S.339 has been signed in Law

[COHunter]

Last night Bush signed S.339 into Law. It was attached to H.R. 1268. The supplemental Bill for Iraq.



Hey George Taulman and USO

 

[Two Rugers]

AND?

 

[subfan]

 

[EL CAZADOR]

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL SILENCE.
(a) In General- It is the policy of Congress that it is in the public interest for each State to continue to regulate the taking for any purpose of fish and wildlife within its boundaries, including by means of laws or regulations that differentiate between residents and nonresidents of such State with respect to the availability of licenses or permits for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or the fees charged in connection with issuance of licenses or permits for hunting or fishing.

(b) Construction of Congressional Silence- Silence on the part of Congress shall not be construed to impose any barrier under clause 3 of Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as the `commerce clause') to the regulation of hunting or fishing by a State or Indian tribe.

SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed--

(1) to limit the applicability or effect of any Federal law related to the protection or management of fish or wildlife or to the regulation of commerce;

(2) to limit the authority of the United States to prohibit hunting or fishing on any portion of the lands owned by the United States; or

(3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, supersede or alter any treaty-reserved right or other right of any Indian tribe as recognized by any other means, including, but not limited to, agreements with the United States, Executive Orders, statutes, and judicial decrees, and by Federal law.

SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED.
For purposes of this Act, the term `State' includes the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

 

[Orygun]

 

[Two Rugers]

Ok so what does it mean?

 

[EL CAZADOR]

Originally posted by Two Rugers@May 13 2005, 11:37 AM
Ok so what does it mean?

In layman’s terms

It is the policy of Congress that it is in the public interest for each State to continue to regulate the taking for any purpose of fish and wildlife within its boundaries,

each State can continue to regulate the take of fish and wildlife within their State (no change from current laws)

including by means of laws or regulations that differentiate between residents and nonresidents of such State with respect to the availability of licenses or permits for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or the fees charged in connection with issuance of licenses or permits for hunting or fishing.

States can now have regulations that apply to residents and a separate set of regulations that apply to non-residents. Example: 10 elk tags total - 8 to residents, 2 to non-residents. Another example: dove season - daily possession for residents = 10, daily possession for non-residents = 5 (extreme example, I know , but that's how the law reads). Most common example: Resident deer tag-$15, non-resident deer tag-$500

 

[spectr17]

Bush signs law allowing states to set own hunting, fishing rules

ASSOCIATED PRESS

5/12/2005

A bill affirming the authority of states to regulate hunting and fishing has been signed into law by President Bush.

The legislation frees states to set their own regulations and in some — including Nevada — upholds rules that favor residents over out-of-state applicants.

The measure, sponsored by several Western lawmakers including U.S. Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign of Nevada, was in response to a 2002 federal appeals court ruling that said states restricting nonresident hunting tags must do so in the “least discriminatory” way.

More at the link

http://www.rgj.com/news/printstory.php?id=99412

 

[Hoback Hunter]

Ahh, the sovereignty of states... they way it should be for fish and game, IMO.

Imagine the chaos that would reign if the feds ever decide that game and fish have an interstate commerce value... We'll all be screwed, no matter what side of the line we're on regarding resident v. non-residents hunting/angling rights.

But I suspect that in our lifetimes, this issue will come up again...