# Nelson County..GF Hearld article



## NDJ (Jun 11, 2002)

anyone else catch this....the county wants to close all non-posted land...This is right in the duck belt.

this fits hand & hand with FB's suit


----------



## SiouxperDave25 (Oct 6, 2002)

From the May 28, 2003 issue of the Benson County Farmers Press:

Benson County commissioners were intrigued by an amendment to a zoning ordinance in Nelson County which was passed by commissioners there. The amendment states:

"All lands in Nelson county, within the Agricultural District, shall be closed to all public hunting, of every kind and nature, unless the owner or tenant thereof shall post the land as 'Open to Public Hunting' and no one may hunt without specific written permission of the farmer/owner. The signs must be readable from the outside of the land, placed conspicuously and not more than every one-half mile (880 yards) apart on unfenced areas and at the gates on fenced areas."

Nelson County commissioners also changed the penalty section to make it a class B misdemeanor to hunt on land which has not been posted as "open to public hunting."


----------



## Perry Thorvig (Mar 6, 2002)

Usually, counties and cities cannot pass laws that are in conflict with state laws. It appears that somebody in Nelson county is playing games here.


----------



## NDJ (Jun 11, 2002)

I've heard the state boys will not enforce the new county ordinance...this will create some conflict..


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

This is about to become real messy. How many other counties will follow?

All of SW ND? It has traditionaly been the SW reps that introduce the no tresspass bills.

Stutsman County has often been defiant. The Stutsman county commissioners banned the USF&WS from buying WPA land for years because of swamp buster and Garrison Diversion. With the SA in their backyard - are they next?

Perry,
I find your comments interesting, but here in metro Twin Cities the township and city ordinances rule regarding hunting and discharge of firearms.

Many cities and townships limit, restrict, or forbid the discharge of firearms within their boundaries. This really can place a damper on the goose hunter and an occasional pheasant / turkey hunter.

NDJ,
May be the Nelson county commissioners and county deputies are looking for a new way to fill the county coffers. Speeding tickets @ $1 per mile over the limit does not bring in too much money on Hwy 2.


----------



## Perry Thorvig (Mar 6, 2002)

PH

You're right about firearms discharge laws in metro fringe communities in the Twin Cities. (It does foul-up metro goose hunting.) However, I don't think the state has any laws that control firearms discharge. They leave that kind of control up to the cities and townships.

But, what I was referring to was zoning laws by local units of gov't that are in conflict with state laws. For example, Minnesota regulates the location of group homes, half-way houses, mobile homes, etc. The local units of gov't (the city you live in) can't make laws that are more restrictive than the state's with respect to certain regulated uses.

So, carrying this principle forward leads me to believe that if the state of North Dakota has trespass laws related to hunting activities, the counties, cities, and towns can't pass laws in conflict. That, of course, doesn't mean that a city can't ban hunting inside the city limits. They can certainly do that. But, that is different than the trespass laws.


----------



## prairie hunter (Mar 13, 2002)

Divergence from the subject at hand, but are you sure?

Seems to me that metro city councils often vote down medium density townhomes or high density units in their area. The subject of affordable housing across the metro is a heated topic - still it is locally controlled.

Look at the women trying to build the orphanage in the metro. She was tossed around like a ping-pong ball.

The state or other larger governing boards can attempt to withhold funds, matching grants, etc... to communities that do not follow the rules but I am very sceptical that this ever occurs.

Someone needs to look at the ND constitutionality of this county ruling.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

I would think they can try - But only a county sheriff could arrest you or ticket you - I'm sure they think it will put teeth into their county judge & cases of landowners prosecuting a tresspasser ??? But if You had a good Lawyer & the Land was not posted - The State Law would over rule

It is just away for a case to be tried & then go on to the State Supreme Court.

I wonder if they voted on this (people of the county) ??? attempt to change / ignore State Law, in the County ??? Or is this an example of a few in the County (Can't be real hard to become a County Commishner in Nelson County) - trying to force their own agenda ???

- It is enough for me to never spend a nickel in Nelson County again until this is resolved.

I hope every hunter Resident & Non Resident - shows their disgust in things like this. But Noooo their will be plenty of NR's going there cause it's wet & lots of ducks.

Chalk this up to a weak Govenor & G&F Director & Confused Legislature & a real minority including G&O stiring the pot :eyeroll:


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

I would think that a county ordinance approach like the one described would be legal. For instance, states can make laws more restrictive than federal laws, but not laws that are less restrictive. I would think that counties can make ordinances more restrictive than state laws as well.

The problem would be with enforcement. If this is a county ordinance, than the county sheriff would have to enforce it, and it would probably be enforced just like any other trespass charge.

