News - Montana Wildlife Federation

HB 295 would improve public access

August 2, 2021February 10, 2017 by Guest Profile

Montana Capitol

State House members on the Judiciary Committee heard from hunters and county commission advocates Thursday that a bill to increase the fine for gating a county road would improve public access and local government authority.

HB 295, sponsored by Rep. Tom Jacobson, R-Great Falls, would take the outdated $10 per day fine for gating a county road and bump it up to up to $500 per day, with no minimum fine. It would also allow county commissioners to issue encroachment permits to farmers and ranchers when it’s needed for fencing and other issues, while maintaining that roads remain open.

The Montana Wildlife Federation worked with the Montana Association of Counties for over a year to craft this needed measure. And it showed in the hearing, with MACO Executive Director Harold Blattie testifying for the measure. Several MWF members from Helena and Anaconda also showed up in support, testifying that hunters lose access to thousands of acres of public land when a county road to reach it gets gated.

The only opponents were the United Property Owners of Montana, a group that also opposes our stream access law, and the Rocky Mountain Stockgrowers. The major statewide agricultural organizations stayed out of the bill.

Questions abounded about what is exactly a county versus a public road, and whether people could be fined in disputed cases. But in the end, it was made clear that the bill was narrowly written to apply to established county roads, and the fines would only apply once that is established and a road is gated.

State legislators almost across the board say they’re for public access. HB 295 is the access bill of the session, and it’s time for legislators to show where they are on this key issue.

Fill out the form below to send an email directly to the head of the Judiciary Committee, Chairman Doane and show your support for HB 295.

[emailpetition id=”5″]

HB 96 Voted Down

August 2, 2021February 8, 2017 by Guest Profile

shutterstock_18224380

Yesterday, HB96 was voted down. MWF originally wanted the bill to succeed, but it was amended in a way that our members could not support. The amended bill would have opened the door for transferable licenses, an idea which has failed in every other state that has tried it. The sponsor of the bill, Representative Zach Brown, a member of the Private Land/Public Wildlife Council, displayed tremendous leadership in advancing the original concept. We are grateful for his commitment to protecting wildlife, hunting heritage, and improving landowners-hunters relations.

The sponsor of the amendments to HB 96, FWP Committee Chairman Kelly Flynn, was open and honest about his motivation to increase access for Montanans while improving incentives for landowners. While we disagreed with his amendment, his character is above reproach. MWF looks forward to finding common ground with Chairman Flynn in the remaining days of this Session.

Congress votes to lock in 1980s public land management – and lock out public land users

August 2, 2021February 8, 2017 by Guest Profile

terry-badlands-photo-courtesy-US-BLM2

Today, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to overturn the Bureau of Land Management’s new “Planning 2.0” rule and set public land management back 30 years — to a time when the public was kept in the dark about land management decisions. The Senate will be casting their own vote on the rules in the next few days.

Planning 2.0 was developed over years by the BLM after listening to concerns from a variety of stakeholders. The new rule makes the planning process more collaborative and transparent by strengthening opportunities for other federal agencies, state and local governments, Indian tribes, and the public to be involved in the development of resource management plans earlier and more frequently.

The new planning rule gives the BLM flexibility to plan at a larger scale that makes sense and allows consideration of the full context of resource values and the best available science. The rule also includes steps to ensure that important fish and wildlife habitats, such as migration corridors and intact habitats, are identified early in the planning process so these important areas can be managed and conserved as the agency makes decisions about development, recreation and other public land uses.

In throwing out Planning 2.0, Congress is using a law called the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Under the CRA, once a regulation is disapproved by Congress, the agency cannot write a new rule that is “substantially the same.” As a result, the BLM would be forced to go back to using outdated guidelines from 1983 – guidelines that every stakeholder had issues with – and would be unable to make any attempt to revise them again, without a specific act of Congress.

Americans are blessed to own millions of acres of incredible public lands across our nation. We all should have a say in how these lands are managed. Planning 2.0 provides all land users with more occasions to make their voices heard: hunters and anglers, ranchers, skiers and snowmobilers, scientists, local governments, and energy and mining companies.

Congress should leave the Planning 2.0 in place. If there are areas that need improvement, let the new Interior Secretary decide how to move forward. The Bureau of Land Management’s new standard of listening to the concerns and ideas of a diverse group of stakeholders and local communities early in the process should not be sent into the dark ages.

Please take two minutes to ask Senator Steve Daines to drop his support for using the Congressional Review Act to throw out the new BLM planning rules!

