# Here are a few interesting pages on the Legislature



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

& ND Bills

http://www.state.nd.us/lr/ see bills & resolutions - not alot there ???

http://www.state.nd.us/lr/assembly/58-2 ... .bill.html

Except stuff to get the Director of G&F off the hook ??? Or to give him more enforcement powers ???

Example ??? :
Is there going to be a Bill to outlaw Outfitters & Guides from using public lands (other states have this )??? & who would bring that Bill to the Legislature & who will Lobby for it ??? Etc. Etc. Etc.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Fetch, guides and outfitters are already prohibited from using public land. I am not saying that it doesn't happen, but when they do it they are in violation of state law. There is one exception to this and the US Forest Service has permitted one individual to guide on the National Grasslands.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Furthermore, it is up to the citizens of the state to introduce bills. If you have a good idea, get one of your legislators to sponsor it. Most state agencies are not able to introduce much if any legislation. Also, if they do introduce it, the governor will approve or not approve it before it is brought in front of the houses. This false illusion of what a state agency can or can not do needs to get cleared up. The first thing we all need to do if we want to succeed in getting any changes in is to understand how our lawmaking body works and gets things done. Also, we can't expect agencies to do this for us. Different state agencies testify over bill all the time, but all they are allowed to do is offer up the facts and that is it.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Okay, I am on a roll I might as well keep going. Fetch, you seem to have rather strong anti game and fish sentiments. You have said in the past that you don't, but you continually make comments that really can't be taken in a nice way. That is fine, we are humans and make mistakes also and need to hear about them. Does the G&F make mistakes? Damn right we do, we had the authority to restrict nonresidents along time ago. If we would have did it even 5 years ago, we wouldn't have had a problem. Now that the commercial aspect has been firmly entrenched, we were stopped from being able to do this on our own. What does no good, is when the game and fish department gets slammed and the person who is doing it doesn't have the proper knowledge, is using second hand information or makes an assumption without asking first. You are not the only one, so don't think I am singling you out. But, you just asked about legislation regarding guiding on public land. Commercial activity has been banned on Game and Fish property for years. Last legislative session there was a bill introduced that would have allowed guiding on any land leased by the department. Luckily we got our PLOTS lands excluded from this. However, what really saved us are rules that were already in place by other agencies. For example, we lease the Lonetree Wildlife Management area from the Garrison Conservancy district. Luckily they also disallow any commercial activity, so their rule (being Federal) outweighs the state rule. Most agencies have something like this. For Example the US Fish and Wildlife Agency does not allow any commercial activity on their land either with the exception of some grazing/haying.

Someone asked before why isn't the game and fish department smart enough to lease land instead of buying it all, I then explained what PLOTS meant, Private Lands Open to Sportsmen. We have been accused of catering to non residents by greeting them at the airport. There have been other things on this site also. A guy tries to be polite on this site, but eventually you want to tell someone their full of **** or ask for the information before passing judgement. I don't know what people know or don't know so it is hard to get people the information if they don't ask for it. There are a lot of things in this world I don't know or understand, but I seek information before condemning them.

If we want to make a change, we better learn the process and do it quick as the session kicks off in January and I can guarantee you the other side is locked and loaded. If we don't get something accomplished this session I fear the fate of the ND sportsmen will be doomed. Also, I attended advisory board meetings in 3 different towns this year. Attendance was extremely poor, and I thought those problems were solved. I know there are some criticisms of the locations of the advisory meeting locations, but they try to circulate them around the area and they are picked by the advisory board members. I know Pekin for example is a little town and out of the way, but people have no problems driving across the state to hunt. You would think they would be able to drive across a county or two. Pekin only had 16 people show up. Leeds had 45 or so, but 75 % of them were commercial interests and legislators from commercial hunting areas and chamber of commerce people. Jon Nelson, Mike Every, Gene Nicholas, (all legislators) Randy Frost from the Devils Lake chamber of commerce. I can assure you none of these people are friends of the average ND sportsman. Steele was a little more of a mix, about half sportsmen and half commercial people (guides, captive wildlife growers, hotel owners). What side of the story do you think was being portrayed. Jamestown had an exceptional turnout from sportsmen (I wasn't there, but that was what was reported). Makes you wonder how important issues are to people when they can't even take a night off to give input. If you have been to an advisory board meeting in the past, I think you will find that they have made a remarkable improvement and there is always time for open discussion at the end.

