Montana 2025 Legislative Session

[Ben Lamb]

Wheres the exception here?

It's a remnant from the original language. It's inartful in it's current form. I can see why some folks would feel they way you do. There are better ways to get that intent.

We are asking for an amendment to restore the language relative to no one being able to hold more than 3 licenses, so will include an ask for a strike through on that word.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Anyone have an update on 307?

 

[Rack Daniels]

Somehow all the people they let have access ran out of B tags? Or - more likely - with an unlimited number the access can be more readily sold and commodified.

There's never been a shortage of tags to control elk population. In fact, recently, a judge in lewistown shot down the inept UPOM idea of FWP exterminating elk because some well invested/connected landowners have an "abundance" of too many elk.

Looks to me like the same ideas behind a legislative curtain. Hope anyone contacts their legislator and tells them they - and our elk - should not be for sale.

 

[mtnkid85]

Anyone have an update on 307?

307s been rescheduled for Monday finally.

Folks, keep up the pressure. Let them know we don't need to make the false choice between two deserving causes, we can stand behind the bipartisan decision to continue funding the habitat allocations from previous sessions AND fund enforcement/treatment services.

Its also becoming increasingly important as we head down the stretch to represent yourself and your causes with professionalism, treat our Representatives with dignity, be courteous and to the point, let them know what the issue is and how to fix it. Everyones nerves are starting to fray.


Senator Lenz, SD 25, Billings (406)-671-7052
Senator Fuller, SD 4, Kalispell (406)-253-4897
Senator McGilveray, SD 26, Billings, (406)-698-4428
Senator Mandeville, SD 28, Columbus, (406)-690-1933
Senator Regier, SD 5, Kalispell, (406)-284-5639
Senator Vance, SD 34, Belgrade, (406)-587-8608
Senator Glimm, SD 3, Kila, (406)-751-7334

 

[mtnkid85]

For anyone who's keeping track. These are the eight representatives most likely to support the divestiture of our federal public lands...



Oh and by the way, HJ 24: Joint house resolution supporting Utah in their land lawsuit against the United States advanced yesterday along a party line vote...

 

[Ben Lamb]

For those still paying attention, HB 676 was gutted in committee Friday, with the land sales amended out. My understanding is that it's still a problematic bill relative to the water rights issue, however.

Montana Trout Unlimited did a tremendous amount of work on this bill, and while there's still some issues with it, they deserve the credit for forcing the amendment and getting the land sale piece taken out.

 

[Southern Elk]

When does this session end? It can’t come soon enough.

 

[Ben Lamb]

When does this session end? It can’t come soon enough.

May 5th is the 90th day.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Bet there will be some nasties that try to get rammed through.

 

[MTGomer]

They should meet every 90 years for 2 days

 

[RandanP]

Sb 307 finance and claims hearing was yesterday. Similar to previous hearing except that opponents were given more time. There is now another bill covering the same subject in Hb 932. Seems more similar to the 446 bill that was vetoed last session. Sponsored by Walsh.

 

[RandanP]

First hearing for HB 932 is on right now in house appropriations.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Elk foundation working against hunters

Right before the last legislative session, an op-ed called out the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation for not showing up “to oppose the guaranteed tags for outfitters, the bulls for billionaires program, efforts to award transferable tags, attacks on conservation easements, or the theft of...

dailyinterlake.com

Interesting piece i saw on RMEF.

I didnt realize that RMEF was for liberalizing the war on elk (sb270). Did they support 519 to repeal 635 from last session?

Kind of makes me a bit sour to give them more of my money. Its true that we all cant run every organization we are members of - its also true not being a member of one org frees up more money for me to give to orgs who dont argue for the detriment of public land elk hunters.

 

[Carnage2011]

First hearing for HB 932 is on right now in house appropriations.

Can you give us a summary of HB932?

 

[Ben Lamb]

SB307 has been tabled.

 

[Elky Welky]

Elk foundation working against hunters

Right before the last legislative session, an op-ed called out the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation for not showing up “to oppose the guaranteed tags for outfitters, the bulls for billionaires program, efforts to award transferable tags, attacks on conservation easements, or the theft of...

dailyinterlake.com

Interesting piece i saw on RMEF.

I didnt realize that RMEF was for liberalizing the war on elk (sb270). Did they support 519 to repeal 635 from last session?

Kind of makes me a bit sour to give them more of my money. Its true that we all cant run every organization we are members of - its also true not being a member of one org frees up more money for me to give to orgs who dont argue for the detriment of public land elk hunters.

This is really sad. I generally respect RMEF, the many great people at Bugle magazine, and their work to restore and expand elk habitat. But their Montana leadership/lobbyist have made it clear this session that their unfounded fears about their financial bottom line are more important to them than the species they purport to care about. But even then, HB 283 would provide folks with an opportunity to auction OR raffle a tag. If they don't want to be equitable and would prefer to sell tags to rich people, this bill wouldn't stop them from doing so. It would simply provide the option to conduct a raffle if the org awarded the tag wanted to do so.

There was no legitimate reason for them to oppose HB 283. Even worse, they sent an action alert out just days later asking membership to support HB 141, which would modernize raffle laws and make it easier for people to use their debit cards for raffles. So why would they support that but then oppose a bill to allow raffles?

@Big Fin I know you are no longer on the board, but have you heard anything from their leadership about why RMEF would kill a bill that's good for the species that passed the house unopposed?

Hunt Talkers: I am a member of RMEF, and I can't begin to express how disappointed I am in them. Are you also going to let them know that they are no longer standing for what they purport to represent? This is a pretty clear example of an org turning its back on its members and the species. Please contact them and, respectfully, let them know that is not okay. I can't imagine the whole org knows that a few of their advocates in Montana are doing this.

 

[RandanP]

Can you give us a summary of HB932?

Kinda complicated. Here it is.

Bill Explorer

Explore, track, and stay informed on legislative bills in Montana with the Montana Legislature Bill Explorer application. Access detailed information, monitor bill progress, and engage with the legislative process easily from your desktop or mobile device.

bills.legmt.gov

 

[Carnage2011]

Kinda complicated. Here it is.

Bill Explorer

Explore, track, and stay informed on legislative bills in Montana with the Montana Legislature Bill Explorer application. Access detailed information, monitor bill progress, and engage with the legislative process easily from your desktop or mobile device.

bills.legmt.gov

That’s why I asked. I read it but couldn’t wrap my head around what exactly it does.

 

[RandanP]

That’s why I asked. I read it but couldn’t wrap my head around what exactly it does.

Maintains pot tax allocations as is.

Changes Habitat Montana some and creates a habitat legacy account.

Within the 20% allocation for habitat mt ( now habitat legacy account), 75% goes to former habitat mt purpose, 20% to WHIP and 5% to a new wildlife passages account (wildlife crossings).

There are some other changes to WHIP. Looks like they broaden the scope of what can be done and make it a bit broader than just noxious weeds.

I’m confused as the why whip needs money as it is already is appropriated 2m of PR money each year. They have never come close to spending 2m in a year.

If the new habitat legacy account has over 50m, then the allocations switch to go exclusively to WHIP and wildlife crossings.

Thats the way I understand it.

 

[Elky Welky]

That’s why I asked. I read it but couldn’t wrap my head around what exactly it does.

It takes the 20% of the marijuana money currently set aside for Habitat Montana and divvies it up in a really cool way. Once the HM account reaches $50 million, it then overflows the remaining money into a few different accounts all intended to benefit conservation. It's a fantastic bill.