For most counties, I would think that the businesses that depend on hunter traffic (both resident and non-resident hunters) would fight this like crazy. Therefore, I doubt whether the real good hunting areas would pass similar ordinances.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Here are some tidbits which relate to Federal preemption of state law, but the same general principal will apply to State preemption of local law: Federal preemption of state law may occur if: (1) Congress explicitly preempts state law; (2) Congress impliedly preempts state law by indicating an intent to occupy an entire field of regulation; or (3) state law actually conflicts with federal law. Conflict pre-emption occurs where compliance with both federal and state laws is a physical impossibility or where state law 'stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress. State law is not preempted merely because it differs from federal law; rather, inquiry is whether state law stands as obstacle to accomplishment and execution of full purposes and objectives of Congress.

Under this standard, the Nelson County ordinance should fail, because the two different presumptions about the trespass status of unposted ground conflict with one another (accessible w/o permission under state law, accessible only with permission (written, no less) under ordinance). As to an unposted piece of ground, compliance with both is a physical impossibility or at least an obstacle to accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives: you either need express permission or you don't.

BD, don't know where you hunt, but I wouldn't call Nelson a "slouch" hunting county. Because of relative water conditions and late summer storms, it offered some of the state's best waterfowling last year, and regularly does, depending on how much of a pounding it takes.


----------



## Bartman (Apr 22, 2003)

I think that all nelson county will do if this actually happens is lose a LOT of money for local businesses, and thus the businesses will fight back against the county to change it back to the way it were. look at how much people already complain about all the posted land, they arnt going to be where there is no open hunting grounds. Just like fetch says...."It is enough for me to never spend a nickel in Nelson County again until this is resolved." I absolutely agree with that statement and how many other people will follow the same way.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Dan, thanks for the clarification. This whole mess is going to give a few folks some well deserved black eyes in their public relations. Not a very well thought out course of action.


----------



## dwmaster (Jun 3, 2003)

Dick:
You may be right that Nelson counties actions may not be very well thought out, however lets not forget the many actions and statements that have also not been well thought out to create this runaway train. I believe We have yet to see the backlash that will result from these actions and statements.  I have many freinds that are farmers and I can assure everyone they are not at all happy about eveyones attempts to regulate THEIR property. There are alot of blackeyes in the state of North Dakota, Its time some people realize they are sporting one.


----------



## Hotel owner (Jan 10, 2003)

I think this is the direction many on this board has taken us. If the resident of ND should have preferances in hunting in ND. Why not residents of a county over genral ND residence? This is one way to make it. Now guys traveling from the East to hunt in the west may have the difficulties of gaining access that some NR have. Paying for access is going to get more popular as these activities take place.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

If this effort boils down to Nelson County landowners wanting to give preferential treatment to Nelson County residents, I will be really disappointed. If this is the case, then residents from the valley will be banned from the southwest, and similar backlashes will result in other parts of the state. This sort of intrastate bickering does nobody any good.

We sit and wonder, then, why so many landowners only grant access to non-residents (yes, I have seen the "Non-resident hunters only" signs in Sheridan County). Could it be that they are sick and tired of North Dakotans fighting among themselves?


----------



## CityHunter (Jan 9, 2003)

I think it boils down to everyone's personal agenda.Some might have a bad taste in their mouth on issues while others could care less.I saw the "nonresident's only" signs long before the session.

It could be something as simple as guys from fargo, twin cities, local, etc. who hunts someones land and he does something to piss the landowner and suddenly a large population is lumped together.Reasons for this could highly vary.Next time you see one of these signs, stop and ask.I'd be interested to hear what they have to say.


----------



## CityHunter (Jan 9, 2003)

BigDaddy said:


> Could it be that they are sick and tired of North Dakotans fighting among themselves?


Not to open up a huge can of worms,but am I wrong to say that all of the "problems" or issues or whatever you want to call it started when outside economic interests moved in? I wasn't here in the 70s, but arrived early in the 80s and that's the only path I can trace back that started all of this.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

CityHunter said:


> Not to open up a huge can of worms,but am I wrong to say that all of the "problems" or issues or whatever you want to call it started when outside economic interests moved in? I wasn't here in the 70s, but arrived early in the 80s and that's the only path I can trace back that started all of this.


I wouldn't forget about the big drop in grain prices either.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

There ya go!!!! That is really what this is all about. M-O-N-E-Y!!! If the farmers were making what they made back then on a bushel of wheat we wouldn't even have anything to talk about. How boring would that be!! :roll: :roll: :roll:


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Chris hit it on the head when he talked about grain prices. If farmers were getting $6/bu for their wheat, I doubt whether we would be having many of these conversations. If landowners can't make it raising wheat or selling cattle, many figure that they can make it raising pheasants for people that are willing to pay for the privilege of shooting them. I disdain the commercialization of hunting, but it's supply and demand in a free market economy.