One thing I am proud to report is that I heard Dean Hildebrand state at each of the three advisory board meetings I attended "I strongly believe that we need to be able to restrict nonresidents who hunt in our state" He needs our help though, as the politicians are not going to listen to him or the game and fish department. They need to hear it from YOU!

Just had to get that off my chest.


----------



## NDMALLARD (Mar 9, 2002)

WELL SAID, MUZZY!!!!!!


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

I never knew state lands were off limits to guides (???) & I was one who thought plots were being bought (???) & I am more interested & up on alot of these things than most hunters in our state (???) I make mistakes (But the hopes & balance of the future of hunting does not fall on my shoulders)

I ask lots of Questions & have lots of Opinions - Mainly in Hopes someone, or others will answer, or join in the debate. I like debate & I admidt to being cynical. But I'm reasonable & know what is real & what is political & BS.

But as far as my criticisim of the G&FD (don't take it personal) most if not all has been towards the Director. Who I honestly think needs to retire. He is a good administrator I'm sure - But we need someone stronger - someone who really knows politics & is pro-active (at least behind the scenes) IS HE ???

I see him as being way to close to the commercial side (He was once very much apart of profiting off of, at least the Fish side) Plus he knows the commercial interests much better, than he knows the average Freelance Hunter of the State (& Freelance Non-Residents) So I have no idea what he really is thinking, or cares about. I do know he seems to be a yes Man to the Govenor (???) & his military style is way to slow & he has way to much respect for rank. (& you know those kind basically think rank has it's privledges)

I just think & know that if he does not pro-activly do the right things. The odds are slim that there will be any significant support, or changes to benefit our concerns.

As far as education & meetings - You guys are OK at best. The Outdoors Magazine is slow & limited & mostly PR (excellant at doing PR) But they need to do so much more. It's so typical of so much of Government. Only tell em what they think we should know & emphasize the positives). & like this site avoid controversy :roll: Sorry but in my little cynical way - I am a squeeky wheel. - Not perfect by a long shot. But not afraid to ask the tough questions (or dumb ones too) & brain-storm for new ideas (both positive & negative) Do we know- that in the end ??? Hopefully ??? they will do the right things. But I have a feeling that they wish there were no controversey, or complaints, or folks asking why, or why not ??? & things will just slowly evolve & work out. I Don't Think So - not now - things are happening much too fast & the apathy factor is real - so it's time to try new ideas - ways of getting a very unorganized & diverse & special interest bunch of regular Joes, to see & agree on what, or how to come together & be heard (???) - Plus live your normal life & deal with normal problems (that can be much more significant than Hunting & Fishing) Plus were so spread out & don't all see the same issues as being important (???) :eyeroll:

So there are three main groups - Right ??? -That support our Freelance ideals ??? All looking for dollars & supporters - But I know very little about any of them (until pheasantgate) ??? Yeah it's sad & before we really get involved. It will be, desparately trying to change back, what we once had. :eyeroll: One minute I feel like there is hope - the next I feel like were screwed & the enevitable is going to happen  - Can't beat em join em, or adjust to what is the next best option.

Have you really seen or heard of a bandwagon you can enthusiasticaly jump on ???

Plus if you have been reading, or understand what I feel - I know I support the ND G&FDepartment & I am proud of the people there. So lets not go there - My beef is against the administration & Govenor & Bone head Legislators that don't have a clue, or really care about this stuff.

