eaten by wildlife. Not saying it doesn't happen but it's not very visible.The one time I have seen it is when a herd of elk decided they liked munching on corn. The first few rows around the field wee more than 1/2 eaten or trampled.Landowner tags are not going to change but let's all be on a level playing field. If you want a landowner tag that has to be your first choice. No applying for a regular tag and if unsuccessful you receive the landowner tag. You should not be able to have it both ways in my opinion.

At the same time there are a whole lot of landowners who don't mind hunters and who mostly don't care if someone is hunting their land as long as hunters respect the land and don't damage anything. It's a few landowners who are making it miserable for us as well as a few hunters who are doing the same thing.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,739
Likes
718
Points
438
Location
williston
I actually question whether someone could be prosecuted for trespass on land the owner didn’t actually post but renter did. Would be curious to know
 

fireone

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Thread starter
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Posts
782
Likes
67
Points
168
johnr's post is an example of hunter harassment and ND has a law against it. That SOB that chewed out his wife should be prosecuted ASAP. The warden made a mistake by not enforcing the law.
 

BotnoJoe

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Posts
284
Likes
3
Points
110
Location
Bottineau
I actually question whether someone could be prosecuted for trespass on land the owner didn’t actually post but renter did. Would be curious to know
"Posting and Trespass Regulations Only the owner or tenant, or an individual authorized by the owner, may post land by placing signs alongside a public highway or boundary giving notice that no hunting is permitted on the land. The name of the person posting the land must appear on each sign in legible characters"

not sure if it would be more difficult to prosecute but it appears it is within the law for someone other than the owner to post
 


eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,739
Likes
718
Points
438
Location
williston
Thanks for that. Kinda figured there would be something like that. The whole name and signature has always been a bizarre thing. I’d say half around here have no info on the signs.
 

dustit

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Posts
40
Likes
0
Points
36
Here's another link for an opinion letter written by State Senator Robert Erbele (SB 2315 sponsor) that was in a newspaper also. You can see the approach that is being taken.

https://www.jamestownsun.com/opinio...en-working-to-find-solution-on-hunting-issues


Here's the text below for those that couldn't access the article.

Landowners, sportsmen working to find solution on hunting issues
Nov 18th 2020 - 6am.
Robert Erbele
By Sen. Robert Erbele, Lehr, N.D., chairman, Interim Natural Resources Committee
I would like to share some additional information on hunter–landowner relations in response to an article that appeared in our major newspapers recently. The article was accurate in describing the history of the battle between property rights advocates and sportsmen protecting their hunting privilege. However, the article did not lay out the work that has been done by both sides, hunters and landowners, to bridge the gap and bring healing to the conflict.
This is a summary of the work done since the end of the last legislative session. The Interim Natural Resources Committee as appointed by Legislative Management was made up of 5 legislators, two from the House and two from the Senate (one from each party) and a chairman that they selected. The committee also included two members selected by sportsmen groups, and two members selected by landowner groups. These 4 citizen members had voting rights equal to the legislative members. In addition the committee had a non-voting Advisory committee that was selected to be a part of all committee meetings. They were the ag commissioner, the Game and Fish director, a representative from the Association of Counties, a representative from the State’s Attorney’s Association, and a representative from the Information Technology Dept. The committee finished its work on Sept. 25 and is advancing three bill drafts to be presented to the full legislature this winter.
One bill will make electronic posting equal to physical posting so both methods would be legitimate means of posting with the same penalties for violations. The trial study for electronic posting that was held in 3 counties this year was to test the ease of use and the functionality of the system. Since electronic posting was not a part of the law, landowners still had to physically post if they did not want to allow hunting or required permission to hunt.
The program that Game and Fish and IT developed from GIS data from the county tax records is easy to navigate for both the landowner and hunter. Landowners can post their land with a few easy clicks in just a few minutes. Hunters can locate the posted land either by an app on their phones or they can download the maps if they are in areas with no cell coverage or they can print the maps from the PLOTS section of the website.
A second bill draft continues the work of the study committee to guide the process of rolling out the electronic posting option to the entire state and bring back a report and recommendations if any other legislation is necessary.
The third bill draft will be a work in progress for the legislature to address other property rights concerns outside of hunting. Our posting laws as they now stand consider property open unless posted and that has caused the concern by sportsmen whenever an attempt was made to have land deemed closed. By accepting electronic posting for hunters and anglers, several positive outcomes are realized. 1. Landowners or property managers will not have the time and expense required to physically post, although they may still do so if that is their preferred method. 2. Many landowners do not mind having hunters on their land, so the land will be considered to be open and they will not have to do anything. 3. Hunters will have better contact information and will have advance knowledge of available land before going to the field. 4. Hunters will be more likely to join property owners in finding a solution to closing property to trespassers if they know that their hunting privilege is secure.
The biggest issue with property rights proponents is just wanting to be able to know who is on their property and when they can be there. Hunting is different than other trespass situations. The wildlife belongs to everyone and property owners recognize that the numbers need to be managed. A property owner knows when it is hunting season and if he sees someone dressed in orange in his field he knows what is going on. All other times the reason why someone else would be on someone’s property is an unknown and the property owner should not have to put signage up to keep people out. Hunting and trapping are addressed in Section 20 of the Century Code and criminal trespass is laid out in Section 12 of the code. My hope is that we will focus on Section 12 this session to bring a workable solution to protecting property rights beyond the hunting seasons. Great progress was made during the interim. The collaborative spirit of sportsmen and property owners working together to find a solution was refreshing to see. As we prepare for this legislative session we are in a good position to bring an end to the divide that has existed in previous sessions.
Erbele, a Republican, represents District 28 in the North Dakota Legislature.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,739
Likes
718
Points
438
Location
williston
Bring an end to the divide. Good damn luck with that. This guy is delusional
 

fireone

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Thread starter
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Posts
782
Likes
67
Points
168
Sen. Erble said in a public meeting in early Jan. 2020 that he would not advance or take part in a further effort with 2315. Now he is doing so. He lied. This bill, as an proposal, was defeated in a house floor vote. And they are going to bring it back again. If this concept had popular support then landowners and sportsmen would be clamoring for it. Neither group is doing so.

And you can bet your ass that the new effort will heard in the Ag Committee again. For a hunting bill no less.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 423
  • This month: 397
  • This month: 133
  • This month: 124
  • This month: 119
  • This month: 112
  • This month: 96
  • This month: 89
  • This month: 87
  • This month: 75
Top Bottom