The "NEW" SB 2315 - Pucker Up Buttercup!

[NDSportsman]

Sent an email to all the senators, got a response back from 2 of them. 2 out of 47

 

[Vollmer]

Sent an email to all the senators, got a response back from 2 of them. 2 out of 47

What type of response are you getting? I talked to one, and he was VERY PRO for this bill.

 

[Jiffy]

why sell your guns first?

I'll need money for drugs.

 

[bravo]

Sent an email to all the senators, got a response back from 2 of them. 2 out of 47

Yep, been emailing since the beginning and I never hear back. I've never been involved in politics but the idea of running to get some of these people out is enticing. Especially since many run unopposed.

 

[duckman1302]

I received a response back from 2 senators. One said they were going to wait for it to hit the floor to decide and the other was all for this bill. Even told me I don't know what I am talking about and that I need to do more research. After a few heated back and forths with him I feel like I am getting him to see things from my side, but will still likely be voting yes.

 

[Migrator Man]

What type of response are you getting? I talked to one, and he was VERY PRO for this bill.

Was it Oley Larson, he is crazy, I can’t believe people in Minot keep electing him granted the democrat choice probably isn’t any better

- - - Updated - - -

the information source onx uses is pretty reliable by its nature. and i don't believe their presentation of said information is subject to human error based on input from their end. so, i would be very surprised to find out they were wrong. for them to have wrong information, the county recorders office would likely have to have wrong information.

I wish someone with your first hand knowledge could have testified during the committee hearing. Sharing your experience would be something hopefully both sides would listen to and consider. I just feel like there are so many generalities being propped up on both sides with substance behind them.

 

[Vollmer]

Was it Oley Larson

Yes it was.

I realized quickly that he and I were not going to find a common ground.

 

[guywhofishes]

I'll need money for drugs.

that's where the guns come in handy, fool

(picked up that bit of knowledge in south Chicago)

 

[Whisky]

that's where the guns come in handy, fool

(picked up that bit of knowledge in south Chicago)

I got a better idea, you pay him to patrol your land with said guns. Win/win Thumbs Up

 

[Marbleyes]

the information source onx uses is pretty reliable by its nature. and i don't believe their presentation of said information is subject to human error based on input from their end. so, i would be very surprised to find out they were wrong. for them to have wrong information, the county recorders office would likely have to have wrong information.

E, I think you'd be shocked at how often courthouse information is either wrong or inaccurate. I would guess onx gets their information from the tax rolls or more likely from county plat maps because there is no way they run title on all of that land.

Either way, errors are more common than you would think. Neither recorders, nor county auditors run title from the patent to present day so they are relying on the information that they "inherited" from previous recorders and auditors. It's not very hard to imagine how human error can easily happen when information was transferred from hand written records to the auditors or recorders computers to the database systems that some counties use now. One simple wrong click or incorrect typed legal description means you won't find the documents proving correct ownership recorded or entered against the legal description you are trying to follow.

It happens more often than you would think. Not to mention the fact that attorneys occasionally type the wrong legal description in deeds. I literally just ran into this scenario a week ago while running title. The attorney typed the wrong township in the legal description in two different deeds so both deeds were recorded against the incorrect legal description. I won't bore you with the details of how I stumbled upon it but it was mostly luck and some experience that triggered me to dig deeper. Anyway, if I hadn't stumbled across what I did, I would have had the wrong legal surface owner since those deeds were recorders against the wrong legal description. I have example after example of this very thing and other simple mistakes that alter record ownership of land/minerals. Needless to say, I have zero faith that the database system they are proposing would be any different.

 

[Fitz]

Email sent. I will post what responses (if any) I receive.


Also, I just want to say thank you for everyone who has sent emails to the senators as well as those on this site that take time and keep others up to date on topics like this. I appreciate it.

 

[Whisky]

I would encourage you to follow up on that, for your own knowledge and to maybe get OnX to update if incorrect to prevent future conflicts.