& Yes I have on many occasions tried to talk to many Legislators about outdoor issues & they do not know, or care about them. They also think the G&FD is doing OK & will take care of & solve all these problems. Why is that ??? & without problems & controversy, I bet you guys like it that way too ??? That to me is a major part of the apathy & problem we all have with residents not getting to involved.

But you want to know whats really SAD ??? If the Director did retire - We would most likely get a even BIGGER YES MAN. & someone who just about totally supports the commercial side of things :******:


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

I asked on another thread here - what are the 30 + Bills related to Outdoors activities ??? & what & why & who sponsored them ???


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

I think the statement about the 30 bills was intended to say that there will be a lot of them coming from various people. I don't think anyone knows exactly how many there will be.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

The number of bills is all speculation, I have heard 30, 50, it is anyone's guess. I have heard rumors of a few different ones as everyone has, and there will be quite a few.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Fetch, I went to that link you provided and the 3 bills on their dealing with game and fish were all related to guiding and outfitting. Some of these are good and some of them are bad. As far as the one dealing with the powers of the game and fish director, it is not giving him more power as you suggested it is actually taking it away from him. As we speak, the game and fish department has the right to inspect guides and outfitters and their records. Guides and outfitters are required to keep records of clients they have had in the fall. This bill is dealing with keeping their records confidential and not public record. This is a very good link you posted and a good way to inform sportsmen of what is being proposed. This list will grow rapidly in the next several weeks. When you read the bill, they have the century code dealing with that listed on the page as it was in the past. Then they make the changes on it so you can see how it was and how it will be. Anything deleted from the original law will have a line through it and anything added will be underlined. This way you can see how it was in the past and how it will read with the proposed changes. The only exception to this is a brand new law where there is nothing to ammend.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

When you go to the link provided, you can click on the senate bills and there are two more bill dealing with game and fish. Both of the bill deal with the caps on nonresident waterfowl hunters. These were both brought out of the judiciary B committee. One is the hunter pressure concept (which is superior to the other bill in my own opinion) and the other bill which is more liberal and brought forth by the commercial interests. I won't go on any more on these as you can read them if you want to.

If the ice would get a little thicker, I could spend more time on the ice and less on the internet :lol:


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

I realize the Director works for the Govenor (at least appointed) But I feel he really works for the Hunters & fishing people of the state ( & mainly as a Recreation) not for commercial interests.

I still think the Director should be his own man. It's not just a job at this level. & I would think he could be loved & admired, (both now & after his Adim. is over) if he took a stance & said & did the right things - and at the same time explain & educate the commercial sides & political & legislative & land rights, in how what many believe is true (from the guides Assn. perspective) is not what is really good for ND. He could be a future Roughrider Award winner in & under a Adimistration that understands all this.

You know I'm right about the trust & political side of the G&FD - as it relates to Apathy & Trust of being where the faith of the people of ND see all this - when it comes to these problems - & when(like I said before) it's mostly positive stuff they (G&FD) Citizens & Legislature really like it that way. How can it be both ways ??? & now is when we need him & the Department the most (on this level) you guys have always been great on the day to day parts of your jobs. I completely understand how the rank & file workers are restrained.

My opinion still stands - I admire the fact you have even stepped forward as much as you have.

Most of my posts have subliminal messages, or meanings (It's just my style) Am I wrong ??? Or have not some of my thoughts (& I'm sure many others) helped him (Director) think, or see that many of us see options (& how the past & how things really are, or have been) as part of the problem ???

If there was not any opposition to him - would he just go with the political flow - ???

As far as the regional meetings, it is a failure - As far as in normal years & times (So is the regional Reps) to the G&FD & needs to be done differently.

The meetings this last year, on all this other stuff (that were so well attended) - I hope are not forgotten.

