Updated SB 2315 Online

[Davey Crockett]

I copied and pasted this from ND bowhunters association. After reading some of the comments on here I wonder how many versions of this bill have been interpreted and rewritten by individuals and media since it left the senate floor . If landowner does nothing it stays green that means it is open to hunting and you guys are calling it a anti hunting anti trespassing bill ?




Senate Bill SB 2315, the "No Trespass Bill" has passed the Senate 28 - 18.
The bill will now cross over to the House side for their debate and a vote. It will be a while before the vote happens.
SB 2315 is totally different than when it was presented. here is a synopsis of what it is now.
SB 2315
What Does 2315 Do?
It is a pro-hunter and pro-landowner bill.
For the hunter:
• Nothing changes for the ethical hunter.
• Until the system is in place it will be business as usual. The hunter will still need to ask permission to hunt posted land.
• Once the database is operational it will provide better access as it takes out the guess work of who owns the land and what land is open without needing to ask.
• The land ownership will be coded as follows:
o 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 regarding registering on the database.
o 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.
o 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:
• Once the system is in place the landowner can post online saving the time and expense of physical posting.
• Land open to hunting requires no action (green)
• Land where the owner wants to control access and requires permission will require providing contact information on a secure site. (yellow)
• Owner can close land to hunting. (red) i.e. areas around farmsteads or pastures with cattle.
• 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 trespass law.
• Physical posting of land will override anything that is listed in the database
• Landowners or the legal occupant may list different tracts of land with different designation regarding access
• Landowners, through a secure website, will be able to change how their land is classified
Other Comments:
• The trespass penalties remain the same as in existing law
• This is a reasonable approach that allows time to develop the best system that will help build the relationship between hunters and landowners
• The phase-in of the database will give IT professionals more time to ensure a sound, accurate, more complete, and useful resource
• The amended bill represents many months of discussion and drafting to address landowners' property rights, and sportsmen's concerns about information and access
• Long range plan is to be able to possibly designate times land is closed or open as well as species open to hunt (someone may designate land open to waterfowl but closed for deer); these options will more than likely come after a successful implementation of the initial phase
SB 2315 will result in a useful tool for sportsmen and eliminate the time and financial burden of signing for landowners

- - - Updated - - -

It's not perfect but nothing ever is.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10156943725949598&id=238375304597&__tn__=K-R

 

[Migrator Man]

I copied and pasted this from ND bowhunters association. After reading some of the comments on here I wonder how many versions of this bill have been interpreted and rewritten by individuals and media since it left the senate floor . If landowner does nothing it stays green that means it is open to hunting and you guys are calling it a anti hunting anti trespassing bill ?




Senate Bill SB 2315, the "No Trespass Bill" has passed the Senate 28 - 18.
The bill will now cross over to the House side for their debate and a vote. It will be a while before the vote happens.
SB 2315 is totally different than when it was presented. here is a synopsis of what it is now.
SB 2315
What Does 2315 Do?
It is a pro-hunter and pro-landowner bill.
For the hunter:
• Nothing changes for the ethical hunter.
• Until the system is in place it will be business as usual. The hunter will still need to ask permission to hunt posted land.
• Once the database is operational it will provide better access as it takes out the guess work of who owns the land and what land is open without needing to ask.
• The land ownership will be coded as follows:
o 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 regarding registering on the database.
o 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.
o 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:
• Once the system is in place the landowner can post online saving the time and expense of physical posting.
• Land open to hunting requires no action (green)
• Land where the owner wants to control access and requires permission will require providing contact information on a secure site. (yellow)
• Owner can close land to hunting. (red) i.e. areas around farmsteads or pastures with cattle.
• 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 trespass law.
• Physical posting of land will override anything that is listed in the database
• Landowners or the legal occupant may list different tracts of land with different designation regarding access
• Landowners, through a secure website, will be able to change how their land is classified
Other Comments:
• The trespass penalties remain the same as in existing law
• This is a reasonable approach that allows time to develop the best system that will help build the relationship between hunters and landowners
• The phase-in of the database will give IT professionals more time to ensure a sound, accurate, more complete, and useful resource
• The amended bill represents many months of discussion and drafting to address landowners' property rights, and sportsmen's concerns about information and access
• Long range plan is to be able to possibly designate times land is closed or open as well as species open to hunt (someone may designate land open to waterfowl but closed for deer); these options will more than likely come after a successful implementation of the initial phase
SB 2315 will result in a useful tool for sportsmen and eliminate the time and financial burden of signing for landowners