Capitol Wildlife Report: Ranching for Wildlife, Habitat Montana & Wolves

August 2, 2021February 6, 2017 by Guest Profile

Capitol-Griz

Ranching for Wildlife comes to Montana

HB 96 was intended to expand a little-used program that provides an elk license or permit to a landowner for allowing public hunters on their land. The bill was crafted over months by the landowners, hunters and outfitters on Private Land/Public Wildlife Council. But that process wasn’t honored by the House Fish, Wildlife and Parks committee, which radically altered the bill to create a “Ranching for Wildlife” program. Chairman Kelly Flynn, R-Townsend, brought an amendment that would allow the landowner to give the licenses to anyone, rather than only immediate family or full-time employees. It is now ripe for abuse that would lead to privatizing wildlife, and the Montana Wildlife Federation will be leading the fight to oppose the bill.

Habitat Montana

The first hearing on HB 5, the state capital improvements bill, took place last week before the joint subcommittee that oversees FWP. That’s important because Habitat Montana land purchases and fishing access sites are included in HB 5. MWF and several of our conservation partners testified in favor of the program, and we gave the committee an MWF report highlighting successes of the program.

In addition, on Wednesday the Montana Sporting Coalition hosted an event in the rotunda of the capitol and served lunch for legislators. The event included tabling around the rotunda and a short speech from a representative from Ducks Unlimited.

Licensing bills offered

Last session, a sweeping overhaul of our hunting and fishing license structure was enacted. That bill came about after an 18 month process that brought diverse interests together to come up with a solid package to shore up FWP’s budget. Among other changes, the bill standardized the numerous free and reduced priced licenses, and set them all at half the price of a regular license. All of those special licenses were costing FWP $4.9 million a year in funding.

MWF opposed two bills last week that would chip away at that reform. HB 315 would have dropped the fee for non-resident relatives of a resident from one half the regular fee to one quarter. And HB 318 would have created a $120 big game combination licenses for non-resident college students. MWF supports keeping intact the license reforms that took so much work last session and rejecting bills to create more new licenses.

Wolf management

SB 110 would change how FWP wolf biologists report their time, and focus more on broad wolf management. The bill was heard in the Senate Fish and Game Committee on Thursday, and MWF supported it to allow FWP to be more effective and efficient in management. Wolf management has come a long way from a decade ago, thanks in large part to the work of MWF to remove Endangered Species Act protections for them and instill regulated hunting and trapping that has reduced livestock conflicts sharply.

Other bills

Last week we also supported SB 111, which would bar feeding of wild turkeys just as Montana does for other wildlife, and HB 311, giving landowners the ability to give preference to veterans to hunt on block management area properties on Veteran’s Day. MWF came out against HB 305, which would create a county bounty program for predators.

Looking forward

This week a handful of bills are coming up for their first hearing. They include SB 171, to prohibit restriction of certain deer permits; and HB 367, to create a voluntary checkoff for predator management.

As always, check the Montana Wildlife Federation bill tracker at montanawildlife.org/billtracker for the most up-to-date information on bills and where they’re at in the process. For questions, contact MWF Conservation Director Nick Gevock at ngevock@mtwf.org or by calling 458-0227 ext. 108.

HB 96: Ranching For Wildlife Comes to Montana

August 2, 2021February 3, 2017 by Guest Profile

elk-for-sale

Please contact your legislator 444-4800 and ask them to vote NO on House Bill 96.

Hammered out by the Private Land/Public Wildlife Council (PLPW), HB 96 sought to increase public hunting access on private ranches by modestly extending a little-used program. Known as the “454” program, it rewarded landowners with permits that had to be used on the landowner’s land.

HB 96 was supposed to be a consensus bill that would increase the incentive to allow landowner access while rewarding the landowner with a licenses and permits, as well as securing a better deal for hunters in terms of access.

That deal has been broken, and now our wildlife is for sale.

HB 96 was amended last week into a “Ranching for Wildlife” program that seeks to privatize wildlife. The bill would:

Allow the landowner to give the limited entry permit or license to anyone, rather than just the landowner, immediate family member or employee
Omit landowners who are enrolled in block management, while still allowing landowners who have leased to outfitters to participate in the program.
Create a new license or permit for outfitted clients rather than increase opportunity for everyone.
Do nothing to prevent outfitters and landowners from setting up under-the-table deals to sell licenses.
Break the faith of the PLPW and all of the organizations who supported the bill as written, and have asked that no amendments be offered.

MWF supported the bill, even though we had reservations, as a show of support for consensus efforts of PLPW. This amendment gives us no choice but to strongly oppose the bill.

Please contact your legislator 444-4800 and ask them to vote NO on House Bill 96.

Not sure who represents you? We can help

Jeff Lukas

Conservation Director