WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SCR 4029

A concurrent resolution directing the Legislative Management to consider studying the costs and effects of planting and tending to sterile monoculture invasive plants and native plants within the state.

69th Legislative Assembly (2025-26) Introduced by Dawson Holle and 3 co-sponsors

A study comparing costs and ecological impacts of planting sterile monoculture invasive plants versus native prairie plants across North Dakota to guide future legislation.

Second reading, failed to adopt
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SCR 4029

Summary: North Dakota Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 4029 (SCR 4029)

Overview

SCR 4029 is a concurrent resolution directing the Legislative Management to undertake a study evaluating the costs and effects of planting sterile monoculture invasive plants versus native prairie plants across North Dakota. As a concurrent resolution, it expresses the legislature’s request for a study rather than establishing new law. The resolution was introduced on March 7, 2025, went through a committee process, and was reported "do not pass." It reached second reading but failed to be adopted on March 14, 2025.

Purpose and Intent

  • Directs Legislative Management to consider a comparative study on:
    • Costs of planting sterile monoculture invasive plants
    • Costs of planting native prairie (non-invasive) plants
  • Evaluate which approach best promotes the state’s ecosystems, considering both foreign/native plantings or a combination thereof.
  • The study should inform potential legislation to implement recommendations, to be presented to the 70th Legislative Assembly.

Key Provisions

  • The study compares the financial implications of two planting strategies:
    • Sterile monoculture invasive plants
    • Native prairie plants
  • The analysis must include, for both approaches:
    • Costs of mowing, seeding, and application of herbicides and pesticides
    • Other related costs and effects of planting each plant type
  • The study must assess ecological impacts on North Dakota’s ecosystems, including how monoculture invasive plants and native prairie plants affect ecological dynamics.
  • The Legislative Management must report findings and recommendations, including any proposed legislation necessary to implement the recommendations, to the Seventieth Legislative Assembly.

Scope and Methodology

  • Geographic scope: throughout the state of North Dakota
  • Comparative framework: sterile monoculture invasive plants vs. native prairie plants
  • Cost components: mowing, seeding, herbicide/pesticide applications, and other related cultivation/maintenance costs
  • Ecological assessment: evaluation of ecosystem impacts from each planting approach

Reporting and Timeline

  • Report due to the Seventieth Legislative Assembly (2027) with findings, recommendations, and any proposed implementing legislation.
  • The resolution does not authorize immediate policy changes; it requires a study and future legislative consideration.

Status and Procedural Details

  • Introduced: March 7, 2025
  • Referred to: Energy and Natural Resources Committee
  • Committee action: March 13, 2025 — Hearing held; reported back “do not pass”
  • Floor action: March 14, 2025 — Second reading, failed to adopt
  • Classification: Concurrent resolution (non-binding, guidance to Legislative Management)

Stakeholders and Potential Impacts

  • State government: Legislative Management, state agencies involved in vegetation management, agriculture, and natural resources
  • Land stewards and land managers: public and private landowners evaluating future planting strategies
  • Environmental and ecological interests: groups concerned with invasive species, biodiversity, and prairie restoration
  • Fiscal considerations: potential costs and savings associated with different planting regimes and maintenance practices

Bottom Line

SCR 4029 seeks a thorough, comparative study of planting sterile monoculture invasive plants versus native prairie plants, including cost analyses and ecological impacts, to inform future legislative direction. The measure underscores a focus on ecosystem health and cost-effectiveness but, as introduced, did not advance past the second reading.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.