The "NEW" SB 2315 - Pucker Up Buttercup!

[fireone]

X2. Can anyone who knows post up how the individual senators on the Ag Committee voted? Will they have enough backbone to put their name behind it?

 

[ndlongshot]

I think they will. Money talks. So does the ballot box.

 

[eyexer]

Sounds like the citizens need to step in and straighten out some of the games these clowns play

 

[Dirty]

[FONT=&quot]Here's the letter I got back from one of the sponsors of this bill, Robert Erbele


What does SB2315 do? It is a pro hunter and a pro landowner bill[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]For the hunter….[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Nothing changes for the ethical hunter. until the system is in place it will be business as usual. The hunter will still need to seek permission to hunt posted land.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. The database once operational will provide better access, as it takes out the guesswork of who owns the land, and what land is open without asking. .a. green or some other indicator would be lands open to hunting. It is the default designation and the landowner does not need to do anything in regards to registering on the database.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]b. yellow would be land open to hunting with permission. No difference from what hunters do now when they are seeking a relationship with a landowner. The landowner will be required to provide contact information on the database. The hunter will now know who to contact no matter where the land is located, and the landowner will know who is on the land. c. red would be land closed to hunting, which is no different than finding a posted sign and the landowner says no. However, that does not prohibit the hunter from asking or the owner granting permission. Remember it is always about building good relationships.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]For the landowner…………[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Once the system is in place the landowner can post online saving the time and expense of physical posting.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. Land open to hunting requires no action (green)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. Land where the owner wants to control access and requires permission will require providing contact information on a secure site. (yellow)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4. Owner can close land to hunting. (red) i.e. areas around farmsteads or pastures with cattle.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]5. Hunting trespass penalties apply during the hunting seasons in posted red and yellow zones. At all other times private land is protected by the criminal tresspass law.[/FONT]

 

[FishSticks]

Regardless of the outcome of this bill I plan to donate campaign money to the opposition of anyone that votes for this dumpster fire in the next election. It may not be much if there is a bunch of 'yes' votes but it maybe it makes a difference. More importantly I plan reach out to any contacts I have in those districts to encourage them to vote against their rep.

Edit: First contribution will be for whoever runs against Erbele

 

[fireone]

Sen. Erble is sending that same letter to anyone who opposes the bill. My senator will vote against it and Erble asked him to forward to me. Seeeesh. The sob wouldn't even show the wording of his bill for the last month.

just heard it is out of committee and headed to the senate floor Monday or Tuesday. Last chance to make your voice heard now.

 

[njsimonson]

Reminds me of my favorite line from "The Devil's Advocate"

 

[Migrator Man]

[FONT=&quot]Here's the letter I got back from one of the sponsors of this bill, Robert Erbele


What does SB2315 do? It is a pro hunter and a pro landowner bill[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]For the hunter….[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Nothing changes for the ethical hunter. until the system is in place it will be business as usual. The hunter will still need to seek permission to hunt posted land.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. The database once operational will provide better access, as it takes out the guesswork of who owns the land, and what land is open without asking. .a. green or some other indicator would be lands open to hunting. It is the default designation and the landowner does not need to do anything in regards to registering on the database.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]b. yellow would be land open to hunting with permission. No difference from what hunters do now when they are seeking a relationship with a landowner. The landowner will be required to provide contact information on the database. The hunter will now know who to contact no matter where the land is located, and the landowner will know who is on the land. c. red would be land closed to hunting, which is no different than finding a posted sign and the landowner says no. However, that does not prohibit the hunter from asking or the owner granting permission. Remember it is always about building good relationships.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]For the landowner…………[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Once the system is in place the landowner can post online saving the time and expense of physical posting.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. Land open to hunting requires no action (green)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. Land where the owner wants to control access and requires permission will require providing contact information on a secure site. (yellow)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4. Owner can close land to hunting. (red) i.e. areas around farmsteads or pastures with cattle.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]5. Hunting trespass penalties apply during the hunting seasons in posted red and yellow zones. At all other times private land is protected by the criminal tresspass law.[/FONT]

If this app actually works with no bugs or issues than it wouldn’t be so bad. Until it is functional and can prove it works we cannot rely on it for posting. They need to guarantee that only the landowners are able to post the land and that the burden of proof of posting is what the app says. Eberle claims the default if the landowner doesn’t act is open to hunting so we will see if that verbiage is in the final bill. I don’t trust the sponsors of the bill the same as I don’t trust public lands in the hands of the farm bureau. I don’t foresee much yellow in this app and most of the land will be red or green. I am also offended that I am not considered an ethical hunter if I don’t ask permission to hunt unposted land even though this app will still allow it.