Ive also seen the same type of discrepancy before but where OnX was correct and the fence wasn’t. I asked the landowner and he told me the fence wasn’t on the property line due to difficulty fencing that area. He said I could legally cross the fence and travel about 100 yards before I was no longer on public land and instead on private.

To the original intent of this thread, these two incidents illustrate there are issues inherent with the use of an online database.

I contacted the area warden and he confirmed via plat book that the spot I had in question was public. So as I suspected. This landowner also ran his fence up top a ridge vs the bottom of the draw and apparently in his eyes owns that public land now.

That said, the warden also confirmed there are discrepancies within OnX and that there have been prosecutions because of it. He said the burden is on hunters to use all available resources to know where they are at. Having a county plat book might not be a bad idea to have in conjunction with OnX. The plat is what the warden used to determine my spot was on public. So if it works for him I assume it works for us. He says they are more accurate then OnX.

 

[Wirehair]

For those that e-mailed Senators, wondering if anyone has received a reply from Senator Terry Wanzek of Jamestown? I have received replys from three Senators, however I found Senator Zanzek's response to be somewhat arrogant. Somewhere between a lecture and suggesting that I was not well informed on the amended bill. As he is not my Senator, I was pleasantly surprised to receive a timely response however disappointed with message.

 

[njsimonson]

...I found Senator Wanzek's response to be somewhat arrogant. Somewhere between a lecture and suggesting that I was not well informed....

You are not alone, but it's not unexpected as he's deep in the pocket of lots of special interests. This adds to the consensus from others who have gotten back on vote counts and responses...my guess is at this point, it's a C&P response from Wanzek to anyone who opposes 2315.

 

[Kurtr]

I contacted the area warden and he confirmed via plat book that the spot I had in question was public. So as I suspected. This landowner also ran his fence up top a ridge vs the bottom of the draw and apparently in his eyes owns that public land now.

That said, the warden also confirmed there are discrepancies within OnX and that there have been prosecutions because of it. He said the burden is on hunters to use all available resources to know where they are at. Having a county plat book might not be a bad idea to have in conjunction with OnX. The plat is what the warden used to determine my spot was on public. So if it works for him I assume it works for us. He says they are more accurate then OnX.

Wardens here just use onX and the ones in Idaho to.

 

[Brian Renville]

Does this thing have a chance to pass? When this discussion started I was thinking no way. The more people I talk to and now I just read through this site’s Facebook thread and I’m thinking this could be a lot closer.

 

[Holmsvc]

For those that e-mailed Senators, wondering if anyone has received a reply from Senator Terry Wanzek of Jamestown? I have received replys from three Senators, however I found Senator Zanzek's response to be somewhat arrogant. Somewhere between a lecture and suggesting that I was not well informed on the amended bill. As he is not my Senator, I was pleasantly surprised to receive a timely response however disappointed with message.

His response to me was extremely arrogant! He also tried telling me I didn’t know what I was talking about.

 

[Davey Crockett]

I have been looking for the amended bill since I first heard it was going to be amended and I haven't saw it. I've heard rumors how bad it is from others that probably don't have a clue what the changes are and quite a few people with the sky is falling attitude are stretching the truth to get others to take action and "Join the fight" . AKA dogpile anyone that doesn't agree 100% with hunters .
Based on the responses I see on here I'd say senator Wanzak is probably right . Sportsmen are sometimes their own enemy and reality is going to feel like a brick to some .

 

[njsimonson]

I have been looking for the amended bill since I first heard it was going to be amended and I haven't saw it.

Did you check the first post of this thread?

Here’s the current version of the amendment in PDF (not final released version...but I'm guessing it's pretty close).

 

[SLE]

No, Davy would rather run his trap.

Sorry, it’s a big pet peeve of mine when people can’t have the courtesy to read through a thread and sift through all the info before posting. My responses normally get a bit snarky at that point!