Study invasive plants vs native prairie

Summary#

SCR-4029 is a North Dakota Senate concurrent resolution, not a bill that would change planting rules. It would direct the Legislative Management to consider studying the costs and effects of planting sterile monoculture invasive plants compared with native prairie plants; its stated goal is to assess how different plants affect the state’s ecosystems. The resolution failed to adopt, so it did not take effect.

  • If adopted, the Legislative Management would have to consider whether to conduct the study; the text does not clearly require that the study itself be done.
  • If a study were done, it would have to compare mowing, seeding, herbicide and pesticide use, other costs, and effects on the state’s ecosystems.
  • The resolution calls for the Legislative Management to report findings and recommendations, along with any needed legislation, to the Seventieth Legislative Assembly.

What it means for you#

  • Residents, landowners, and businesses: The resolution would not require anyone to plant, remove, or tend particular plants. It would not change rules for land or planting.
  • State lawmakers: If adopted, the Legislative Management would have to consider studying the issue. The resolution would not itself create a planting program or require the state to use either type of plant.
  • The public: Because the resolution failed to adopt, it creates no study duty or other direct change.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

  • The resolution gives no estimate for the cost of a study or says how it would be paid for.
  • It does not authorize planting, tending, or other spending.

What is unclear#

  • “Sterile monoculture invasive plants” is not defined, and the resolution names no plant species.
  • The text does not say how the Legislative Management would decide whether to conduct a study or what it would involve.
  • It does not explain who would carry out or oversee a study, or how its costs would be assessed.
  • The resolution calls for a report, but does not explain what would happen if no study were conducted.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the resolution is that comparing costs and ecological effects could give lawmakers information before considering changes to planting practices.
  • The proposed comparison includes practical maintenance costs, such as mowing, seeding, and herbicide and pesticide use, as well as ecosystem effects.
  • A report could give the next Legislative Assembly findings and recommendations to consider.

Case against#

  • One concern is that the resolution only directs the Legislative Management to consider a study; it does not clearly require the study to happen.
  • The resolution does not define the plant categories or explain how costs and ecosystem effects would be measured, which could leave the comparison unclear.
  • No study budget, method, or oversight is specified.