Foraging Bill~~~ Taking My Jig Rods!

[Loves To Fish]

Seemed to go in foragers favor....

Without a doubt. That bill doesn't stand a chance in hell of passing.
There were several legislative members acknowledging that would be a disaster if passed. Most likely it will be killed next week with a stipulation added that landowners post signs / verbage stating what edibles are off limits on their property.
That's why it's important for people to show up and speak up at these public hearings.
Job well done Joe.

[. Ron]

I'm not a forager, don't like most mushrooms, detest fiddleheads, and don't have a dog in this race.  I'd like to ask a couple questions to better understand the issue, though. 

What are the guidelines with regards to what you can harvest from someone else's land, as it stands now?  I understand that tipping has already been ruled out.  But what about raiding someone's garden?  It seems to me that that's probably a stretch, but it begs a further question.  Do foragers regulate themselves?  Only harvest fungus and perennials/ferns.  Would that include my asparagus patch?  Or the chaga that I've been leaving until my current stash is gone? 

Again...personally I don't care if someone plucks all the shrooms and ferns from my little piece of land.  But what if I did?

(Edited because autocorrect sucks) 

[9huskies]

I spoke with Tom Saviello after the hearing. His thoughts are they will try to require landowner permission for commercial foraging. I didn't ask him how they would determine who is foraging commercially versus someone who is picking for personal or family use. I could pick 100 pounds of fiddleheads to give to my neighbors or my extended family. Someone else might pick 20 pounds to sell to Belle of Maine. This was my first time attending a legislative public hearing. Next time I will be better prepared with note cards to make the most of my three minutes.

[woodchip]

We really need a few more laws that can't be controlled.  They should start getting rid of some of these laws . instead of new ones . It leaves one to believe the quality of people dreaming up these laws.

[Anomaly]

Without a doubt. That bill doesn't stand a chance in hell of passing.
There were several legislative members acknowledging that would be a disaster if passed. Most likely it will be killed next week with a stipulation added that landowners post signs / verbage stating what edibles are off limits on their property.
That's why it's important for people to show up and speak up at these public hearings.
Job well done Joe.

Thanks! It was interesting. Doubt the bill will go anywhere, at least for now.

What I didn’t realize, AT ALL and was a bit taken aback, is that it is illegal to take anything besides game from anyones property, including public property.

[GasBlaster]

What I didn’t realize, AT ALL and was a bit taken aback, is that it is illegal to take anything besides game from anyones property, including public property.

If that's the case then what is this foraging thing all about ??

[Anomaly]

If that's the case then what is this foraging thing all about ??

Good question....Apparently enforcement time to enforce given the # of wardens, means and officers who would enforce it and actual ability to enforce. Some large landowners and there reps were there, saying they really didn’t care about the issue and felt it would be a bother for them to be tracked down for permission. 

I’d say all agreed it is best to ask permission where possible. There are times when it is not possible or one might be in the woods where pretty lines are not defined. Again....enforcement.. ..

Plus, current posting laws cover the issue:

          “Posting of Land and Criminal Trespass (17-A MRSA, §402)
             Property is posted if it is marked with signs or paint in one of the
             following ways and in a manner that is reasonably likely to come to the
             attention of an intruder:
1.   Signs must indicate that access is prohibited, that access is
    prohibited without permission of the landowner or landowner’s
    agent, or that access for a particular activity is prohibited.
2.   One vertical “OSHA Safety Purple” stripe at least one inch in
width and at least 8 inches in length means “Access by Permission Only” when it is placed on trees, posts or stones between three and five feet off the ground.

[cap]

Again...personally I don't care if someone plucks all the shrooms and ferns from my little piece of land.  But what if I did?

simple..

Just post your land "Access by Permission Only",,,like duh,,,this is not rocket science...we have plenty of laws on the books right now to cover this panty waste crapola from George....

[Anomaly]

  

That was pretty much the crux of the biscuit. Sen. “He who has a high opinion of himself” Saviello (not that you and I don’t, cap)  was and is still gonna push it. It was good to see large land owners and small ones like testify against the deal.   

simple..

Just post your land "Access by Permission Only",,,like duh,,,this is not rocket science...we have plenty of laws on the books right now to cover this panty waste crapola from George....

[Loves To Fish]

It appears the change of focus of this bill now will be on " commercial forages " and regulating them by licensing and asking for landowner permission to forage. Good luck with that.

[Anomaly]

It appears the change of focus of this bill now will be on " commercial forages " and regulating them by licensing and asking for landowner permission to forage. Good luck with that.

Where’d you see that,  LTF?

[Loves To Fish]

Where’d you see that,  LTF?

George mentioned it on his web page and it was brought up at the public hearing yesterday. But I didn't think they were serious in pursuing it. Sounds costly and will be hard to get compliance. Everyone will now claim that they're picking for themselves.

[Anomaly]

George mentioned it on his web page and it was brought up at the public hearing yesterday. But I didn't think they were serious in pursuing it. Sounds costly and will be hard to get compliance. Everyone will now claim that they're picking for themselves.

Thanks, D. Have to pay attention, I suppose. It’s like they now have a vendetta to pursue. With the preponderance of testimony against, I’d have hoped they would let it go. Maybe the committee will not recommend the bill given current posting law. That posting law question was floated several times during the hearing. It seemed to me something that mattered to the majority of legislators on committee.

[Loves To Fish]

Thanks, D. Have to pay attention, I suppose. It’s like they now have a vendetta to pursue. With the preponderance of testimony against, I’d have hoped they would let it go. Maybe the committee will not recommend the bill given current posting law. That posting law question was floated several times during the hearing. It seemed to me something that mattered to the majority of legislators on committee.

I believe you are right Joe. If they ammend this bill so it drastically changes, then they may resubmit a new LD so commercial foragers can give their input. But I doubt many would come forward to speak.

[9huskies]

There's one thing we can do after we contact our state representative and senator. We can contact Governor LePage and ask him to veto this bill if it passes.