The "NEW" SB 2315 - Pucker Up Buttercup!

Brian Renville

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Posts
4,144
Likes
64
Points
273
Location
Fairview, MT
So what about the landowner that says, I have family that deer hunt my land, I would like it posted just the month of November. I don’t want people calling or stopping by all fall. How will that be handled?

I'm assuming they would let a landowner change their mind about what they want to do with their own land at any time. That could definitely make for some interesting situations when a guy might get crabby about something the night before a season starts and changes everything from green to red.
 


Petras

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
1,680
Likes
298
Points
313
Location
Stanley
Are you sure? Does it say anywhere that their contact info will actually be made available? Maybe I missed it.

I feel, if you are a participant (yellow or red) it should be mandatory that you have to provide contact info.

Yep, it looks like it would be required to be made available if they choose to post the land as "open to hunters upon receipt of permission". As far as posting it red or closed, it doesn't appear they would be required to provide their contact information... Doesn't mean you can't call them, you'd just have to find their contact info elsewhere I guess?

This is straight from the latest "amended" bill that someone posted on this forum.

20.1-18-02. Hunters access database.
1. The hunters access database must use color coding or other clear indicators to
designate private land in the state as open to hunters, closed to hunters, or open to
hunters upon receipt of permission from the owner or lawful occupant.
2. A landowner or lawful occupant may designate which of the three categories in
subsection 1 applies to the landowner's or occupant's land. Land for which a
landowner or lawful occupant does not designate a category must be indicated in the
database as open to hunters if the county in which the land is located is included in the
database.
3. If a landowner or lawful occupant designates land as open to hunters upon receipt of
permission, the landowner or lawful occupant shall provide contact information to be
included in the database for hunters to request permission to hunt on the land.
 

KJS - ND

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2015
Posts
95
Likes
4
Points
98
Look reasonable to me - perfect, no - will there be hiccups, absolutely, but there are things that could be good for both hunters and landowners in the bill.

Couple random thoughts:

1) Supposedly will ease posting requirements for landowners - instead of replacing signs, it will be done online and should be an easier process.
2) Red will mean please don't bother asking - this should benefit both landowners (don't want to be bothered) and hunters (don't need to bother and getting turned down - sometimes nicely and sometimes maybe not so much)
3) Yellow will mean - ask and you may be given permission - maybe the contract information will be included in the database - not sure many will opt for this but possibly some will - same as current "ask before entering" option currently - don't see many signs, but have seen a few around
4) Green will be default and open - same as current - if you didn't post before you don't have to do anything now and nothing will change for landowner - hunter will benefit by knowing it is green instead of driving back and fourth a couple times to see if they missed a posted sign anywhere hiding in the grass
5) G&F can attempt to at least sample validate who is doing the posting - same process they use for gratis tags to make sure you are allowed to post land and have penalties for those that try to post where don't have permission - currently there is nothing to prevent anyone from posting anything - this should benefit hunters as I hear on NDA about this problem regularly
6) Computer illiterate landowners will need help to post - same as computer illiterate hunters who want a deer license
7) May open up slightly more land for waterfowl and coyote hunters as you will be more easily able to turn posting on and off - if easily changed maybe some will leave green until closer to pheasant or deer season and open land back up again after they are done hunting - nobody is currently going around and taking down signs
8) Hunters will have ability to 'scout' where possibly open land is from their home computer vs. driving around and looking for areas w/ out posted signs
9) I don't know enough about guides/outfitters - if this keeps things the same as before or gives them additional opportunities?

Will hunting change w/ the passage of a bill of this nature, yes. Will some people quite - I guess that is always a possibility. Will it end hunting in ND forever - nope. People adapt and hunting is always changing - it will never be like it was back in the 60-70's w/ very little posted land - nothing will bring those days back. All we can do is try to maintain a cordial relationship between landowners and hunters where both benefit from the existence of the other.
 

Petras

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
1,680
Likes
298
Points
313
Location
Stanley
I'm assuming they would let a landowner change their mind about what they want to do with their own land at any time. That could definitely make for some interesting situations when a guy might get crabby about something the night before a season starts and changes everything from green to red.


I think Holms was just pointing out a flaw in the suggestion of hiring college kids in the summer to put up signs..

