Bill barring permits in MO Breaks and other districts pops up

[Straight Arrow]

Just a reminder

[email protected]

Email him. Ask him to pull LC2770

Done.

 

[bigsky2]

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2021/billpdf/LC2770.pdf

Here is the link to the draft text. While Elk are the most obvious target this could effect every game species as written.

I haven't looked but I wouldn't be surprised if sheep are over-objective in the Breaks. Can't imagine the bill passing unless it was amended to exclude species like moose, sheep, and goat.

 

[Brad W]

The draft language is so simple and broad it is clear that no one put any actual thought into the implications of the bill. Can you imagine the Breaks in 2022 if this actually goes through? It would be a massacre the opening week of rifle season. It would also have no impact on private land “game damage” issues. It will probably exacerbate the situation as every elk in Eastern MT flees to private land sanctuaries. The population would be back at “objective” within 24 hours and then the state would go back to issuing limited entry tags for those units. Then it would seesaw back and forth.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I haven't looked but I wouldn't be surprised if sheep are over-objective in the Breaks. Can't imagine the bill passing unless it was amended to exclude species like moose, sheep, and goat.

This is a bad bill with significant adverse consequences for whatever the species, as well as for hunting. Moreover, it is another piece of legislation aimed at usurping the authority and responsibility of Montana FWP and the Fish & Game Commission to professionally manage wildlife and hunting with the proper due diligence and careful analysis of ramifications of such permitting changes.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

After reading these last few bills and learining of groups like UPOM, it seems like everyday hunters have to come together and start a lobbying organization or something to at least compete with these large money/ landowner lobbying groups. I know there is BHA is there any others that do lobbying work in the MT Legislature?

 

[Straight Arrow]

After reading these last few bills and learining of groups like UPOM, it seems like everyday hunters have to come together and start a lobbying organization or something to at least compete with these large money/ landowner lobbying groups. I know there is BHA is there any others that do lobbying work in the MT Legislature?

Nick Gevock for Montana Wildlife Federation. Other representatives from local sportsmen groups consistently show up also.

 

[EYJONAS!]

I haven't looked but I wouldn't be surprised if sheep are over-objective in the Breaks. Can't imagine the bill passing unless it was amended to exclude species like moose, sheep, and goat.

I highly doubt the FWP is going to let their precious 250k-400k dollar rams just get dumped.....

 

[Ben Lamb]

After reading these last few bills and learining of groups like UPOM, it seems like everyday hunters have to come together and start a lobbying organization or something to at least compete with these large money/ landowner lobbying groups. I know there is BHA is there any others that do lobbying work in the MT Legislature?

MWF, Montana TU, MTBHA, MT Bowhunters, DU all show up regularly or have staff committed to the session every time. Other groups participate as they can, but lack staff capacity to really do much beyond get the word out to members. There are coalitions of groups that work together as well, such as MT Wilderness Assn, MT Conservation Voters working with sporting groups on areas where they are aligned, such as public land, and there is the MT Sporting Coalition which has every major sportsman's org in it.

The problem is long-term engagement & the ability to provide enough support to anyone to do the long-term work necessary to change the dynamic in the capitol, as well as influence electoral politics. The other side has this down pat and spends all year long working legislators, while the small sportsmen's groups can't, as they have limits on the lobbying they can do put in place by the IRS and because of staff capacity.

 

[MTLabrador]

I may have missed it in the previous pages, but has RMEF shared anything yet? It's still early in the process, but they could really get the word out to a lot of people.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

I may have missed it in the previous pages, but has RMEF shared anything yet? It's still early in the process, but they could really get the word out to a lot of people.

Does RMEF do any lobbying or just land purchases, easments and things of that nature?

 

[MTLabrador]

Does RMEF do any lobbying or just land purchases, easments and things of that nature?

I'm not talking about lobbying, just spreading the word to the public and their membership, as we saw them do with wolf reintroduction in Colorado. This is a huge issue for elk in Montana.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Does RMEF do any lobbying or just land purchases, easments and things of that nature?

They do, but they are currently without a Gov't Relations specialist as he moved over to the BLM to run the NLCS department (really solid appointment by the previous administration, btw), so they're not as looped in as usual.

 

[Schaaf]

I may have missed it in the previous pages, but has RMEF shared anything yet? It's still early in the process, but they could really get the word out to a lot of people.

I wouldn’t get your hopes up.

 

[MTLabrador]

I wouldn’t get your hopes up.

I’m waiting for a return email from them now.

 

[antlerradar]

Iam just saying alot of dude ranches such as dome mountain, wilks ect sell often. Which are the ones behind alot of these bills. If montana ran it like a business. Yes we could purchase alot of land. Just to be fair say we charge $15 an aum. With that it benifits the public and a true rancher. Actual ranchers would have more grazing at $15 an aum. Just thinking

A ranch like the NBar just sold near me. Price of better than 75 million. At 15 dollars an aum that is better than 400 thousand cows. Might be stocking a little heavy.

 

[Walkalot]

Just a quick search in 2015 the BLM made $14.5 million dollars off of grazing from ranchers. I assume thats all states maybe only montana. Article didnt specify. That was at $1.23 AUM at the time. So if it would of been at $15 an aum, adjust it to $150 million roughly just because. Its short but will move on. Say it was every state. So say montana BLM at 15 aum would make 15 million a yr. So ya it would take 5 yrs to buy the Nbar or similar. But thats just the BLM. I just guessing montana could buy alot of land that would benifit everyone.

I will find out the actual numbers and post them.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Just a quick search in 2015 the BLM made $14.5 million dollars off of grazing from ranchers. I assume thats all states maybe only montana. Article didnt specify. That was at $1.23 AUM at the time. So if it would of been at $15 an aum, adjust it to $150 million roughly just because. Its short but will move on. Say it was every state. So say montana BLM at 15 aum would make 15 million a yr. So ya it would take 5 yrs to buy the Nbar or similar. But thats just the BLM. I just guessing montana could buy alot of land that would benifit everyone.

I will find out the actual numbers and post them.

Montana can’t take BLM grazing fees and purchase land. It doesn’t work that way.

 

[mtmiller]

I will find out the actual numbers and post th

Montana can’t take BLM grazing fees and purchase land. It doesn’t work that way.

Luckily Montana doesn't have to cover the BLM grazing administrative cost either.

FYI Walkalot, the grazing fee was $1.69 in 2015 so BLM made a lot more money.

 

[Walkalot]

Was just going off what the article said. $1.23. I will just leave it alone. Seems like it would be a way to purchase more public land.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

I've been trying to figure out the logic behind this bill. I talked to a family friend who lives in the breaks and as you can guess he opposes this bill. However, he did admit there is a problem in the breaks that there are certain areas (410 specifically) there are tons of elk that come onto actual rancher's properties and are "eating them out of house and home." Problem is they call the fwp, who then attemps damage hunts, etc etc but the vast majority of the elk then run onto ranches that allow NO HUNTING, or are pay to play. It seems to me essentially this is just a great example of the current state of western hunting. Big money land owners come in, buy large ranches, horde elk herds like they own them, dont let the herds be managed as they should be and screw over thier neighbors who are real ranchers/ farmers who actually need the land to make a living. Its crazy the legislature could think this idea/bill will work to manage herds, its only going to grow the divide between common people and large money land owners.