But to now use this last round of regional meetings, as a example of any of our concerns - THAT DOES MORE HARM IN MY OPINION, than anything at this time & needs to be said.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

The facts that a meeting is a failure can not be blamed entirely on the Game and Fish Department. The meetings have changed over the years and there is time in the end allotted for open discussion, and department personel will stay around as long as someone wants to talk to them. They fail when people don't take the time to even show up. If a person went one time several years ago and didn't like what he seen, doesn't mean the whole process should be canned. Communication is a two way street, both sides need to take time to listen and speak their minds. To say that the meetings do more harm than good because the commercial interests show up in force is wrong. There are no limits on the number of people who show up, nobody was barred from coming to the meetings or turned away. Whether we like what commercial interests are saying, in the United States everyone has the ability to state their case. Don't fault the process because one side shows up and the other doesn't.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Here is something I wrote on another site that I somehow thinks fits here ???

Maybe not ??? But I see lots of things different than the average hunter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tell the truth about Nature & conservation & support farm legislation, that truely helps ducks.

I obey all game laws & try to teach others what they are.

I support the enforcement people & lobby for them to recieve more funds, to keep all the law breakers from taking advantage of things. Shooting all they can, or anything they can & then dump them or leave them & keep shooting.

I shoot less birds every year -cause I don't need the meat for food.

I practice good landowner relations

I speak out about the commercialization of hunting - thats turning a great lifetime passion into a for profit - greed filled competition by way too many.

I support real hunting & respect for the land & resource - so they will never be over harvested & condem those that are just shooters & slobs.

I hate litter & pickup all I can

I support States Rights to regulate hunters & base their decisions on science, or professional managers from our G&FD - to not allow too much Hunter pressure & stop over harvest of birds for profit.

I pray for timely rains (adequate moisture) in the Prairie Pot hole region.

I support management of waterfowl based on month to month decisions, year round, as they are happening. (using stastics from past years, will no longer be the best way to manage ducks)

I think unlimited mobile traveling shooters & internet reports, hurt the resources.

I believe Spinning wing decoys are unnessary & will prove to be a negative to the resource.

I believe buying lands & putting up a sign & calling them the answer to conservation, is ridiculous - those same lands will produce ducks, depending on Nature (or god). The ones that are already purchased, should be maintained better, with the right vegetation & weed control & predator control. & improve them during dry times (when it is cheaper to do) - so when moisture returns, they are as condusive to the success of reproducing waterfowl & other game birds as possible. (NOT HAPPENING)

I believe predator control is vital & works. & it's time to change some of the laws that have hurt waterfowl & game birds by protecting some predator birds.

I believe if all the money currantly spent - was spent more wisely - there would be alot more waterfowl. By taking care of what is already there. (not happening)

I lobby for ways to fund private owners of habitat, to do things to raise ducks & all game birds - (in the right places) They own over 90 % of the habitat - but most think what is happening to promote waterfowl, is doing more to hurt than help (Why ???) - Find a way for private landowners to profit from rasing ducks & there will never be a shortage of ducks.

I believe (& have written to anyone who will listen) That letting hunters - hunt SOB's (Snows Or Blues) without restrictions, would do even more to prevent their over population. & that in too many areas, the commercial hunting of SOB's is preventing hunters from reducing the size of the flock. & someday when nature decides to control them - it will dramatically affect all waterfowl. (the problem is still there).

I'm for anything that can promote & improve public / freelance hunting is good - & should be supported by tax payers & real non-profit & corporate donations, or increased license fees. Instead of for the wealthy, or special interests & not used for profit / commercial hunting, or shooting. Spending any of this money to help or promote commercial hunting is wrong. No matter how it is disguised, or politically obtained.

I can go on & on but I doubt many (majority) will care, or support things to make this a reality ??? ??? ???


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

AND No One should ASSUME Muzzy & I are arguing here, or really disagreeing. (we do disagree) on some things- But we tell each other - what we really think - in PM's.

I respect the guy for even being here & being as honest as he is.

This whole mess is so complicated & so much effects something else

But censorship, or wishfull thinking on either side is not the answer. I hope topics like this makes us smarter & stronger. & help educate the ones that will really make a difference in months to come.