- - - Updated - - -

One problem I have with the amended version is that it would change the law for guides/outfitters so they would no longer be required to contact and obtain written permission from landowners.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-guide or anti-outfitter, I just don't feel this is right simply for the fact of they'd be able to profit off of someones land without them even knowing they were there or being compensated for it if they wanted to be compensated....

If they were to remove the stuff about guides that they tried to sneak in there, and then maybe stiffen the penalties for violators with this bill, I would probably get behind it.
 

Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,158
Likes
765
Points
463
Look reasonable to me - perfect, no - will there be hiccups, absolutely, but there are things that could be good for both hunters and landowners in the bill.

Couple random thoughts:

1) Supposedly will ease posting requirements for landowners - instead of replacing signs, it will be done online and should be an easier process.
2) Red will mean please don't bother asking - this should benefit both landowners (don't want to be bothered) and hunters (don't need to bother and getting turned down - sometimes nicely and sometimes maybe not so much)
3) Yellow will mean - ask and you may be given permission - maybe the contract information will be included in the database - not sure many will opt for this but possibly some will - same as current "ask before entering" option currently - don't see many signs, but have seen a few around
4) Green will be default and open - same as current - if you didn't post before you don't have to do anything now and nothing will change for landowner - hunter will benefit by knowing it is green instead of driving back and fourth a couple times to see if they missed a posted sign anywhere hiding in the grass
5) G&F can attempt to at least sample validate who is doing the posting - same process they use for gratis tags to make sure you are allowed to post land and have penalties for those that try to post where don't have permission - currently there is nothing to prevent anyone from posting anything - this should benefit hunters as I hear on NDA about this problem regularly
6) Computer illiterate landowners will need help to post - same as computer illiterate hunters who want a deer license
7) May open up slightly more land for waterfowl and coyote hunters as you will be more easily able to turn posting on and off - if easily changed maybe some will leave green until closer to pheasant or deer season and open land back up again after they are done hunting - nobody is currently going around and taking down signs
8) Hunters will have ability to 'scout' where possibly open land is from their home computer vs. driving around and looking for areas w/ out posted signs
9) I don't know enough about guides/outfitters - if this keeps things the same as before or gives them additional opportunities?

Will hunting change w/ the passage of a bill of this nature, yes. Will some people quite - I guess that is always a possibility. Will it end hunting in ND forever - nope. People adapt and hunting is always changing - it will never be like it was back in the 60-70's w/ very little posted land - nothing will bring those days back. All we can do is try to maintain a cordial relationship between landowners and hunters where both benefit from the existence of the other.

I see a little problem. Landowners who can not or will not bother to figure out the app, may be approached by fellows all too willing to help. As in.... we'll just push this here red button and we got this covered. wink wink
 


ndlongshot

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
1,795
Likes
155
Points
268
One thing is certain, theres no way this is ready for a vote this week. Tomorrow, none the less. Way too many questions and loose ends.

- - - Updated - - -

Another thing. I guarantee there will be all kinds of green land, thats posted because landowners wont participate in program. Maybe they need gray option as well. Not participating. Whats the point of having all this green land and people post anyways. Essentially thats how the system works now and none of this is needed. There WILL be a large percent of landowners who will never mess with this stupid database and just move forward business as usual. Or when they find out the state labeled their land open they will be pissed off. Gurantee there is landowners that dont even know these changes are being talked about let alone voted on this week. Again, just let stockmans take care of it, they have everyomes best interest in mind! ;)

- - - Updated - - -

:::
 

Obi-Wan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
8,850
Likes
5,533
Points
933
Location
Bismarck
Look reasonable to me - perfect, no - will there be hiccups, absolutely, but there are things that could be good for both hunters and landowners in the bill.

