ShootsManyBullets
Well-known member
Nailed it. FWP does NOT serve the people or the wildlife.
HB 505 - Elk Need Your Help
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
FIFY
FWP employees do. Some in Helena seem to have forgotten their history. Good story about what's happening at HQ:
Anti-wildlife bills and agency changes could damage Montana's wildlife populations
The anti-wildlife nature of several bills has prompted more than 48 wildlife professionals of Montana to raise their voice in opposition. If passed, the bills, along with agency changes, would diminish Montana’s reputation for science-based wildlife management.
missoulacurrent.com
Spartan_Eric
Active member
Kudos to them for standing up for “fair chase” principles! During this legislative session it appears to be a race to the bottom in this regard.FIFY
FWP employees do. Some in Helena seem to have forgotten their history. Good story about what's happening at HQ:
Anti-wildlife bills and agency changes could damage Montana's wildlife populations
The anti-wildlife nature of several bills has prompted more than 48 wildlife professionals of Montana to raise their voice in opposition. If passed, the bills, along with agency changes, would diminish Montana’s reputation for science-based wildlife management.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Sounds like people are being silenced. Not very encouraging, but I'm not exactly shocked.FIFY
FWP employees do. Some in Helena seem to have forgotten their history. Good story about what's happening at HQ:
Anti-wildlife bills and agency changes could damage Montana's wildlife populations
The anti-wildlife nature of several bills has prompted more than 48 wildlife professionals of Montana to raise their voice in opposition. If passed, the bills, along with agency changes, would diminish Montana’s reputation for science-based wildlife management.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
Looks like a bunch of new amendments have been added. Still a terrible bill.
sacountry
Well-known member
The house is about to adjourn from the floor. Not sure how much lag time there is between the closing of the floor and the opening of the committee meetings. Might start before 3:00 today, just a heads up.
Walkalot
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 254
What are the amendments
Schaaf
Well-known member
Here are your amendments
Very courteous of them to upload the amendments one hour before the meeting where they will vote.
Very courteous of them to upload the amendments one hour before the meeting where they will vote.
brocksw
Well-known member
Basically whats below and knocking it down from 5 bonus points to 1 is the meat and potatoes of it.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I read it as 3 bonus points
brocksw
Well-known member
So if they can verify they
Nameless Range
Well-known member
Just says "hunted", doesn't say successfully. So as I read it. 1 just like everyone else, 1 to "indicate" or not apply for a permit, and 1 after the season based on personal "verification."
MThuntr
Well-known member
Am I reading this right?
New amendments are:
5 per applicant of the 640 acres of contiguous acres BUT there is room for another 5 more on a different 640 acres.
3 bonus points (1 option to buy for getting a license ahead of the drawing, 1 for just participating in the transfer program, 1 after the fact for hunting on private land)
Half Priced tag for the landowner to "sponsor"
Landowner may not charge a fee or offer services or assistance...does this mean they can't charge for getting an applicant a permit or that they cannot offer outfitting services?
New amendments are:
5 per applicant of the 640 acres of contiguous acres BUT there is room for another 5 more on a different 640 acres.
3 bonus points (1 option to buy for getting a license ahead of the drawing, 1 for just participating in the transfer program, 1 after the fact for hunting on private land)
Half Priced tag for the landowner to "sponsor"
Landowner may not charge a fee or offer services or assistance...does this mean they can't charge for getting an applicant a permit or that they cannot offer outfitting services?
brocksw
Well-known member
I read it as 1 sponsorship/applicant per 640 acres up to 5
"To be eligible, a landowner may not accept monetary consideration from the license applicant for the sponsorship or for providing any services or assistance to the applicant except as provided in Title 37, chapter 47, and this title."
Anyone have a good link to Title 37, Chapter 47? I would assume it refers to standard guiding regs of some kind? Purely speculation though...
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I think it is up to 5 sponsored tags, and they would only get 5 if they owned 5 x 640 acres.
Also this: . To be eligible, a landowner 24 may not accept monetary consideration from the license applicant for the sponsorship or for providing any 25 services or assistance to the applicant except as provided in Title 37, chapter 47, and this title.
MThuntr
Well-known member
Thanks I got that backwards and started editing while you guys replied.
Landowner may not charge a fee for sponsorship or offer services or assistance...does this mean that they cannot offer outfitting services or offer like lodging?
Walkalot
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 254
So basically it has nothing to do with elk tolerance or objectives. Just a ploy to build points for high paying clients in LE units. They will pay the fee once they draw. $$$$
brocksw
Well-known member
Title 37, Chapter 47
brocksw
Well-known member
I'm skimming through the outfitters and guides regs as fast as possible and I don't see a damn thing that seems at all relevant to the language in this bill in terms of how it would enforce 505 language.
Spartan_Eric
Active member
By striking out “for a general elk license” here, I see this as a way for the Fish and Wildlife Commission to potentially open this up to bull elk limited draw hunting districts. Hopefully, I am wrong.
