Act now & submit comments to Montana’s Department of Natural Resources & Conservation (DNRC) by September 25th.
Montana’s state lands generate important revenue for our schools. Most state lands are leased, though these lands remain publicly accessible to outdoor recreation, for the most part.
However, now that Montanans specifically pay for recreational access to these lands with the required conservation license – generating $2.4 million in Fiscal Year 2026 – some of the more restrictive rules no longer seem appropriate or fair.
The rules that guide what sort of recreation is permitted and where are being revisited, and DNRC wants to know your thoughts.
MWF will be commenting on the following:
Camping and Overnight Use
Montanans should be able to camp for more than two days, even if that state land is leased, and backcountry hunters specifically should be able to venture on foot to camp overnight in locations that are more than 200 feet from an access point. Otherwise much of our large chunks of state lands remain only accessible to lessees.
In recognition of this and to be consistent with existing regulations on unleashed state lands, we request that camping be allowed on all state lands for up to 16 days a month, and that non-motorized camping be allowed on all state lands, rather than being limited to within 200 feet of an access point.
Camping while using a motorized vehicle, however, should remain limited to 50 feet of an access point to protect our natural resources.
Electric Bike (e-bike) Use
DNRC should continue to regulate e-bikes as motorized vehicles since they have a motor.
As electric OHVs and e-dirt bikes enter the market, it’s increasingly important that we distinguish between human-powered and motorized recreation on our state lands.
Snowmobilie Use
DNRC should continue to default to snow machines only being allowed on motorized travel routes unless otherwise noted (rather than the other way around).
The ‘open-unless-posted-as-closed’ approach makes it too easy for signage to disappear; but for some reason the signs denoting a road or area as open to motorized use, those signs seem to last a long time.
Lessees should continue to get motorized use exceptions, but since those often lead to confusion amongst other user groups there needs to be more education and signage explaining these permissive exemptions for lessees only, and increased enforcement to back it up.
Motorized Use/Road Use
Similar to snowmobile use, we encourage DNRC to default to motorized use only being allowed on motorized travel routes unless otherwise noted (rather than the other way around). The ‘open-unless-posted-as-closed’ approach makes it too easy for signage to disappear and it will take significant staff time and resources to appropriately sign DNRC lands if it were to change.
Again, lessees should continue to get motorized use exceptions, but to limit confusion there needs to be more education and signage explaining these permissive exemptions for lessees only and expanded enforcement efforts are needed.
State Trust Land Enrolled within Block Management Agreements (BMAs)
Block Management compensates private landowners for the impacts associated with hunters on their private lands; it is not technically an access payment. And with more use comes more impacts on the private lands enrolled, even if much of that impact is also on DNRC lands.
We encourage DNRC to continue to allow these chunks of private and DNRC lands to be clearly communicated as publicly accessible to hunt via Block Management, and private landowners should still be compensated for all of those associated user impacts on their private lands.
But the special hunting restrictions that we’re seeing for Block Management should only apply to the private lands enrolled, and not the DNRC lands that would otherwise not have any special regulations. Leaseholders nor Block Management cooperators should be able to prohibit forms of otherwise legal and responsible hunting or recreation.
Final Thoughts
Leaseholders often pay to use these DNRC lands, but lessees don’t own them, nor do they pay for or possess exclusive access. And while there are valid concerns from leaseholders that more public recreation could mean an increase in litter, for example, DNRC should not allow reasonable impacts of public use to prohibit public use of state lands.
Recreationists should certainly strive to minimize our impacts as much as possible though, by practicing principles of Leave No Trace and being responsible and ethical users of our shared resources. To this end, MWF supports improved education and consistency, better signage, and bolstered enforcement in the field.
To submit your own comments, click here. The comment deadline is September 25th.