Couple random thoughts:

1) Supposedly will ease posting requirements for landowners - instead of replacing signs, it will be done online and should be an easier process.
2) Red will mean please don't bother asking - this should benefit both landowners (don't want to be bothered) and hunters (don't need to bother and getting turned down - sometimes nicely and sometimes maybe not so much)
3) Yellow will mean - ask and you may be given permission - maybe the contract information will be included in the database - not sure many will opt for this but possibly some will - same as current "ask before entering" option currently - don't see many signs, but have seen a few around
4) Green will be default and open - same as current - if you didn't post before you don't have to do anything now and nothing will change for landowner - hunter will benefit by knowing it is green instead of driving back and fourth a couple times to see if they missed a posted sign anywhere hiding in the grass
5) G&F can attempt to at least sample validate who is doing the posting - same process they use for gratis tags to make sure you are allowed to post land and have penalties for those that try to post where don't have permission - currently there is nothing to prevent anyone from posting anything - this should benefit hunters as I hear on NDA about this problem regularly
6) Computer illiterate landowners will need help to post - same as computer illiterate hunters who want a deer license
7) May open up slightly more land for waterfowl and coyote hunters as you will be more easily able to turn posting on and off - if easily changed maybe some will leave green until closer to pheasant or deer season and open land back up again after they are done hunting - nobody is currently going around and taking down signs
8) Hunters will have ability to 'scout' where possibly open land is from their home computer vs. driving around and looking for areas w/ out posted signs
9) I don't know enough about guides/outfitters - if this keeps things the same as before or gives them additional opportunities?

Will hunting change w/ the passage of a bill of this nature, yes. Will some people quite - I guess that is always a possibility. Will it end hunting in ND forever - nope. People adapt and hunting is always changing - it will never be like it was back in the 60-70's w/ very little posted land - nothing will bring those days back. All we can do is try to maintain a cordial relationship between landowners and hunters where both benefit from the existence of the other.

How does #2 benifit hunters? Landowners who now leave their land unposted because they don't want to be bothered could now put it in red for the very same reason they left it open with the present system.
 

KJS - ND

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2015
Posts
95
Likes
4
Points
98
How does #2 benifit hunters? Landowners who now leave their land unposted because they don't want to be bothered could now put it in red for the very same reason they left it open with the present system.

It benefits hunters because they will know with more certainty which landowners may be willing to allow you access with permission vs. those that don't want to be bothered. You do hear stories about landowners being less the courteous to hunters on certain occasions - could be landowner likes being a jerk, could be your the 843'd person to drive into his yard to ask permission to hunt his trees, could be he's two weeks behind on harvest and just having a bad day.

Landowners that leave their land open now because they don't want to be bothered won't have to do or change anything - just do nothing, you land stays green and you won't be bothered.
 

Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,158
Likes
765
Points
463
It benefits hunters because they will know with more certainty which landowners may be willing to allow you access with permission vs. those that don't want to be bothered. You do hear stories about landowners being less the courteous to hunters on certain occasions - could be landowner likes being a jerk.

Happens all the time. Out hunting on an unposted piece of land and don't who owns it...…..every time a pickup drives by you have that moment of dread whether or not it is going to slow down.
 


Migrator Man

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
3,968
Likes
26
Points
261
I'm assuming they would let a landowner change their mind about what they want to do with their own land at any time. That could definitely make for some interesting situations when a guy might get crabby about something the night before a season starts and changes everything from green to red.

being able to change it multiple times a season will cause a ton of issues. Like some said before there is not good cell service around the state so using the live app will not be possible in some areas. On X maps has a solution for areas with poor cell service by allowing the user to save map areas so they can use the app when offline. If landowners can change land status at random times during the season it will require users to constantly update the app to make sure they have the latest version. This WILL lead to confusion and to more conflicts with honest hunters and landowners. Some people will say how hard is it to keep your app updated but I will respond by asking you how good you are at keeping your phone software updated or how good your less electronic literate older relatives are at keeping their phones updated?

This app would solve some of the issues in a perfect world but it will not be the perfect tool it needs to be. Until it is functional I cannot get behind. We need to look at other ways to make it easier for landowners to post like using painted fence posts to signify posted land. We could require only one corner to have contact info but if it is torn down the land is still posted.

Finally this app will not reduce trespassing and may actually increase it due to the complexity of the app. It only makes it easier to post for computer literate landowners. If trespassing continues to be a problem the same groups will end up pushing for a new law .

- - - Updated - - -

Minnesota has a civil ticket they can write for trespass violations. They can write this pretty easily. There can also be criminal violations. To the best of my memory. Maybe that is what they are getting at.

- - - Updated - - -

This has become one big mess and needs to be studied and worked on over the next couple years.

