
Baiting bill, fee hike among top North Dakota outdoors legislation still in play
Mar. 8—The number of outdoors-related bills introduced during the 2025 session of the North Dakota Legislature is down from previous sessions, but a few pieces of legislation stand out, bill-watchers say.
According to John Bradley, executive director of the North Dakota Wildlife Federation, the NDWF has been tracking about 20 bills that impact hunters, anglers and trappers.
"Normally, we see about double that in a session," Bradley said. "It's been pretty quiet so far, but the good, positive bills that we've seen have moved through and have had really decent support from our legislators.
"So, (we're) kind of optimistic going into the second half."
Among the bills the NDWF is tracking is
HB 1470
, which would increase the fees of some hunting and fishing licenses. The bill passed the House by a 64-25 vote and now awaits action by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
The price of hunting and fishing licenses in North Dakota hasn't increased since 2013, when the Legislature approved a fee hike that took effect in 2014. The Game and Fish Department is mandated to keep at least $15 million in its reserve fund. Without an increase, that fund is projected to fall below $15 million in the next biennium.
"We'll be supporting that in the Senate," Bradley said. "There hasn't been a license fee increase in over a decade. Everything else in this world has become more expensive, whether that's eggs, your mortgage ... you name it, it's gone up. And so, it's due time to keep the Game and Fish whole to keep them above their mandated $15 million reserve fund."
The bill could see "a little bit more discussion" in the Senate, Bradley said, especially as it pertains to nonresident license fees.
"We may see an uptick (in proposed nonresident fees) as that crosses over to the Senate, but 1470 as a whole is a good bill that we will be supporting," Bradley said.
The proverbial elephant in the room among outdoors bills, though, is
SB 2137,
the so-called "baiting bill," which would prevent the Game and Fish Department from restricting the practice of supplemental feeding for hunting — commonly known as baiting — on private land in units with documented cases of chronic wasting disease.
Game and Fish currently prohibits baiting for big game hunting on private land in hunting units with CWD-positive cases or within 25 miles of a confirmed CWD case. Baiting also is prohibited on state and federal lands.
A neurological brain disease, CWD is always fatal to deer, elk and moose, although it can take several months or more before obvious symptoms appear.
Proponents of the legislation to restrict the Game and Fish Department's current baiting ban authority flocked to the Capitol on Friday, Jan. 17, for the bill's initial hearing before the Senate Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Committee, forcing legislative staff to move the hearing to a larger room.
Hunters who favor baiting and oppose efforts to ban it on private land say it's a property rights issue. They say it increases hunting success for young hunters and people with physical limitations. They also question CWD's impact on deer populations and argue it doesn't make sense to restrict baiting for hunting when supplemental feeding is allowed the rest of the year.
Opponents, meanwhile, cite the potential disease risks of drawing deer into close quarters.
The North Dakota Game and Fish Department in February
reported 17 deer tested positive for CWD
during the 2024 sampling season — 15 taken by hunters and two "clinical" deer confirmed through diagnostic examination. That brings the statewide total to 122 since 2009, when the disease first was detected in unit 3F2 in south-central North Dakota.
The
Senate approved SB 2137 by a 31-15 vote
in late January, with a "sunset clause" amendment that the legislation be effective through July 31, 2029. The bill had its first hearing before the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Friday, March 7, but no action was taken.
Similar legislation passed the House by a 76-18 vote during the 2023 legislative session, only to be defeated in the Senate by a 26-21 vote in the closing days of the session.
Two other bills introduced this session in the House — HB 1236
and
HB 1325
, both of which would have limited the Game and Fish Department's ability to manage for CWD — were soundly defeated.
One in particular, HB 1236, would have prohibited the department from using license dollars for CWD management. That bill was defeated by a vote of 63-27.
Bradley of the NDWF says he thinks SB 2137 will get a "far more thorough" look in the House.
"Our take on it is the (Game and Fish) Department is the best (option) to manage CWD in our state, and banning baiting in certain areas is one of the best tools to slow the spread of CWD," Bradley said. "And with any wildlife disease or even livestock disease, to lock something up in statute doesn't really give the agencies the proper leverage to be able to address something on the fly."
As of Wednesday, March 5, the bill had received
247 pieces of written testimony
on the North Dakota Legislative Branch website.