- - - Updated - - -

It's not perfect but nothing ever is.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10156943725949598&id=238375304597&__tn__=K-R

No one has answered how this app is going to work on our phones without cell service and how someone without a smart phone is supposed access this database. Hunting is going to be a privilege to those who are lucky enough to have a smart phone and that’s not right. There are many of us sportsmen that spend thousands of dollars on hunting every year but we must not forget there is less fortunate folks that hunt to sustain their families and spend much less than $100 a year to hunt. The more hunting becomes a right man sport the more susceptible it is to threats from groups like PETA and HSUS

 

[Kurtr]

$100 dollars a year? You have lots of great arguments against this but this is not one. To kill enough meat you have well over 100 into either gas or ammo or gear or processing equipment or hell even spices. I have figured it out and it is way cheaper to just go to the store and buy beef that is for a family of 3 and at that if they are that down and out they would qualify for snap so they could use the money for something else that is a need not a want. Hunting to sustain a family is not economically possible in the lower 48 if saving money is the goal

 

[Davey Crockett]

If cell phone reception is an issue in an area that you hunt then you might be forced into learning a new and very useful trick called saving a screenshot. It took me about 20 seconds to learn.

 

[Walleye_Chaser]

If cell phone reception is an issue in an area that you hunt then you might be forced into learning a new and very useful trick called saving a screenshot. It took me about 20 seconds to learn.

Taking screenshots of a whole unit for example, might be a little ridiculous.

 

[fly2cast]

I copied and pasted this from ND bowhunters association. After reading some of the comments on here I wonder how many versions of this bill have been interpreted and rewritten by individuals and media since it left the senate floor . If landowner does nothing it stays green that means it is open to hunting and you guys are calling it a anti hunting anti trespassing bill ?

This is what I thought I had heard also: If the landowner does nothing it stays green. However after reading the bill as it is, I don't see anywhere where it says that land is designated as green by default: https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/66-2019/documents/19-0896-02000.pdf

 

[Davey Crockett]

20.1 - 18 - 02. Hunters access database.1. The hunters access database must use color coding or other clear indicators todesignate private land in the state as open to hunters, closed to hunters, or open to hunters with 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 alandowner or lawful occupant does not designate a category must be indicated in thedatabase as open to hunters if the county in which the land is located is included in thedatabase.

 

[fly2cast]

20.1 - 18 - 02. Hunters access database.1. The hunters access database must use color coding or other clear indicators todesignate private land in the state as open to hunters, closed to hunters, or open to hunters with 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 alandowner or lawful occupant does not designate a category must be indicated in thedatabase as open to hunters if the county in which the land is located is included in thedatabase.

Thank you. I read through that I guess. I'm going to have to rethink this. It may not be as bad as I once thought.

 

[Davey Crockett]

Tourism they said, Everybody should come to North Dakota and see what we have and we should create a bunch of good jobs and we will grow and thrive.

This is the result, We were doing just fine a few years ago.

 

[guywhofishes]

what does this part mean? If a county isn't in the database it's all posted? why wouldn't a county be in the database?

"if the county in which the land is located is included in the database"

 

[Davey Crockett]

Taking screenshots of a whole unit for example, might be a little ridiculous.

I don't travel and rely on my phone as much these days so I am out of the loop on coverage but are there actually still large areas of ND without cell coverage ?

 

[628977]

yes there is

 

[Brian Renville]

Thank you. I read through that I guess. I'm going to have to rethink this. It may not be as bad as I once thought.

