North Dakota Administrative Code Title 30 - Game and Fish Department
🔷 What is NDAC Title 30 – Game and Fish Department?
Title 30 of the North Dakota Administrative Code contains the administrative rules adopted by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department (NDGF). These rules implement state wildlife laws under the authority granted by the North Dakota Century Code (NDCC), primarily Chapter 20.1.
The Game and Fish Department is responsible for managing and regulating the conservation, propagation, protection, and harvest of wildlife in North Dakota, including hunting, fishing, and trapping.
đź”· Purpose and Responsibilities
The Game and Fish Department, through Title 30, fulfills several key objectives:
1. Wildlife Conservation
Protects populations of fish, birds, and game animals through science-based management and habitat conservation.
2. Licensing and Permits
Establishes rules for issuing hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses.
Regulates special permits (e.g., for disabled hunters, landowners, guides).
3. Hunting and Fishing Regulations
Sets season dates, bag limits, weapon restrictions, and other conditions for legal harvest.
Adjusts rules based on population surveys and environmental conditions.
4. Enforcement and Penalties
Provides administrative support for enforcement of wildlife laws by game wardens.
Regulates revocation and suspension of licenses for violations.
5. Land Access and Public Use
Oversees management of wildlife management areas (WMAs).
Issues rules for hunter access programs on private land.
đź”· Structure of Title 30
While the specific chapter organization may vary, it typically includes the following types of rules:
â–Ş Licensing (30-01)
Resident vs. non-resident licenses
Youth and senior licenses
License agents and online systems
â–Ş Hunting Regulations (30-02)
Deer, elk, moose, pronghorn
Upland birds and waterfowl
Manner of taking game (e.g., bow, firearm, muzzleloader)
â–Ş Fishing Regulations (30-03)
Game fish species (e.g., walleye, northern pike)
Ice fishing rules
Use of live bait and nets
â–Ş Trapping and Fur-bearers (30-04)
Season dates
Approved traps and snares
Mandatory reporting and tagging
â–Ş Land Use and Habitat (30-05)
Wildlife management area regulations
Private land access programs
Motor vehicle restrictions
đź”· Legal Framework and Case Law Principles
The Game and Fish Department’s rules in Title 30 are legally binding regulations that have the force of law. They are adopted through the Administrative Agencies Practice Act in North Dakota and must conform to both statutory authority and constitutional protections.
🔹 1. Police Power and Wildlife Regulation
States have broad authority under their police powers to manage wildlife within their borders.
Case Example: Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U.S. 519 (1896)
Held that wildlife belongs to the state in its sovereign capacity for the benefit of the people.
Application: ND Game and Fish has the authority to regulate game harvest even if it impacts private landowners or commercial hunters.
🔹 2. Due Process and License Revocation
Hunters and anglers with valid licenses have limited property interests. If NDGF revokes or suspends a license, it must follow due process.
Case Example: Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970)
Established that when a government benefit is revoked, affected individuals must receive notice and a fair hearing.
Application: If a hunter’s license is revoked due to a violation, the Department must provide procedural protections like notice and an appeal process.
🔹 3. Equal Protection and Discrimination
Rules must be enforced fairly and equally, especially between residents and non-residents.
Case Example: Baldwin v. Fish & Game Commission of Montana, 436 U.S. 371 (1978)
Upheld Montana’s higher license fees for non-residents, stating there is no constitutional right to equal treatment in recreational hunting.
Application: NDGF can charge non-residents more for licenses or limit their access without violating equal protection laws.
🔹 4. Search and Seizure – Game Wardens
Wildlife officers may have broader search authority in enforcing game laws, but constitutional protections still apply.
Case Example: Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967)
Generally requires a warrant for administrative searches.
But: Under the “open fields doctrine” (from Oliver v. U.S., 466 U.S. 170), officers can enter open fields without a warrant.
Application: ND game wardens can inspect fields and non-curtilage areas without a warrant, but may need consent or probable cause for vehicles, homes, or camps.
🔹 5. Commerce Clause – Limits on State Power
States cannot enforce wildlife regulations that unduly burden interstate commerce.
Case Example: Hughes v. Oklahoma, 441 U.S. 322 (1979)
Struck down a law banning export of minnows, saying it burdened interstate commerce.
Application: NDGF must be careful when creating rules that limit out-of-state sale or transport of wildlife products.
đź”· Example Application: Hypothetical ND Case
Case: In re Suspension of John Smith’s Hunting License (ND Supreme Court, hypothetical)
John Smith's deer hunting license was suspended after he was found to have harvested a deer outside of legal shooting hours, based on camera surveillance. Smith claims:
He was not given notice before the suspension.
The evidence was improperly obtained.
Court’s Analysis:
Due process: ESPB failed to provide a pre-deprivation hearing → Violation of Goldberg principles.
Search and seizure: Camera placed in open field (no expectation of privacy) → No Fourth Amendment violation.
Outcome: Suspension overturned on procedural grounds; evidence admissible.
đź”· Summary
| Aspect | Description |
|---|---|
| Agency | North Dakota Game and Fish Department |
| Authority | ND Century Code Chapter 20.1 |
| NDAC Title 30 Covers | Hunting, fishing, trapping, licenses, land use, wildlife conservation |
| Constitutional Requirements | Due process, equal protection, lawful search, and commerce compliance |
| Key Legal Doctrines | State ownership of wildlife, administrative due process, open fields doctrine |
âś… Final Note
NDAC Title 30 gives the Game and Fish Department the rulemaking power to conserve wildlife and regulate outdoor recreation. While the Department has wide discretion, it must still operate within constitutional and statutory boundaries. Violations of procedural or substantive rights can result in legal challenges, though courts typically defer to the agency’s expertise when rules are clear and fairly applied.
RELATED Blog
0 comments