Another bill that stands out, Bradley says, is
HB 1094,
which would allocate up to 10 big game licenses to nonprofit groups for fundraising. Existing legislation limits the allocation to 501C3 nonprofits, but HB 1094 would expand that to 501C19 nonprofits, which are veterans' organizations, Bradley said. The bill also would increase the percentage of fundraising proceeds that would have to go to conservation from 10%, the current level, up to 20%.
"So, if a nonprofit were to get a moose tag and, say, raise $50,000, you'd be looking at $10,000 going back into the resource instead of just the original $5,000," Bradley said.
Among other bills of note,
HB 1237,
which would have allowed nonresident hunters to buy full-season licenses for upland game and small game instead of limiting them to a 14-day license or two 7-day licenses, was defeated by an 86-4 vote in the House.
Meanwhile,
HB 1260,
which would allocate nonresident any-deer bow licenses based on 15% of the current year's mule deer gun license allocation, passed the House by a vote of 87-3. Currently, the nonresident bow allocation is based on 15% of the previous year's mule deer gun license allocation.
The change, if passed, would give the Game and Fish Department more flexibility in managing nonresident any-deer bow license numbers in years when mule deer populations are down.
"If a bad winter were to come through and really wipe out the deer it would give more accurate counts heading into the next year, as opposed to the current system of using last year's numbers," Bradley said.
For a complete listing of outdoors-related bills and their status in the Legislature, check out the
Outdoors Legislation page
of the Game and Fish website at gf.nd.gov/legislation.
Where North Dakota lawmakers vote on specific outdoors-related legislation, individual bills in the Minnesota Legislature, if they survive scrutiny, often are incorporated into an all-encompassing omnibus bill that includes several pieces of legislation as the session progresses.
Among the bills currently in play are House File
276
and HF
413
, which would affect the cost of fishing licenses for residents age 65 and older. According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, HF 276 would reduce the cost of a license by $10 for seniors, with lost revenue appropriated from the state's General Fund to the DNR's Game and Fish Fund. HF 413 would allow people 65 and older to fish without a license. Both bills have been laid over to possibly be included in an omnibus bill.
A few other bills of note:
*
HF 944:
Would allow landowners to use purple paint to mark no trespassing areas instead of placing physical signs.
*
HF 1120:
Would establish and appropriate money to the Keep It Clean program, an effort encouraging anglers and fish house owners to pick up after themselves while on the ice. The bill would direct the DNR commissioner to develop a grant program to provide funds to local units of nongovernment organizations.
*
HF 1387:
Would prohibit the sale, manufacture and use of lead tackle. Specifically, anglers couldn't use lead jigs weighing 1 ounce or less, or sinkers measuring 2 1/2 inches or less in length.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
7 minutes ago
- CBS News
Hakeem Jeffries calls Elon Musk's attacks on Trump-backed budget bill "the stone-cold reality"
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, says he agrees with Elon Musk's characterization of President Trump's domestic policy bill as a "disgusting abomination," torching what he called a "Republican civil war" among GOP lawmakers in an interview with CBS News. "What Elon Musk said is the stone-cold reality," Jeffries said in an interview with "CBS Evening News" co-anchor Maurice DuBois of Mr. Trump's "big, beautiful bill" — which passed the House last month. "When you try to take away healthcare from more than 15 million Americans, that's a disgusting abomination," Jeffries said of the cuts to Medicaid included in the bill. "When you are endeavoring to rip food, literally, out of the mouths of children, veterans and seniors with the largest cut to nutritional assistance in American history, that is a disgusting abomination. And it's certainly a disgusting abomination, when all of this is being done to provide massive tax breaks to their billionaire donors, and they're going to stick the American people with the bill and increase the debt by trillions of dollars." Musk's "disgusting abomination" comments came in a post on X Tuesday, calling the bill "outrageous" and "pork-filled." Musk and Jeffries' criticisms of the bill differ: Musk has attacked the legislation's price tag, while Jeffries has criticized its cuts to Medicaid and food stamp spending — though the Democratic leader has also pushed back on its cost. Musk previously criticized the bill last month, telling "CBS Sunday Morning" correspondent David Pogue he's "disappointed" by the bill's cost. His comments are striking because Musk was previously a key ally of President Trump, helping to lead the Trump administration's effort to reduce the size of the federal government. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, has pushed back against Musk, defending the bill and calling his criticisms "flat wrong." Musk's criticisms come as Senate Republicans prepare to take up the domestic policy bill, which extends Mr. Trump's signature 2017 tax cuts, imposes work requirements on some Medicaid recipients, adds new restrictions to food stamps and boosts border spending. Some senators are pushing for changes — including a few who are skeptical of its changes to Medicaid. Any changes passed by the Senate will also need to be approved by the House. "What we see right now is a Republican civil war," Jeffries said. "Elon Musk is attacking the GOP tax scam, this reckless budget that's going to hurt everyday Americans. House Republicans are attacking Senate Republicans, Senate Republicans are attacking House Republicans." See more from the interview with Jeffries on the "CBS Evening News" Thursday.