Reducing the punishment for trespassing will only make trespassing worse. It needs to be stiffened with more enforcement if we want to reduce it from happening. Reduce the burden of proof and hire more game wardens if we want to reduce trespassing and would be a better use of the money than the app.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep, it looks like it would be required to be made available if they choose to post the land as "open to hunters upon receipt of permission". As far as posting it red or closed, it doesn't appear they would be required to provide their contact information... Doesn't mean you can't call them, you'd just have to find their contact info elsewhere I guess?

This is straight from the latest "amended" bill that someone posted on this forum.

20.1-18-02. Hunters access database.
1. The hunters access database must use color coding or other clear indicators to
designate private land in the state as open to hunters, closed to hunters, or open to
hunters upon receipt of permission from the owner or lawful occupant.
2. A landowner or lawful occupant may designate which of the three categories in
subsection 1 applies to the landowner's or occupant's land. Land for which a
landowner or lawful occupant does not designate a category must be indicated in the
database as open to hunters if the county in which the land is located is included in the
database.
3. If a landowner or lawful occupant designates land as open to hunters upon receipt of
permission, the landowner or lawful occupant shall provide contact information to be
included in the database for hunters to request permission to hunt on the land.

If I was a landowner there is zero benefit to signing up my land as yellow. Why post my address and a personal phone number for everyone to see so I can open myself up for a ton of calls during the year and especially during harvest? If a landowner is going to sign up they are going to sign up as red. I think no matter if it is red or yellow we should be able to see who has the land posted, but I don’t think anyone should be required to give out their phone number.

instead of an unproven app how about we make posting land easier for landowners and reduce the confusion on whether land is posted? If we allow painted fence posts on corners and telephone poles then trespassers won’t be able tear down or knock over signs. We also would not have to worry about not being able too see signs in tall grass or signs covered with snow. Painted posts would also last multiple seasons and could be provided by the game and fish.
 

Brian Renville

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Posts
4,144
Likes
64
Points
273
Location
Fairview, MT
Migrator Man instead of an unproven app how about we make posting land easier for landowners and reduce the confusion on whether land is posted? If we allow painted fence posts on corners and telephone poles then trespassers won’t be able tear down or knock over signs. We also would not have to worry about not being able too see signs in tall grass or signs covered with snow. Painted posts would also last multiple seasons and could be provided by the game and fish.[/QUOTE said:
I agree, at least that something in the middle here instead of such a drastic shift in the rules. It seems folks are still being pretty polite about the issue in order to not ruffle feathers which is good but if this passes and the alot of the concerns/fears for the average law abiding non-huntingland owner hunter come true there could be some serious repercussions at the ballot box and that won't be good for anyone.
 

Migrator Man

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
3,968
Likes
26
Points
261
Look reasonable to me - perfect, no - will there be hiccups, absolutely, but there are things that could be good for both hunters and landowners in the bill.

Couple random thoughts:

1) Supposedly will ease posting requirements for landowners - instead of replacing signs, it will be done online and should be an easier process.
2) Red will mean please don't bother asking - this should benefit both landowners (don't want to be bothered) and hunters (don't need to bother and getting turned down - sometimes nicely and sometimes maybe not so much)
3) Yellow will mean - ask and you may be given permission - maybe the contract information will be included in the database - not sure many will opt for this but possibly some will - same as current "ask before entering" option currently - don't see many signs, but have seen a few around
4) Green will be default and open - same as current - if you didn't post before you don't have to do anything now and nothing will change for landowner - hunter will benefit by knowing it is green instead of driving back and fourth a couple times to see if they missed a posted sign anywhere hiding in the grass
5) G&F can attempt to at least sample validate who is doing the posting - same process they use for gratis tags to make sure you are allowed to post land and have penalties for those that try to post where don't have permission - currently there is nothing to prevent anyone from posting anything - this should benefit hunters as I hear on NDA about this problem regularly
6) Computer illiterate landowners will need help to post - same as computer illiterate hunters who want a deer license
7) May open up slightly more land for waterfowl and coyote hunters as you will be more easily able to turn posting on and off - if easily changed maybe some will leave green until closer to pheasant or deer season and open land back up again after they are done hunting - nobody is currently going around and taking down signs
8) Hunters will have ability to 'scout' where possibly open land is from their home computer vs. driving around and looking for areas w/ out posted signs
9) I don't know enough about guides/outfitters - if this keeps things the same as before or gives them additional opportunities?