 

[Obi-Wan]

Here's the letter I got back from one of the sponsors of this bill, Robert Erbele


What does SB2315 do? It is a pro hunter and a pro landowner bill
For the hunter….
1. Nothing changes for the ethical hunter. until the system is in place it will be business as usual. The hunter will still need to seek permission to hunt posted land.
2. The database once operational will provide better access, as it takes out the guesswork of who owns the land, and what land is open without asking. .a. green or some other indicator would be lands open to hunting. It is the default designation and the landowner does not need to do anything in regards to registering on the database.
b. yellow would be land open to hunting with permission. No difference from what hunters do now when they are seeking a relationship with a landowner. The landowner will be required to provide contact information on the database. The hunter will now know who to contact no matter where the land is located, and the landowner will know who is on the land. c. red would be land closed to hunting, which is no different than finding a posted sign and the landowner says no. However, that does not prohibit the hunter from asking or the owner granting permission. Remember it is always about building good relationships.
For the landowner…………
1. Once the system is in place the landowner can post online saving the time and expense of physical posting.
2. Land open to hunting requires no action (green)
3. Land where the owner wants to control access and requires permission will require providing contact information on a secure site. (yellow)
4. Owner can close land to hunting. (red) i.e. areas around farmsteads or pastures with cattle.
5. Hunting trespass penalties apply during the hunting seasons in posted red and yellow zones. At all other times private land is protected by the criminal tresspass law.

Who will be liable for the accuracy of the data base? will it be the state or will it fall on the hunter?

How will they protect the data base from fraud? It's not like there has never been land posted by someone who wasn't authorized

example - landowner A knows that land owner B is not from the area and doesn't care if people hunt the land. Landowner A registers the land of landowner B for no hunting without landowner B's knowledge. Unless landowner B went on the site and noticed his land was registered as no hunting the only one who would know was it is open is landowner A and he would have hunting access while everyone else would think it was posted.

 

[Vollmer]

It is the default designation and the landowner does not need to do anything in regards to registering on the database.

If this is how it ends up, and they can somehow verify that proper people are doing the "posting", then I am kind of okay with this.

Just my honest opinion. It is basically the same system as now, except in an app.

 

[Trip McNeely]

Do you guys really think alot of people will go with green? Given the option of red or green i would guess most will go red knowing they cant be asked to hunt if its labeled red..... the reason alot of ground is left unposted is because they dont want to be hasseled.... how many landowners are going to advertise on a phone app their land is a free for all? No way am I buying this.... most will make their property red and only let a few people they know on it.

 

[Vollmer]

Do you guys really think alot of people will go with green? Given the option of red or green i would guess most will go red knowing they cant be asked to hunt if its labeled red..... the reason alot of ground is left unposted is because they dont want to be hasseled.... how many landowners are going to advertise on a phone app their land is a free for all? No way am I buying this.... most will make their property red and only let a few people they know on it.

I am hoping it is a bit of a process (as it should be) in order to get authorization to be a "poster" for your land on the app.

I am with you, on being nervous about all of this.

 

[Trip McNeely]

Then what happens when a landowner “forgets” to update every year and the land is set back to default green? How many hunters will get chewed out for huntin “posted” unposted ground then? This whole system is just changing one set of problems( arguable they even exist) for a whole new set of problems.

 

[pointer]

Yep from the report the other day on KX it seemed like it was good for everybody, much like the b's that Erbele is spewing, that is what makes it dangerous, if it passes it will save me about a hundred bucks in license fees a year and a lot more from my job, as a lot of our patrons are from out of state hunters, not to mention how many homes in small communities will be soon up for sale. Too much bullshit to go through to hunt a few pheasants. That is why they leave their own state's to hunt here. Stupid stupid stupid

 

[Trip McNeely]

I am hoping it is a bit of a process (as it should be) in order to get authorization to be a "poster" for your land on the app.

I am with you, on being nervous about all of this.

agreed but then we will hear the argument that the process for posting land online is too tedious and burdensome. For crying out loud just put up posted signs and step up enforcment already. Maybe we as a a society should try a simple approach first before up-ending every time a small issue arises.

 

[Vollmer]

Then what happens when a landowner “forgets” to update every year and the land is set back to default green? How many hunters will get chewed out for huntin “posted” unposted ground then? This whole system is just changing one set of problems( arguable they even exist) for a whole new set of problems.

I wonder if they will require them to update every year, or if it just stays as is, until changed??

As far as hunting "green" land, the app would, I ASSUME (yes, I know what happens when you assume), log date/time that it was changed.

Now that you mention it, they should almost make the app show incoming changes. If a landowner requests an area of their land to be "red", it will show that to the public for "X" days, before it is actually changed. Maybe that is too complicated ...

 

[Vollmer]

agreed but then we will hear the argument that the process for posting land online is too tedious and burdensome. For crying out loud just put up posted signs and step up enforcment already. Maybe we as a a society should try a simple approach first before up-ending every time a small issue arises.

This has been my argument all along. I could not agree with you more.

 

[fireone]

Maybe I'm not looking at the latest language but in the version I saw there was no mention of annual updating. We'll find out tonight what it actually says.

 

[Reprobait]

I saw on KX News this evening that there is a press conference on this bill on Monday.

 

[Retired Educator]

Have you watched any of the political press conferences lately? Don't trust most of the press to ask questions unless the question pushes their issue. Politicians will answer questions without telling you anything that doesn't fit their agenda.

As far as the owner posting. My wife and I manage the family farm with owners on both coasts. They certainly will have no idea what to say if someone calls them to ask permission.