Time Magazine
20 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Stumbles in Senate as Musk Ramps Up Bid to ‘Kill' It
President Donald Trump's sprawling tax-and-spending proposal—touted as the centerpiece of his second-term agenda—is facing intensifying resistance in the Senate, as fresh concerns about its impact on the deficit and a ramped-up campaign by Elon Musk to torpedo the entire package threaten to derail the legislation's fragile path to passage. At the center of the turmoil on Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is a sobering new assessment from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which reported Wednesday that the bill would add $2.4 trillion to federal deficits over the next decade while stripping health coverage from nearly 11 million Americans, largely through deep Medicaid cuts and the imposition of new work requirements. That analysis sparked alarm among some Senate Republicans, several of whom are demanding substantial changes. 'I think Congress is sort of like a bad behaving teenager when it comes to spending,' Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, one of the Republicans threatening to vote against the bill, told TIME on Wednesday. 'If you had a teenager that you were giving $100 a week and they wasted all of it on gambling or on booze, would you give them $200?' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and other prominent Republicans tried to dismiss the CBO's projections by arguing its analysis was flawed or biased. But fiscal hawks in the Senate remained dug in, buoyed by former Trump advisor Elon Musk, who extended his all-out offensive against the bill. A day after using his vast social media reach to brand the bill a 'disgusting abomination,' he posted more than two dozen messages on X on Wednesday attacking the legislation, as well as urging his followers to call Congress and 'KILL the BILL.' Musk's ire appears especially focused on how the bill's expansion of the deficit would erase the cost-cutting he hoped to accomplish with the Department of Government Efficiency, which he led under the Trump Administration. He has also expressed concerns with provisions in the House-passed bill that would terminate clean energy tax credits and electric vehicle subsidies established under the Inflation Reduction Act. Tesla Energy, Musk's solar and battery company, has warned that ending those credits 'would threaten America's energy independence and the reliability of our grid.' The sharp reversal has blindsided some Republicans, who were counting on Musk's tacit support. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who has spearheaded the bill's passage, tried to stem the fallout by reaching out to Musk directly. 'I hope he comes around,' Johnson said Wednesday, though he added that Musk has not returned his call. Inside the Senate, Johnson's broader strategy—pushing through House priorities quickly and with minimal changes—is beginning to unravel. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota acknowledged that significant changes to the bill are now unavoidable. 'We'll make some modifications to it, strengthen and improve it,' Thune said Tuesday. 'But at the end of the day, the math is simple—51 in the Senate, 218 in the House. That's what we're working toward.' One potential modification Thune has expressed interest in is scaling back the $40,000 state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap in the House version of the bill, an increase from the current $10,000 cap that House Republicans from high-tax states secured as a concession. But not all Republicans agree with the additional spending: 'There really isn't a single Republican senator who cares much about the SALT issue,' Thune told reporters as he departed a meeting with Trump and Senate Republicans on Wednesday evening, saying that they discussed ways to dial that money back. It's a move that could alienate House Republicans from New York and New Jersey, who say their support is contingent on the SALT provision. "Let's be clear — no SALT, no deal," New York Republican Mike Lawler said Wednesday in a post on X. Additionally, the bill's sweeping changes to Medicaid, such as imposing new work requirements, are a sticking point. Republican Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Jim Justice of West Virginia have raised red flags over a provision that would eliminate provider taxes—mechanisms that states use to fund Medicaid—which they argue could shutter rural hospitals. Hawley is also opposed to a so-called 'sick tax' in the bill, which would impose new charges on low-income patients for medical visits. Other Republican Senators, including Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, may also put up roadblocks over potential cuts to Medicaid. Trump has personally intervened, holding calls with Sens. Hawley, Paul, and Scott. But there is little evidence he has swayed skeptics. Paul, a libertarian-leaning lawmaker who has vocally pushed back on many Trump Administration policies, told TIME that he plans to vote against the bill over its provision to raise the debt ceiling by trillions of dollars. 'Congress has been acting irresponsibly for decades,' he said. 'We spend $2 trillion more than to come in. They should have a very narrow leash. The only debt ceiling they get should be very, very narrow in time and very, very small in amount. And the more we vote on the debt ceiling, the better. I'd vote on it every three months.' Trump, meanwhile, renewed his calls on Wednesday for scrapping the debt ceiling altogether. The growing litany of disputes has created a daunting legislative gauntlet for Trump's signature bill. Senate committees are now beginning to draft their own version, starting with less controversial sections and leaving the most divisive elements—Medicaid, energy, taxes—for later. Should the Senate approve any amended version, it must still clear the House once again—no small task given the narrow margins and the emboldened dissent among House Republicans. The stakes are high not just for Trump, but for Republicans heading into a contentious midterm season. Failure to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts would translate into a tax increase for many Americans. Trump's legislation would also boost spending on defense and border security, while reducing spending on Medicaid and food stamps.

Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CT lawmakers OK $3.2 billion annual bond package of school construction, other projects
On the final day of the 2025 regular session, state lawmakers voted Wednesday to fund major construction and renovation projects ranging from colleges to state parks to local schools. The bipartisan bonding package includes $3.2 billion in the first year and $3.4 billion in the second year for projects for more than 30 state agencies, plus public schools across the state. In addition to brick and mortar projects, the legislature decided to allocate bond money to help pay for removing some of the controversial 'public benefits charges' on customers' electric bills. Those costs caused a firestorm of protest starting last July when the increased amounts appeared on electric bills and surprised some customers. Republicans called for switching those costs to the state's general fund, but lawmakers decided to pay for them by borrowing money. The 256-page bond package was approved by the House by 144-4 after less than one hour of debate with four conservative Republicans, Anne Dauphinais of Danielson, Doug Dubitsky of Chaplin, Joe Hoxha of Bristol, and Gale Mastrofrancesco of Wolcott, voting against the measure. The bill was then immediately sent to the Senate, which approved the package before 5:30 p.m. by 35-1. Sen. Rob Sampson, a fiscal conservative from Wolcott, voted against the bill after saying that the state borrows too much money through bonding. The multiple projects range from large to small, for example, including up to $113 million for a new Windham Technical High School to $1 million for renovating a building at Norwalk Community College. Aside from the two-year, $55.8 billion operating budget that is a separate entity, the bond package helps numerous cities and towns, said Senate majority leader Bob Duff of Norwalk. 'This is a crucial piece of the puzzle,' Duff said. 'In this bill, we are under the bond authorization cap in fiscal year 2026 and fiscal year 2027. … At the same time that the federal government is backing out of commitments, we are doubling down. … It is much-needed dollars back to our communities.' Sen. Ryan Fazio of Greenwich, a fiscally conservative Republican, questioned the state's spending on major projects. He said recently on the Senate floor that Gov. Ned Lamont's much-touted 'debt diet' was really like eating a half dozen donuts a day, rather than a full dozen, and feeling like you're still on a diet. Noting that his district is known for sending hundreds of millions of dollars in income taxes annually to the state, Fazio said the package would include money for the historic Old Greenwich School on Sound Beach Avenue and Roxbury Elementary School in the Westover section of Stamford. Traditionally, the bond package often gets approved in the final hours of the session as lawmakers fight to get their special projects into the document. That was the case again Wednesday as both chambers debated on the final day of the regular session. 'The cost of the final version is lower than the committee version,' said Rep. Ron Napoli, a Waterbury Democrat who co-chairs the bonding subcommittee and introduced the bill on the House floor. He added that money set aside in the 'Town Aid Road' category for paving and improving local streets had increased by nearly 33% in a category that he said would make mayors and first selectmen 'very happy.' Rep. John Piscopo, the longest-serving House Republican, noted that the package was crafted on a bipartisan basis. 'The major increases were for energy, getting those public benefits off our bills,' Piscopo said. 'All in all, I could accept this.' Piscopo recalled the early 1990s when an unlikely odd couple of legislators, a blunt, blue-collar Democrat from Enfield and an Ivy League stockbroker from New Canaan, were known for relentlessly traveling around the state and personally looking at leaking roofs and other problems in detailed, on-the-ground inspections. 'We brought back the old tradition of Fred Gelsi and Les Young,' said Piscopo, who has served in the legislature since 1989. 'It means a lot when you can visit the projects and see a day care center that is bursting at the seams … instead of looking at a spreadsheet. We were all over the state. … I'm glad we brought back that Gelsi and Les Young tradition of going out and seeing the projects.' Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney, a New Haven Democrat, also mentioned the pair, saying that Gelsi was a 'legendary' lawmaker who knew details down to a particular boiler in a state building. Gelsi died in 2005, long after Young died of cancer in 1996. Looney noted that $550 million will be allocated for school construction, plus $200 million for housing and $10 million in each of the next two years for municipal open space, among others. 'There is a lot to celebrate here,' Looney said. This year, House Speaker Matt Ritter of Hartford said the number of individual projects was reduced as larger sums of money would be set aside for a broad category of urban projects, for example, that would be named later. 