Caribou Gear

SB 442 - Habitat and Access

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
20,370
Location
Cedar, MI

Yesterday in Senate Finance and Claims Senator Mike Lang (R-Malta) amended SB 442 to restore the 20% funding for Habitat Montana and add a new conservation program that expands and improves the Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program, creates a new habitat council designed to take the politics out of habitat acquisition and conservation, funds better maintenance for rural county roads, increases benefits for disabled veterans and their spouses, increase funding for addiction counseling and intervention programs.

This is a significant step forward in investing Montana's marijuana tax revenue in to programs that help all Montanans and bring forward the best in all of us.

For conservation purposes, the bill does the following:
1.) Creates the Habitat Legacy Account. This account will house the 20% allocation of marijuana revenue for both Habitat Montana and the Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program. The funding will flow into Habitat Montana at 75% of the allocation, with 25% allocated to WHIP projects until such time that $50 million is in the Habitat Montana account that is unobligated. After that, the funding stays in the Habitat Legacy account, and can be used by both programs, based on need. This account will receive about $17.3 million per year. The Legacy program also has a $1 million per year allocation of Pittman Robertson funding as well.

2.) Creates the Habitat Council: Currently, the WHIP board only oversees the work done relative to that program. The bill expands the scope of the council to include reviewing Habitat Montana projects as well to help ensure viability early in the process, bringing surety to landowners looking to sell their property or place an easement on it as well as answer any questions relative to assessments, quality of the project or other issues that have been flagged by the Land Board.

3.) Creates the expanded Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program which will do the following:

a.) Improvement and maintenance of habitat on tribal, private and public lands.

b.) Projects that improve water conservation such as irrigation projects, beaver dam analogs, etc

c.) Improvement and maintenance of riparian areas and aquatic habitat

d.) Range management projects, range health projects, drought resilience projects

e.) Noxious weed management projects

f.) Wildlife conflict reduction projects

g.) Conservation Districts, Grazing Associations, irrigation districts, 501 (C)3 wildlife and landowner groups, county weed boards and state, tribal and federal agencies.

The bill also sets up a new fund that allocates 20% of the general fund portion of the marijuana revenue to be used to maintain county roads, and specifically ones that provide access to block management areas, public lands and other areas open for access. The goal is to help ensure better road maintenance especially during the fall when the thaw and freeze cycle is happening daily. Lang's amendment moves this fund from the conservation portion over to the general fund portion but still helps ensure better access routes to publicly accessible lands.

This model is built off of the highly successful Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resources Trust that passed in 2005, but is uniquely developed to fit Montana's landscape and ownership mix. It will be up on the Senate floor on Monday, so feel free to call your local senator and ask them to support a bill that brings so many different interests and causes together under one bill.

(406) 444-4800 or contact them through your usual means or through the legislature's web portal.
 
Ben, could you give me the cliff notes of what has changed prior the Lang bill (passage I-190) and where we will be after the current Lang bill if passed?

I was in attendance at the R6 CAC meeting when he grand standed his plans prior the legislature session. I have opinions, but will refrain.
 
I-190 suggested an allocation of 32%, with another 12% going to the trails, state parks and nongame management programs.

HB 701 from last session changed that allocation to 20% for Habitat Montana, and kept the 12% for other programs.

SB 442 originally took that 20% from Habitat Montana and allocated it to the new county road fund. After the amendment, the 20% funding was restored for conservation, with a new account designed to help fund both Habitat Montana and the changes to the WHIP program based on a formula that still allows the vast majority of the funding to be used for Habitat Montana programs, but changes that allocation based on projected needs to both programs.

The original estimate of the funding under I-190 was that HM would receive roughly $8-10 million per year under the 32% model. Given the rapid increase in revenue since passage, that allocation at 20% was about $17.3 million per year. As revenues stabilize, the need to adjust based on need and fiscal prudency was such that we expected some changes here and there, but the attempts to steal all of the funding for Habitat MT really ramped up in the interim and have led to the introduction of 3 bills to directly divert funding: HB 462 (which was the Governor's bill and is now tabled in House Appropriations), HB 669, which is up for second reading on the House Floor today, and SB 442, which is now a bill that all should be able to support.
 
I got my second generic letter from the Governor's office yesterday after reaching out about efforts to defund HM. The people have spoken! Let's rally and show support now!
 
I-190 suggested an allocation of 32%, with another 12% going to the trails, state parks and nongame management programs.

HB 701 from last session changed that allocation to 20% for Habitat Montana, and kept the 12% for other programs.

SB 442 originally took that 20% from Habitat Montana and allocated it to the new county road fund.
I-190 called for 37.1% of marijuana tax revenue to go to Habitat Montana:

(3) Funds deposited into the account must be transferred in the following amounts to provide funding as set out below:
(a) 4.125% of the funds to be deposited into the nongame wildlife account established in 87-5-121;
(b) 4.125% of the funds to be deposited into the state park account established in 23-1- 105(1);
(c) 4.125% of the funds to be deposited into the trails and recreational facilities account established in 23-2-108;
(d) 37.125% of the funds to be deposited to the credit of the department of fish, wildlife, and parks to be used solely as funding for wildlife habitat in the same manner as funding generated under 87-1-242(3) and used pursuant to 87-1-209;
 
Good story out of the Flathead Beacon on the two competing bills left on this: https://flatheadbeacon.com/2023/03/31/two-competing-bills-aim-to-settle-cannabis-tax-revenue-debate/

“I think we’ve made some pretty smart changes here that are intended to invest in rural Montana’s roads, lands and hunting opportunities while providing support for our veterans and a growing need for drug treatment,” Lang said. “At the end of the day we want to give our local counties and local people the tools and resources they need to improve the conditions of the land and be good stewards of Montana.”
 
What's unclear for me Ben is what happens to HB442 if HB669 passes....or vise versa.

Rochambeau.

This will likely be settled in a conference committee. Both bills still have to clear their respective ve chambers. 662 is on third reading in the House tomorrow & 442 is up for second reading in the Senate.

There is a lot more road to head down for both bills. Right now, we have over 40 groups from industry to ag to conservation representing hundreds of thousands of Montanans that support 442.

Only 65 politicians support 669.
 
Quail Forever? There are quail in Montana? Or maybe they are preparing for the next legislative session where they can get few mil $ to get pen-raised quail released on state lands....for the kids, of course.

View attachment 270801
r
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,061
Messages
1,945,451
Members
35,001
Latest member
samcarp
Back
Top