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

I will say, that if you were not at an advisory board meeting this last month, you missed a very good chance to call people to responsibility for there actions. The two I attended were very constructive, and I beleive several solid proposals could come out of them. Fetch, I have heard you ask a number of excellant questions here that would have provoked good conversations at those meetings. ie resting areas, plots emphasis, etc. Your not being there to ask them in a setting encouraging frank discussion is to to bad.

Again, you all must lead, if you dont, the future is bleak.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

Just one more thing on the regional Meetings

Most people don't have alot of problems with the G&FD

- I think most think they are the ones who decide most of these things (or should)

But now we learn they are not political ??? Not going to lead in all this ???

Then why would anyone attend their meetings ??? - (even if they have changed)

Especially when held in Pekin :roll: Sorry Pekin - But pekin is not even a hot bed of hunting. People are not going to drive that far, unless there are issues & accurate reporting of the issues. & most Feel that the issues have been put on the table recently (by duplication of meetings - in terrible, or too spread out - of locations) It amazing after last years fiasco of meetings, that anyone showed up.

Why can't the G&FD at least have someone report on these Bills & issues & tell us what they mean & will do for, or against both sides ??? Or have on-line meetings & discuss things more often (monthly maybe ?) or even weekly ? I'd say alot more than 16 would show up - you could even have it so someone could spend the entire next month, or week answering questions.

There are also lots of people that because of health, or family & other responsibilities, or work, cannot not make it to this one quarterly (or six month) :roll: meeting. & they should not be shamed over & over - the system & process does not work - admidt it & move on - re-group & try another idea.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Where are they supposed to have it then? Grand Forks all the time in your town? Is that fair that people from the other areas have to drive an hour and a half all of the time. Also, historically (other than last winter) we have had more people show up in the towns and smaller cities that the larger areas. You could always count on more people showing up to a meeting say in Park River or Grafton than in Grand Forks.


----------



## Fetch (Mar 1, 2002)

We understand that - Why not in all those locations - Maybe spend a week in each region if necessary ??? oke: :lol:


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

The last time a meeting was held in Grand Forks there were 7 (yes 7) people in attendence. I was impressed, that even though the G&F department outnumberer us by 2-1, they still gave the whole 9 yards. I've never understood why more people don't go. They happen twice a year and are well-publicized.

I try to make 2 each time spring and fall. One for our area and one in another region that I can make the most convenient for business. I try to go to another region to understand if there are any regional differences.

Good things can come out of them personally as well. The last time the meetings were held in Selfridge a friend from Bismarck and I went and we visited with an older gentleman that resulted in us being able to pheasant hunt on his ranch, and the hunting has been awfully good. I'm sure glad we weren't too busy fishing that day to be able to go to the meeting.


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

OK. Here's a draft bill. Pretty simple. Certainly the Legacy type. Based on Alberta's version the idea.
How do I find someone who is willing to propose it?
Anyone know a reasonable legislator? How does one "shop it around"?

M.

*****************
A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 20.1-03 of the North Dakota Century Code, Disposition of Access to Lands.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:

SECTION 1. A new section to chapter 20.1-03 of the North Dakota Century Code is created and enacted as follows:

Disposition of Access to Land. No person shall directly or indirectly buy or sell, trade or barter or offer to buy or sell access to any land for the purpose of hunting any big game, any fur-bearing animals, any game birds or any upland game birds except as provided in NDCC 20.1-12, Private Shooting Preserves.

******************


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

MRN...I like it but I think it's closing the barn door after the horse is already out.