Will hunting change w/ the passage of a bill of this nature, yes. Will some people quite - I guess that is always a possibility. Will it end hunting in ND forever - nope. People adapt and hunting is always changing - it will never be like it was back in the 60-70's w/ very little posted land - nothing will bring those days back. All we can do is try to maintain a cordial relationship between landowners and hunters where both benefit from the existence of the other.

how will this app be better than the status quo if it is not perfect? We haven’t even seen the app in person so how do we know it will work as they say it will because it’s only a concept. Unless the bill reduces trespassing then it is pointless to have a new process that does little to reduce the problems we are currently facing. We need to focus on reducing the burden of proof and to make posting easier than it currently is.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree, at least that something in the middle here instead of such a drastic shift in the rules. It seems folks are still being pretty polite about the issue in order to not ruffle feathers which is good but if this passes and the alot of the concerns/fears for the average law abiding non-huntingland owner hunter come true there could be some serious repercussions at the ballot box and that won't be good for anyone.
I rather pay more for a license and provide landowners metal signs on posts. The game and fish could also make sure they are only giving them to the actual landowners and prevent random people from posting land that isn’t theirs. My two ideas will do much more towards reducing trespassing and making it easier to charge people than this unproven app will accomplish.
 

Petras

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
1,680
Likes
298
Points
313
Location
Stanley
being able to change it multiple times a season will cause a ton of issues. Like some said before there is not good cell service around the state so using the live app will not be possible in some areas. On X maps has a solution for areas with poor cell service by allowing the user to save map areas so they can use the app when offline. If landowners can change land status at random times during the season it will require users to constantly update the app to make sure they have the latest version. This WILL lead to confusion and to more conflicts with honest hunters and landowners. Some people will say how hard is it to keep your app updated but I will respond by asking you how good you are at keeping your phone software updated or how good your less electronic literate older relatives are at keeping their phones updated?

Sure, landowners could be tricky and try to change the status of their land on a guy while he's out there, but I see that being a very long shot of happening, and it could easily be dealt with... any change that is made would be time stamped in the database so if some sort of issue did come about from a landowner trying to pull something like that, it could be looked into and dealt with accordingly... I personally hunt all over the western third of the state from the SD border all the way up to the Canada border and I can tell you that I've never been without cell phone data signal for more than about 4 hours. Hell, I'm usually looking at onX maps in online mode while I decide on a place to hunt next.

This app would solve some of the issues in a perfect world but it will not be the perfect tool it needs to be. Until it is functional I cannot get behind. We need to look at other ways to make it easier for landowners to post like using painted fence posts to signify posted land. We could require only one corner to have contact info but if it is torn down the land is still posted.

The majority of landowners I've spoken to about this have one of 2 main gripes about the current setup.
1. they don't feel they should even have to post their land, they already go through the expense of purchasing it, maintaining it, etc.... it's their property and people should stay off unless the obtain permission.
or
2. They are sick of having to replace signs that are destroyed by assholes that call themselves hunters and mother nature. They don't like that it costs them time and money to do this.

Finally this app will not reduce trespassing and may actually increase it due to the complexity of the app. It only makes it easier to post for computer literate landowners. If trespassing continues to be a problem the same groups will end up pushing for a new law .

It would, in my personal opinion once fully implemented, eliminate all doubt about whether or not a piece of land is posted... No more sketchy posted signs that look like they are half torn down, or improperly "posted" chunks of land. No more "I looked for signs but I didn't see any" As far as computer illiterate people having issues, that can be dealt with in one way or another... We just went to online deer apps and some people had problems with that and they found a way to help those folks...


- - - Updated - - -



Reducing the punishment for trespassing will only make trespassing worse. It needs to be stiffened with more enforcement if we want to reduce it from happening. Reduce the burden of proof and hire more game wardens if we want to reduce trespassing and would be a better use of the money than the app.