Green doesn't mean it's open to hunt though. It may just mean the landowner hasn't taken any action on the database, posting the old fashioned way trumps the database.

 

[Davey Crockett]

Thank you. I read through that I guess. I'm going to have to rethink this. It may not be as bad as I once thought.

If North Dakota bowhunters association supports this bill it must not be all bad for hunters.

 

[Walleye_Chaser]

I don't travel and rely on my phone as much these days so I am out of the loop on coverage but are there actually still large areas of ND without cell coverage ?

Yeah I think it depends on your cell carrier. Verizon is generally pretty good, but I've heard sprint it terrible in most of ND. There are still large areas you can't get decent internet access though.

 

[fly2cast]

Green doesn't mean it's open to hunt though. It may just mean the landowner hasn't taken any action on the database, posting the old fashioned way trumps the database.

Correct. But the benefit to the hunter may be that we will then have landowner phone numbers if we need them and the database will also identify who owns the land.

 

[Migrator Man]

Correct. But the benefit to the hunter may be that we will then have landowner phone numbers if we need them and the database will also identify who owns the land.

They are not required to list a working phone number and if I owned the land I wouldn’t post my number either. This is why people don’t want their phone number in the phone book.

Like I said before the database idea could work but right now it’s just ideas on paper with a ton of unanswered question marks. Sportsmen will still have to look out for posted signs because that still trumps the database. The same issues we currently have will continue to exist and the same groups will still push to make everything automatically posted.

 

[PrairieGhost]

If North Dakota bowhunters association supports this bill it must not be all bad for hunters.

I have bow hunted every year since I was 12 years old. We bowhunt different that all other hunting. We may have one to six blinds or tree stands set up and that is where we always go. We always talk to the landowner, and it's usually the same land year after year after year that we hunt. We hunt it and very seldom anywhere else.

I was a regional rep for the North Dakota Bowhunters. I don't know how they do it now, but the president at that time was from Dickinson. He appointed the regional reps, then they were the only one who voted for president. Little surprise that the organizations may have the same president for 15 or 20 years. It's infiltrated with traditional archers. I paid $850 for a custom longbow myself, but I'm not so short sited that I go around knocking compounds. Last fall I had to use a crossbow. I was looking foward to getting back to my longbow, but the doctor tells me that's a fantasy. So the North Dakota Bowhunters should not be looked at as an organization that represents all hunters, not even all bowhunters.

I disagreed with the North Dakota Bowhunters once and he appointed a new regional kiss up. I know, I know it's hard to imagine me disagreeing.

 

[Migrator Man]

If North Dakota bowhunters association supports this bill it must not be all bad for hunters.

Bowhunting pretty much mandates sportsmen to get permission to hunt private land because of having to set up tree stands. I don’t know a bow hunter that will set up a blind or tree stand to leave on private land. This law will affect that kind of hunting the least.

- - - Updated - - -

$100 dollars a year? You have lots of great arguments against this but this is not one. To kill enough meat you have well over 100 into either gas or ammo or gear or processing equipment or hell even spices. I have figured it out and it is way cheaper to just go to the store and buy beef that is for a family of 3 and at that if they are that down and out they would qualify for snap so they could use the money for something else that is a need not a want. Hunting to sustain a family is not economically possible in the lower 48 if saving money is the goal

Obviously that is not the case for the average family but there are some families that do this on a tiny budget ex. only paying for gas because they have all of the other equipment. This may not be very common but families like this are out there.

 

[Brian Renville]

They are not required to list a working phone number and if I owned the land I wouldn’t post my number either. This is why people don’t want their phone number in the phone book.

Like I said before the database idea could work but right now it’s just ideas on paper with a ton of unanswered question marks. Sportsmen will still have to look out for posted signs because that still trumps the database. The same issues we currently have will continue to exist and the same groups will still push to make everything automatically posted.

That's a bigger issue here than people give it credit for. Coming the folks I talked to about this over and over they say "there is no reason I should ever have to post my private property in order to keep people off of it." If in fact thst's where this is going this database will just be a pile of wasted cash in the path of the inevitable.