----------



## Dano2 (Oct 8, 2002)

Any word on what they are leaning towards on the NR issue,
as far as a cap or having 2 5 day hunting weeks?
Just a little worried, as you can probably tell I'm a NR.
I live in Moorhead, and tryed talking the wife into
selling the house and moving to Fargo a few times, but
I have a handicapped little girl that is on a very good
sytem right now, and the change wouldn't be good for her,
I just got back into bird hunting this year after not doing it for over
15 years, hunt with friends from work that farm in ND
so thats kind of nice for me to have that land access,
even though I have to listen to the Minnesota cracks,
heh, heh 

Certainly hope things work out to satisfy the majority anyway,
Cant make everyone happy I guess,
Hell, I'd be willing to pay $150 for good pheasant hunting


----------



## Bronco (Aug 12, 2002)

*Dano 2- *you just stay in touch! I will take you hunting and promise you some good pheasant hunting "for free"- the only catch is you have to promise not to use guides, outfitters or participate in fee hunting. The only thing I ever asked is guys throw $10.00 in for food & beer (if you don't bring your own) and have a good time!

*MUZZY- * keep up the good work, I was one of the uninformed complainers that used to think the Game & Fish had alot to do with our problems. I have learned alot from you and your posts and have done a 180 since joining this site. I have also got involved because emailing my Reps in District 32 (even though they won't write me back). If I don't hear from them soon- I plan to track them down personally. I almost forgot- the ice is thick enough-so go do some fishing! I was at Lake Audobon last weekend and if you fish in late afternoon & evening in 20-25 feet of water you will find some nice walleys. When the bite starts- make sure you have your running shoes on!!! 

*FETCH* Keep hammering away at the issues- because we are all learning! Never thought hunting could be so much work! :beer:


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

Ken, 
Yes, the "genie is out of the bottle", but stuffing him back in is the right thing to do. Its really just choosing which model we want to follow, the Texas model or the Alberta/Sask model, greed or benevolence.

Moreover, I think this proposal scares the crap out of folks. Some may fear a "back-lash", but that's just appeasement which has a long history of backfiring. As Tsodak suggests, backlashes are temporary, but legacys last a long long time. Principles are more important than fear.

I would sure like a legal opinion of the idea that charging for hunting access deprives the owner (the state) of the economic value, use and benefit. Seems clear to me - but I'm from Alberta. If the state gets $100 a lic., but access charge is $150/gun/day - that sure seems like it deprives the state of a major portion of the economic value of the game animals it owns.

M.

**********************
20.1-01-03. Ownership and control of wildlife is in the state
The ownership of and title to all wildlife within this state is in the state for the purpose of regulating the enjoyment, use, possession, disposition, and conservation thereof, and for maintaining action for damages as herein provided. ..... The state has a property interest in all protected wildlife.

12.1-23-02. Theft of property. 
A person is guilty of theft if he:
1. Knowingly takes or exercises unauthorized control over, or makes an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, the property of another with intent to deprive the owner thereof;

12.1-23-10.3. "Deprive" means:
a. To withhold property or to cause it to be withheld either permanently or undersuch circumstances that a major portion of its economic value, or its use and benefit, has, in fact, been appropriated;


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Bronco, just a suggestion. When you visit your district reps, take a group of like minded friends. Legislators might blow off a single person but it's much harder to blow off a group of three or four people and as the conversation progresses your guys are going to come up with ideas that one person can miss.


----------



## Dano2 (Oct 8, 2002)

Sounds good to me Bronco,
I wont pay those guys a dime.


----------



## Bronco (Aug 12, 2002)

Dick, thanks for the suggestion, I will do that  I have a group of people here in Bismarck that I asked to contact their reps, but we live on different sides of town and have diff. reps. I also sent a "nice" email to Rep Nelson asking for his "fair" support of freelance hunter issues.

*Dano2* stay in touch next summer and like I said, you will have a good hunt and good time. I just hate to see people use the guides- because at least in my area- they are the ones screwing everything up.


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

Can I make one other suggestion. I hear a lot of commenting that email is not as effeective as a good old paper letter. Email is almost to easy, and overloads the reps. They might not even read them all. I know you rarely get responses to them. Write and mail the letter, it is worth more wight that way. Tom


----------