- - - Updated - - -



If I was a landowner there is zero benefit to signing up my land as yellow. Why post my address and a personal phone number for everyone to see so I can open myself up for a ton of calls during the year and especially during harvest? If a landowner is going to sign up they are going to sign up as red. I think no matter if it is red or yellow we should be able to see who has the land posted, but I don’t think anyone should be required to give out their phone number.
How would providing a phone number to the database for land that is entered as yellow (hunting is allowed as long as permission is obtained first) be any different than calling the phone number listed on a posted sign? I mean if landowners don't want to be inundated with phone calls during harvest, why do some put their number on posted signs?
As far as there being zero benefit to landowners for posting their land as yellow, respectfully I disagree... Most of the landowners whose land I hunt on have their land posted not because they don't want to allow other people to hunt it, but because they want to know who the people hunting their land are and they want to make sure the hunters know where not to hunt because of cattle or structures etc...... The app, if done correctly, would make it virtually effortless for landowners to post their land however they would choose to have it.... I think it would also make it easier to prosecute people for trespassing with this app.

instead of an unproven app how about we make posting land easier for landowners and reduce the confusion on whether land is posted? If we allow painted fence posts on corners and telephone poles then trespassers won’t be able tear down or knock over signs. We also would not have to worry about not being able too see signs in tall grass or signs covered with snow. Painted posts would also last multiple seasons and could be provided by the game and fish.
Wouldn't this proposed database/map be the easiest of all for landowners? It would literally drop the cost of "posting" their land if they choose to, down to nothing more than about 5 minutes of their time... no monetary cost to the landowner... and as far as avoiding confusion goes, it seems pretty simple to comprehend in my opinion... Green means Good to go, Yellow means call the landowner and obtain permission prior to hunting, and Red basically means No Go.








Is creating an app the perfect solution? Depends who you ask.... I don't personally think it is the best solution possible, but it beats the alternatives we are faced with right now... Will the app be perfect in every aspect? No, probably not, but no app is perfect.
For now the app is just a concept that would serve one basic function: To convey a landowners wishes to people who would like to utilize their land. I'm sure there are a lot of ideas floating around out there on what features would make an app feasible and beneficial to both hunters and landowners.
 

Trip McNeely

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 16, 2015
Posts
1,718
Likes
974
Points
383
Location
Burleigh county
Id be all for using any money that is for this absolute garbage of a bill to instead be used for state supplied “official” metal posted signs....leave the system in place we have now. Supply long term signs to those who wish to post and make an effort to step up enforcement. We can shell out how many millions for new liscense plates. Why not posted signs? Sportsmen really do want to help and compromise but this bill went from bad to completely confusing garbage. Add on top of that this new bill would require continous monies and effort to launch and keep afloat many years down the road.
 


Boondoggle

New member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Posts
16
Likes
3
Points
58
Location
Boondocks
Does anybody know who is paying for this wonderful database proposal?

The original version was an opt-in program where the database would allow the landowner to show land open for hunting. The amended version is completely different such that all land would be considered open unless the land was signed up in the database. I'll take a wild guess and say 50% of the 38 million acres would need to be processed in the database. That's 19 million acres.

The State also estimated one staff could administer 500 agreements annually. Using the average 300 acres/agreement number in the fiscal note, that equates to roughly 63,000 agreements (19 million acres/300 acres per agreement). That equates to 127 FTE required to administer the agreements in the database. The current FTE level for the entire NDGF is around 160.

Does anybody know who would be in charge of supporting the database? The State? The State via a contract with private industry? If private, then add a percentage for profit to the total cost, say 10%.

The proposed database in all versions of SB 2315 is a big waste of time and money.
 
Last edited:

Migrator Man

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
3,968
Likes
26
Points
261
Is creating an app the perfect solution? Depends who you ask.... I don't personally think it is the best solution possible, but it beats the alternatives we are faced with right now... Will the app be perfect in every aspect? No, probably not, but no app is perfect.
For now the app is just a concept that would serve one basic function: To convey a landowners wishes to people who would like to utilize their land. I'm sure there are a lot of ideas floating around out there on what features would make an app feasible and beneficial to both hunters and landowners.
If you use on x maps and hunt out west where you don’t always have cell service you know that when you don’t have service in a certain location you cannot load the online maps and have to rely on the offline maps you downloaded. If you didn’t load the offline maps the day before you hunt you could have outdated maps where permission may have changed. A hunter can be proactive by scouting before going out using the online maps and then only go to those places the next day. Not all of us hunters hunt like that or should have to. What it boils down to is confusion to some that will undoubtedly lead to landowner conflicts whether the hunters meant to break the law or not because of an outdated map. This isn’t an issue in MT or WY because land use is set before the season and isn’t changed mid season.

