I would ask the chair to rule this out of order because it actually goes diametrically in the opposite direction of the intent of the original motion.
The original motion calls for the season to open, not for the season to remain closed. Those are complete opposites; therefore, it is out of order.
It's also out of order because the motion clearly identifies that the government has done an inadequate job of enforcing the law, and the amendment claims to do the exact opposite.
In both cases, what the government is doing is out of order and is against the spirit and the intent of the original motion. It is a completely opposite motion of this and, therefore, it is out of order.
You need to rule, Mr. Chair.