I-193 to exempt MT Landowners from elk/deer/bear regs

Eh, wow? I would think this a HT prank though...

Who are the primary "representatives" to fire our calls / emails?
Bah... reading while working. Apologies from OP:
If you want to contact EQC members, here is the webpage. This also contains the "Referral letter" from the person submitting, along with the AG opinion letter of legal sufficiency. EQC web page is here - https://leg.mt.gov/committees/interim/eqc/meeting-info/
 
All I can say is wow. Are the people pushing this really that desperate. Most of the stuff like this could not get through a friendly legislature and a Governor that is all on board with this crap. Do the backers really think they are going to get 50+ percent of voters to pull the lever for this. I predict that this will back fire. First this initiative is going down in flames and it will not be that close. The vote will then be used to beat down any legislator that proposes any similar legislation. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think so.
 
All I can say is wow. Are the people pushing this really that desperate. Most of the stuff like this could not get through a friendly legislature and a Governor that is all on board with this crap. Do the backers really think they are going to get 50+ percent of voters to pull the lever for this. I predict that this will back fire. First this initiative is going down in flames and it will not be that close. The vote will then be used to beat down any legislator that proposes any similar legislation. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think so.

I hope you are correct.
 
Holy cow...I feel it's dead in its tracks tho as antlerradar said. Still crazy to me it's even been initiated tho.
 
Would this enable a poacher previously convicted and banned from hunting, but now ok to hunt as a "guest", lessor or landowner?
 
All I can say is wow. Are the people pushing this really that desperate. Most of the stuff like this could not get through a friendly legislature and a Governor that is all on board with this crap. Do the backers really think they are going to get 50+ percent of voters to pull the lever for this. I predict that this will back fire. First this initiative is going down in flames and it will not be that close. The vote will then be used to beat down any legislator that proposes any similar legislation. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think so.
Completely agree.
 
This is just a first step prior to combing the counties of Montana for signatures, correct? That's a difficult thing for far more popular ideas, and costs a hell of a lot of money. Seems very possible we won't even see this initiative on a ballot.

At this point, I don't think it coming to fruition is likely, but it will be interesting to see who shows up in support for it, if anyone.
 
Seems like they may struggle to get enough signatures?

If this is challenged in court and they have to change the language after it's submitted, do they have to start over collecting signatures? The language is poorly written and looks like it could easily be challenged. Can it be challenged if it's been approved by the AG or whoever has authority in MT?

I can't say that I'm surprised. Wildlife is a hot commodity that comes with hot property.
 
Where does it say this?

@ item 7 in the full text. Granted, I may not be understanding the full meaning of this initiative. The language is very vague and confusing to me as it doesn’t clearly specify what the commission is not allowed to prohibit.
Other parts of this document specifically say the commission is authorized to set permit areas. 🤷‍♂️
IMG_2413.jpeg
 
My gut feeling is in line with what @antlerradar posted. I don’t see this being a burning issue for 50% of Montana voters to pass into law.

If it does pass as vaguely as it is written it seems to me that there’s a whole lot of potential for unintended consequences that exceed the scope of the author’s intent.

Deer, elk, and black bear is a completely arbitrary distinction. If this is passed on the principle that landowners have the right to harvest wildlife without the restriction of permits then why stop there? What about that rancher over in central MT who was complaining about the number of bighorn sheep in his alfalfa fields?
 
PEAX Trekking Poles

Forum statistics

Threads
110,347
Messages
1,916,930
Members
34,721
Latest member
jeemeeyah
Back
Top