To use the excuse that people didn’t see the sign and hunted on posted land is not valid. People will still hunt on posted land regardless of a posted sign or on the app. They can still claim ignorance even with the app. When a landowner catches someone on their land and it’s posted with even one sign the person can be charged with criminal trespass or hunting on posted land. At the end of the day the landowner will still need to catch the trespasser and will need to call a game warden or sheriff to get them brought to justice. They will need to photograph the culprits before they get away if the LEO don’t arrive before they leave. I want to know the statistics of slobs getting off because there was not enough posted signs or that some were weathered. This is why we need to invest in enforcement.

I know ethical hunters like myself don’t hunt posted land even if we only see one weathered sign. We know that even if it’s not legally posted were can still be charged with trespassing. This app does nothing to stop unethical people from trespassing and to claim it will is a falsehood
 

fireone

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Posts
778
Likes
62
Points
163
Has anyone tried to navigate the ND Legislative page to find the final amendment that is supposed to be voted tomorrow? If the new app for trespass is anything like the Legislative page landowners and hunters are both screwed. Now throw in probably thousands and thousands of landowners and renters. Good luck and goodbye state money.
 

Migrator Man

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
3,968
Likes
26
Points
261
The app could work perfectly if the only goal was to reduce the burden of posting land. To sell it as a way to prevent most unintentional trespassing is a stretch. Yes it would be easier for landowners but supplying metal signs or allowing paint to represent posting would also make it easier on landowners.

You still have not convinced me how putting your land as yellow has any benefit to a landowner. It has a ton of benefit to hunters but openly supplying your number is not something many are willing to do. Yes some put their phone number on their signs but I can’t think of many signs I have seen with that , maybe 5% if that much. Putting their number on a sign in the country is nothing like posting it on a widely accessible online database. I say leave them all red and allow landowners to have the option of putting down a number. Isolating them out as yellow will only concentrate focus on those few peoples and the overwhelming amount of calls will drive these people to post it red. There is a reason landowners don’t put their numbers on their signs even if they are willing to let people hunt after gaining permission

- - - Updated - - -

If the app isn’t perfect we will still have issues out there just like the system now isn’t perfect. Why go through building this database if we are still going to have issues. I bet we could use the money to have the game and fish post for every landowners and it still may be cheaper than this app. There is a lot that needs to be studied before we say this app is a solution.
 

Retired Educator

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Posts
3,253
Likes
225
Points
283
Location
North Dakota
Can't say I can guarantee I have read every post on this issue but a couple problems I see with the data base are:

1. Why does our G&F have to fund this database system. There is no evidence that this posting is for hunters only. Many of the problems have not been proven to be hunter related. (DAPL comes to mind)
2. If hunters are expected to be able to use this data plan while out hunting, do we have phone service all over the state? I don't. I lose coverage all over the state. While hunting last fall when the deer season had some colder than average temperatures, my phone was quickly losing it's charge while out walking. Phone batteries and cold weather don't mix well.
3. When will this law take affect if passed? And if passed, when will the data base be available?

Guarantee this data base will not work as well as everyone thinks, especially at first.

I am also a landowner and see no benefit to posting my cell phone # on said data base. My home phone is listed but not my cell and have no intention of providing that information and it is certainly the best way to get ahold of me.

I have no problem asking for permission to hunt. What I find in ND is the difficulty of determining who to ask. MT has the Block Management where most of it is sign in at a box somewhere along the perimeter. Clearly marked and easy and lots of it in parts of the state. We have PLOTS, similar but different. As I understand the Block Management (There are two types of BM, some you just sign in, some you have to have permission as the number of hunters /day is limited) the landowner is paid based on the number of hunters using the land. The better the hunting, the more the landowner is paid. Have had really good antelope hunting using BM in MT. Someone please correct me if I'm clearly off-base on my understanding of BM.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 306
  • This month: 303
  • This month: 91
  • This month: 86
  • This month: 70
  • This month: 56
  • This month: 52
  • This month: 47
  • This month: 44
  • This month: 42
Top Bottom