----------



## Dakota Kid (Aug 17, 2002)

Rest assured though if there was $6 a bushel wheat your duck population would be in the dumps. It would be fencerow to fencerow black dirt.

f


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Since when is anything up here free market economy ???

Even the land was given to people to come & live here

As if farming is based on free market economy ???

If it were we would be paying alot more for food

What should be a living wage for a farmer ???

Should because they managed to be better farmers, or had better crops, or were better at managing their resources, or times were right (interest rates - value of land) or just knew how to play the none free market game :roll:

WEATHER COOPERATES for some generations better than others ???

- so the few that remain should be wealthy & the rest of us should just be peasants, working for them ??? Didn't this Country fight & break away from these kind of things - But in the Name of Capitalism - this is the American way --- I say :bs:

Those of us, that are dumb enough to stay here - because of Low crime & outdoor opportunities - the uncrowded opportunities - (the great pay) :roll: should just be happy to take what the State can provide, or what is left over after the paying customers are thru ??? :eyeroll: OH & REMEMBER WE SHOULD SHARE THIS WITH UNLIMITED #'S from the rest of the USA - But the Farmers & Landowners should not have to share the other 90 % (Free Enterprize) and all that - Don't cha know 

As if much of anything up here is really not based on Government , or services to support Agriculture & those of us that supply services to the people who live here because of Agriculture, should be happy the landowners let us have anything :roll: ??? I'm sure all the Roads were put in for profit & the Rural Electric & Schools & Mail & Telephones & other Public Services & then the maintainence of these things :roll: ??? Whatever happened to doing whats best for ND ??? For your County ??? for your city / community ??? Seems Me Me Me & PROFIT has got a grip on EVERYONE !!! :idiot:

Little wonder why the young & especially the brightest & best are pulling out :eyeroll: & now the ones who can profit, will call all the shots (literally) :lost: for the rest of us :roll: ??? This is the American way HUH ??? :huh: ---- :eyeroll:

Yeah, were just a bunch of Low lifes living in the East - Funny how we spend so much of our disposable income, trying to get back in the rural & wish we could have been blessed, to have been born into families that hung on to their Lands (YES my Grand Father was one of the original Pioneers here in ND) But lost his land in the depression) But still managed to have & raise 12 kids (only one left of the 12) & only a few of their kids have stayed here. - Some of you that feel, so picked on & abused should try working in a city for 40 hrs a week (or more) around 50 weeks a year. & now what we love is being taken away more & more every year ........... :******:


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

Chris, sorry to disagree with you, but in all reality grain prices per se have absolutely nothing to do about it. Let me tell you why.

During this time of unprecedented disasters from floods to droughts, toads to rivers of blood, the quiet thing that has happened is that some farmers out there are doign GREAT!!!! They have learned to farm the program, taking prevented planting when they could have planted the crop in a couple of days, and buying up subsidized insurance to pay for yields artificially inflated during these years. These farmers have raised cash rental rates in many instances 100% in the past 12 years, and continually driven all economies of scale through the roof. The sad truth is that THIS IS THE NATURE OF CAPITALISM!!!!! In all reality we would have to go to completely socialized agriculture, where you can only own so many acres, or recieve so much in payments to keep in the program. Europe does some of this, and has stabilized there rural areas, to a certain extent. No one is talking about this, but a state senatr and I were talking about this over the weekend, and I think we are poised to see an economic disaster in rural America that will make the 80's look like a cake walk. And a few pheasants aint going to bail our butts out of this one.

Any farmers on this board: What would your net returns have been these past years without federal programs. I was involved in a farm with 0 debt, and an extremely large asset base. For the past 4 year our profits were almost exactly equal to farm payments. I mean within a thousand bucks. You take away those farm program payments and see what happens in Lakota. See ya.... Cant happen right??? We just had a giant farm bill pass, and already a huge amount, as in Billions has been robbed out of it. If we keep cutting taxes, and people keep seeing people with millions buying up the countryside, people are going to revolt and say NO MORE!!!

Maybe I am all wet, but this is another way I see politicians out of touch with reality. I am predjuduced, but I have had numerous conversations with landowners saying they dont agree with this lawsuit. They dont advertise it, cause it aint cool to say you support open trespass in rural ND. Just like it isnt cool to say you are doing alright in Ag. All the press and popularity goes to the squeaky wheel.

And by the way, Bioman, this resident says chime in whenever and wherever you want. Your thoughts are often much deeper than some others. Maybe that is the problem.


----------