'They've gone away from the line items,' Ritter told reporters. 'You won't see a ton of projects listed.' While lawmakers are highly interested in the bond package, no projects can move forward unless they receive final approval from the 10-member, Democratic-dominated State Bond Commission. Lamont chairs the commission, controls the agenda, and decides which projects get funded. Sen. John Fonfara, a longtime Hartford Democrat, said he wished that legislators had more influence on the final projects that need approval from the bond commission. 'Bonding matters to legislators,' Fonfara said on the Senate floor. 'Parks, recreation, you name it, that are unable to be funded' by local municipalities. The huge, 256-page bill still listed multiple projects, including the maximum amount that could be spent on each one. That includes up to $75 million for the governor's budget office to oversee upgrading computers through an information technology capital investment program, $50 million for designing and planning a replacement for state-owned Whiting Forensic Hospital in Middletown, $40 million for improvements at state parks so that they will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and $15 million for relocating the Department of Motor Vehicles headquarters in Wethersfield, which has been under discussion. 'We are currently looking for a new location in the area that can accommodate our branch and back-office staff with sufficient space,' said state motor vehicles commissioner Tony Guerrera, a well-known former legislator who headed the transportation committee. 'We are collaborating with the Department of Administrative Services to facilitate this process, carefully considering factors such as parking, ADA accessibility and access to public transportation.' The bill also includes up to $40 million for installing solar systems on state properties, $30 million for deferred maintenance at the state's 12 community colleges, $28 million for the UConn Health center in Farmington for equipment, library collections, and telecommunications infrastructure upgrades, $17 million for renovations and improvements at Rentschler Field in East Hartford and the convention center in Hartford, and $30 million for deferred maintenance at the four regional public universities in Danbury, New Britain, New Haven, and Willimantic. Despite plaudits from colleagues about the depth and breadth of the proposals, Sampson said the package was too big. 'Overall, the state of Connecticut bonds too much and probably always has,' Sampson said, adding the bill is 'more giant that it has to be.' But House Republican leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford, who voted for the bill, said the package was affordable. 'The bonding is still under the debt cap,' Candelora told reporters outside the Hall of the House. 'So I think the bonding levels have stayed appropriate. But when you continue to give state employees raises, it puts pressure on the pension fund. So now that you're slowing down the amount of money you're going to put into the pensions, we are going to see our unfunded liabilities potentially now increase. They're no longer going to decrease.' The bond bill also included various 'fixes' from multiple pieces of legislation that had already passed, including mistakes and errors that could be corrected before the legislative session's adjournment at midnight Wednesday. 'I know it's a shock to people that we make mistakes in bills that we have to fix, but that's what happens,' Ritter told reporters Wednesday. A key aspect concerns the future of the State Elections Enforcement Commission, which oversees the elections of the state legislators and others. Both the House and the Senate had passed a controversial bill that would have allowed the legislature to approve the commission's executive director. But Lamont had been lobbied on the issue to veto the bill in order to preserve the commission's independence, and his administration requested the change. Groups like the League of Women Voters, Connecticut Citizen Action Group, and Common Cause had opposed the controversial bill, but the measure had moved quickly through both chambers. While the bipartisan measure passed by 34-1 in the state Senate, numerous House Democrats voted against the measure that still passed in the chamber by 92-46. But the resolution is that the legislature will not have veto power over the choice of the executive director. 'There will be a public hearing before the exec noms committee, but not a vote of the exec noms committee,' Ritter said, referring the executive and legislative nominations committee. 'That is something the governor did ask us to look at. That's a big one. He didn't like the appointment by the legislature.' So the tradition will continue in which the five-member, bipartisan commission will still hire its own executive director. 'That provision was a double-edged sword,' Candelora said. 'At the same time, it doesn't need a full vote of the legislature. … That is a provision that impacts democracy. Christopher Keating can be reached at ckeating@