Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="njsimonson" data-source="post: 248238" data-attributes="member: 1507"><a href="https://www.legis.nd.gov/contact-my-legislators" target="_blank">https://www.legis.nd.gov/contact-my-legislators</a> - Contact the senate one last time...my final thoughts sent this morning are below:Good Morning Senators –Before you today sits consideration of SB 2315.  In my final message to you before the vote, I have seen the previously amended version and the notes regarding Friday’s additions, and as you consider this bill, I’d encourage you to vote NO on SB 2315 for the following reasons:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Ultimately, the amended version does nothing to curb the perceived issue of criminal trespass, which among 140,000+ hunters dropped last year to 48 offenses. In fact, in the notes I was provided from Friday, the amended bill will allow a first offense to be treated as an infraction.  Sportsmen and landowners have argued against this and have asked for steeper penalties throughout this process as a deterrent for criminals and troublemakers.</li> </ol><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">This version sets forth a law creating a database to be managed by a committee.  It doesn’t propose it as a study, a continuing resolution or interim group, but rather sets forth an untested solution as law at the expense of the state which will certainly total in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more than a million and place the cart before the horse.  While it is a good theory, in practice it will take validation, testing, fine-tuning and close management to make it successful – all things that should be vetted before it becomes the law of the land.</li> </ol><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The database will also rely on physical posting in many areas, therefore not curtailing the expense and time required of landowners who want to be certain that people know to stay off - and in those counties where the GIS/ownership information is currently not available or not made public such as Ransom and at least a dozen others - the database will not serve its purpose of helping hunters identify lands and contact information for owners to contact for access.</li> </ol><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">While the amended version is an attempted compromise, it comes too late.  The sponsors knew what they were up against, and rallied an impressive showing, however they did not have this ready and were forced to put it all together without much consideration or oversight, up against the voting and crossover deadlines before you.  We cannot rush this, but I can promise you – as both a sportsman, and a person with land ownership interests – we will find a way to better solutions in the next year, if you will vote no.  Place your faith in me, and the hundreds of landowner-sportsmen out there to find it together, as we have addressed many possible solutions, including:</li> </ol><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Making all criminal trespass (12.1 and 20.1) at least an A-Misdemeanor (deterrence/respect);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Automatic forfeiture of all firearms in any trespass conviction, with auction to benefit a Posting Relief Fund (deterrence/respect);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Automatic 1-year loss of hunting licensure in all compact states for any violation of a criminal trespass statute in ND (deterrence/respect);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Creation of a Posting Relief Fund for landowners, with a $2 surcharge on all hunting and fishing licenses each year (~$1.2M/annually) where landowners can get reimbursed for expenses and time spent on the posting process (cost in time and money);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Creation of a jointly-drafted sportsman-landowner-G&F module for All Future Hunter’s Ed courses on land access which includes i) Identifying posted and unposted lands, ii) respecting all signage, even if old, faded or not properly placed; iii) tips on talking to landowners and building relationships; and iv) utilizing land ID guides (Google Maps, PLOTS guide, GIS, platbook, app, GPS, Trax/OnX chips, etc.) to identify boundaries of all lands.  (education & prevention)</li> </ol>None of these are as sweeping and drastic as SB 2315, nor do they cost much money, and in fact, would generate funds which many sportsmen have stated they’d be glad to pay in order to keep public access to millions of acres of unposted land available to ND residents and visitors alike.In the end, the emotions which have run high in this debate must be cast aside.   Not all sportsmen are “entitled” because they access unposted land, just like landowners aren’t “lazy” because they don’t want to post.  Those are the weakest arguments, and emotion is never a good ground for any legislation.  You must look at the facts and law as it sits today, and ask yourself if a problem exists, and if this amended SB 2315 solves such a problem. I present that the answer to both questions is NO. Thank you all for your time and attention in this process, I know it has not been easy.  I wish you the best in your consideration today and ask that you vote NO on SB 2315, and thank you for your public service. Sincerely,</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA