HB 505 - Elk Need Your Help

[Hunting Wife]

Early morning email sent. Just how I like to start my day.

 

[MLaird]

I received a nice, informative update letter from my representative a bit ago so I took the opportunity to write him this morning and tell him thank you for his work and legislation, then ask him to vote no on HB 505 if it came up.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Folks, we're going to need 17 R's to side with us on the House floor. All hands on deck on this bill again. Contact your local reps to vote against this bad bill. Do not let this foot squeak through the doorway.

Blast motions requires a 3/5 vote to be successful. The Republicans currently enjoy a 67 seat majority in the House, and will need 60 Representatives to vote for the motion.

Keep hammering. Don't let up.

 

[Nameless Range]

This may sound dumb, but is this for sure happening? How did folks become aware of it?

I ask because I feel I only have a certain amount of capital with my representative, who has been receptive at times, but I feel like we are approaching a point where upon receiving yet another email from me, she's gonna think to herself, "This guy again...."

 

[Ben Lamb]

I haven't heard anything to corroborate this, but did see MTBHA put it out on their SM, so would assume that their lobby team has vetted.

 

[brocksw]

Has anyone taken the time to get all the emails in a copy/paste format to send and share easily?

 

[Montana2015]

I am the first to admit, that my understanding of government is not all that great. How on earth is democracy working when, a committee tables a bill, but a couple people, don't like the results so they can "blast" it to the next level? It seems like all the time and effort to achieve a no vote in committee was for not.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I am the first to admit, that my understanding of government is not all that great. How on earth is democracy working when, a committee tables a bill, but a couple people, don't like the results so they can "blast" it to the next level? It seems like all the time and effort to achieve a no vote in committee was for not.

Democracy is messy & process oriented. The Blast Motion is a time-tested rule under the MT Leg playbook, and it is supposed to be a bulwark against committee's flat rejecting good legislation based on partisan chicanery. The thinking is that if 3/5's of the legislature approve of a concept enough to move it out of committee, then full debate on the floor is warranted. It's an elegant solution to a partisan problem, but it also means that nothing is dead until final adjournment (Sine Die).

Here is HR 2, the rules for the House: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2021/billpdf/HR0002.pdf

The rules make the legislature 3 dimensional chess, and any good lobbyist knows them backwards and forwards in order to gain a favorable outcome for their preferred legislation. Being Speaker, the bill sponsor has a built in majority for blast motions, but we need around 10 Republicans to resist the motion, so as to have the opposition needed to suffice a second blast tomorrow, if it happens today (Rules state no same-day blast motions on a bill).

Traditionally, the minority has used the blast motion to get a vote on a specific issue (like corner-crossing in 2013) as a way to help provide accountability for legislators who didn't have to take a tough vote due to committee action. In this instance, a speaker having to blast his own bill would be considered a sign of weakness by the loyal opposition, and they would be eager to find the votes to keep the bill tabled. We'll see though.

The motions come under business #9, I believe, so it will be at the end of the floor session, sometime right before they adjourn, and after they have finished with third reading.

 

[Hunting Wife]

This may sound dumb, but is this for sure happening? How did folks become aware of it?

I ask because I feel I only have a certain amount of capital with my representative, who has been receptive at times, but I feel like we are approaching a point where upon receiving yet another email from me, she's gonna think to herself, "This guy again...."

Some Committee members started sending heads up emails yesterday from what I’ve seen. Pretty sure it’s happening.

 

[Andrew Posewitz]

My understanding is the rumor is well sourced, but even then remains a rumor. Better safe than sorry I would suggest. Apologies for any errors in the below, but moving fast this morning.


Below are emails I sent last night that people are free to borrow/amend as they see fit:


1. First - email I sent to the three Rs on the committee who helped table which was a follow up to the prior thank you:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Thank you again for your courageous vote on HB505 in committee. The rumor mill has spun up that the bill may be blasted out tomorrow. I am hopeful you will continue to side with Montana hunters and continue to oppose HB505.


2. Second, a personalized note to my Rep - She represents the district that includes the Elkhorns, which is why I hit the bonus points.

Rep Bertoglio

I am a constituent in your district writing late this evening as rumor is making its way through the hunting and conservation community that HB 505 may be sent to the floor after being tabled by the committee. If the rumor turns out to be true, I would respectfully urge you to vote no on HB505, even as amended. The amendments by Rep. Berglee were done in good faith and did in fact make the bill substantially better, unfortunately, this bill came from a failed process at FW&P and can't be saved by the greatest of intentions or the best of amendments.

This bill is an affront to 130 years of Montana history and tax payer investment to return elk to our Montana landscape in a thoughtful, well-managed way as a huntable, wild species held in trust for all Montanans by our elected leaders. In addition to all the other problems with this bill, it will benefit wealthy out of state landowners at the expense of resident hunters by awarding inflated bonus points to non-residents because they had the capacity to pay. Imagine a once in a lifetime Elkhorn tag going to a non-resident by virtue of his inflated bonus points from a bad management bill over a reliable non resident visitor, or a Boulder resident who has spent his life accumulating bonus points the honest way. No hunting or conservation groups were consulted in its drafting and it was noted in hearing as the start of a conversation. Blasting it to the floor with no collaboration from a single hunting or conservation group to date, does not strike me as the start of a conversation.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have, and renew my respectful request that should 505 make it to the floor, please vote no.

Thanks so much for listening.


3rd - Backcountry has an action alert out that can be used. If you enter your info, it should direct a note to your specific rep (full disclosure, I haven't tested this).

Take Action

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

4th - My view is our best bet for crossovers is from the following list - Again, moving fast this morning so the below may not be complete.

Ed Buttrey - [email protected]
Rep Durham - [email protected]
Rep Fitzgerald - [email protected]
Rep Garner - [email protected]
Rep Hopkins [email protected]
Rep Loge - [email protected]
Rep Mitchell (above)
Rep Noland - [email protected]
Rep Putnam (above)
Rep Rekstan (above)
Rep Welch - [email protected]
Rep Jones - [email protected]


Andrew

 

[OntarioHunter]

I'm nonresident so any letters I send would probably be suspicious. However, i have a few suggestions based on my albeit remote observations. Targeting GOP legislators on the west side would seem practical since those were the ones who swam against the party tide in committee vote. I would not expect much from GOP in Dillon area but maybe give it a try. Missoula, Flathead Valley, Libby, Butte, Helena, Bozeman would be my targets ... if they even have any GOP legislators. This "blast" BS is clearly intended to bag a partisan victory by keeping party legislators uninformed. This bill is complicated to say the least and it will be your job to inform any potential fence sitters, not just speak in negative generalities. Otherwise you will appear to be partisan.

Second, to avoid appearing partisan (because that's not what good government is about) target some Democrats, especially on the east side. You know those people will be feeling the pressure from the big ag game hogs in their areas. Make sure they stay on board. Make sure they are informed. It is important that all Montanans from all parties kill this nonsense.

 

[brocksw]

My understanding is the rumor is well sourced, but even then remains a rumor. Better safe than sorry I would suggest. Apologies for any errors in the below, but moving fast this morning.


Below are emails I sent last night that people are free to borrow/amend as they see fit:


1. First - email I sent to the three Rs on the committee who helped table which was a follow up to the prior thank you:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Thank you again for your courageous vote on HB505 in committee. The rumor mill has spun up that the bill may be blasted out tomorrow. I am hopeful you will continue to side with Montana hunters and continue to oppose HB505.


2. Second, a personalized note to my Rep - She represents the district that includes the Elkhorns, which is why I hit the bonus points.

Rep Bertoglio

I am a constituent in your district writing late this evening as rumor is making its way through the hunting and conservation community that HB 505 may be sent to the floor after being tabled by the committee. If the rumor turns out to be true, I would respectfully urge you to vote no on HB505, even as amended. The amendments by Rep. Berglee were done in good faith and did in fact make the bill substantially better, unfortunately, this bill came from a failed process at FW&P and can't be saved by the greatest of intentions or the best of amendments.

This bill is an affront to 130 years of Montana history and tax payer investment to return elk to our Montana landscape in a thoughtful, well-managed way as a huntable, wild species held in trust for all Montanans by our elected leaders. In addition to all the other problems with this bill, it will benefit wealthy out of state landowners at the expense of resident hunters by awarding inflated bonus points to non-residents because they had the capacity to pay. Imagine a once in a lifetime Elkhorn tag going to a non-resident by virtue of his inflated bonus points from a bad management bill over a reliable non resident visitor, or a Boulder resident who has spent his life accumulating bonus points the honest way. No hunting or conservation groups were consulted in its drafting and it was noted in hearing as the start of a conversation. Blasting it to the floor with no collaboration from a single hunting or conservation group to date, does not strike me as the start of a conversation.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have, and renew my respectful request that should 505 make it to the floor, please vote no.

Thanks so much for listening.


3rd - Backcountry has an action alert out that can be used. If you enter your info, it should direct a note to your specific rep (full disclosure, I haven't tested this).

Take Action

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

4th - My view is our best bet for crossovers is from the following list - Again, moving fast this morning so the below may not be complete.

Ed Buttrey - [email protected]
Rep Durham - [email protected]
Rep Fitzgerald - [email protected]
Rep Garner - [email protected]
Rep Hopkins [email protected]
Rep Loge - [email protected]
Rep Mitchell (above)
Rep Noland - [email protected]
Rep Putnam (above)
Rep Rekstan (above)
Rep Welch - [email protected]
Rep Jones - [email protected]


Andrew

FYI, only do the BHA action alert for 505 if you are a resident of MT. Action alerts lose some of their legitimacy if non-residents use it. This isn't the case with all bills but for 505 it is.

Non-residents please write in your own emails outside of the action alerts!

 

[Carnage2011]

My understanding is the rumor is well sourced, but even then remains a rumor. Better safe than sorry I would suggest. Apologies for any errors in the below, but moving fast this morning.


Below are emails I sent last night that people are free to borrow/amend as they see fit:


1. First - email I sent to the three Rs on the committee who helped table which was a follow up to the prior thank you:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Thank you again for your courageous vote on HB505 in committee. The rumor mill has spun up that the bill may be blasted out tomorrow. I am hopeful you will continue to side with Montana hunters and continue to oppose HB505.


2. Second, a personalized note to my Rep - She represents the district that includes the Elkhorns, which is why I hit the bonus points.

Rep Bertoglio

I am a constituent in your district writing late this evening as rumor is making its way through the hunting and conservation community that HB 505 may be sent to the floor after being tabled by the committee. If the rumor turns out to be true, I would respectfully urge you to vote no on HB505, even as amended. The amendments by Rep. Berglee were done in good faith and did in fact make the bill substantially better, unfortunately, this bill came from a failed process at FW&P and can't be saved by the greatest of intentions or the best of amendments.

This bill is an affront to 130 years of Montana history and tax payer investment to return elk to our Montana landscape in a thoughtful, well-managed way as a huntable, wild species held in trust for all Montanans by our elected leaders. In addition to all the other problems with this bill, it will benefit wealthy out of state landowners at the expense of resident hunters by awarding inflated bonus points to non-residents because they had the capacity to pay. Imagine a once in a lifetime Elkhorn tag going to a non-resident by virtue of his inflated bonus points from a bad management bill over a reliable non resident visitor, or a Boulder resident who has spent his life accumulating bonus points the honest way. No hunting or conservation groups were consulted in its drafting and it was noted in hearing as the start of a conversation. Blasting it to the floor with no collaboration from a single hunting or conservation group to date, does not strike me as the start of a conversation.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have, and renew my respectful request that should 505 make it to the floor, please vote no.

Thanks so much for listening.


3rd - Backcountry has an action alert out that can be used. If you enter your info, it should direct a note to your specific rep (full disclosure, I haven't tested this).

Take Action

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

4th - My view is our best bet for crossovers is from the following list - Again, moving fast this morning so the below may not be complete.

Ed Buttrey - [email protected]
Rep Durham - [email protected]
Rep Fitzgerald - [email protected]
Rep Garner - [email protected]
Rep Hopkins [email protected]
Rep Loge - [email protected]
Rep Mitchell (above)
Rep Noland - [email protected]
Rep Putnam (above)
Rep Rekstan (above)
Rep Welch - [email protected]
Rep Jones - [email protected]


Andrew

Add Rep Walsh as a crossover. Talked to him this morning about it and he agrees that it’s a bad bill that needs killed.

 

[sacountry]

I haven't heard anything to corroborate this, but did see MTBHA put it out on their SM, so would assume that their lobby team has vetted.

This literally took me about 10 minutes to figure out SM = Social Media. I checked Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers site and their Twitter, but didn't see anything. I did also text both Putnam and Mitchell. Here's exchange with Putnam. ...

 

[Nameless Range]

This literally took me about 10 minutes to figure out SM = Social Media. I checked Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers site and their Twitter, but didn't see anything. I did also text both Putnam and Mitchell. Here's exchange with Putnam. ...

View attachment 178158

That is interesting. Well, I sent my emails. If such a thing as Constituent Capital exists, HB 505 is a good thing to burn it up on.

 

[YoungGun]

My understanding is the rumor is well sourced, but even then remains a rumor. Better safe than sorry I would suggest. Apologies for any errors in the below, but moving fast this morning.


Below are emails I sent last night that people are free to borrow/amend as they see fit:


1. First - email I sent to the three Rs on the committee who helped table which was a follow up to the prior thank you:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Thank you again for your courageous vote on HB505 in committee. The rumor mill has spun up that the bill may be blasted out tomorrow. I am hopeful you will continue to side with Montana hunters and continue to oppose HB505.


2. Second, a personalized note to my Rep - She represents the district that includes the Elkhorns, which is why I hit the bonus points.

Rep Bertoglio

I am a constituent in your district writing late this evening as rumor is making its way through the hunting and conservation community that HB 505 may be sent to the floor after being tabled by the committee. If the rumor turns out to be true, I would respectfully urge you to vote no on HB505, even as amended. The amendments by Rep. Berglee were done in good faith and did in fact make the bill substantially better, unfortunately, this bill came from a failed process at FW&P and can't be saved by the greatest of intentions or the best of amendments.

This bill is an affront to 130 years of Montana history and tax payer investment to return elk to our Montana landscape in a thoughtful, well-managed way as a huntable, wild species held in trust for all Montanans by our elected leaders. In addition to all the other problems with this bill, it will benefit wealthy out of state landowners at the expense of resident hunters by awarding inflated bonus points to non-residents because they had the capacity to pay. Imagine a once in a lifetime Elkhorn tag going to a non-resident by virtue of his inflated bonus points from a bad management bill over a reliable non resident visitor, or a Boulder resident who has spent his life accumulating bonus points the honest way. No hunting or conservation groups were consulted in its drafting and it was noted in hearing as the start of a conversation. Blasting it to the floor with no collaboration from a single hunting or conservation group to date, does not strike me as the start of a conversation.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have, and renew my respectful request that should 505 make it to the floor, please vote no.

Thanks so much for listening.


3rd - Backcountry has an action alert out that can be used. If you enter your info, it should direct a note to your specific rep (full disclosure, I haven't tested this).

Take Action

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

4th - My view is our best bet for crossovers is from the following list - Again, moving fast this morning so the below may not be complete.

Ed Buttrey - [email protected]
Rep Durham - [email protected]
Rep Fitzgerald - [email protected]
Rep Garner - [email protected]
Rep Hopkins [email protected]
Rep Loge - [email protected]
Rep Mitchell (above)
Rep Noland - [email protected]
Rep Putnam (above)
Rep Rekstan (above)
Rep Welch - [email protected]
Rep Jones - [email protected]


Andrew

Based on the response I got from Rep Loge, I feel he may be a crossover, too, if this goes. His reasoning for voting "yes" was that the practice has a "1 year" trial associated with it, as well as he approved of the amendments made. I would voice that it is better to get any bill right the first time then it is to amend it into a new product, and that science/wildlife management practices take time, and a 1 year trial is not going to tell us anything- not to mention it is easy to leave it in place once enacted, so again, get it right the first time.

Not to get partisan with it, but I also reminded our Republican representatives that many of them were voted for on the basis of "less government"- Legislating our wildlife goes against this principle.

 

[sacountry]

 

[Hunting Wife]

That is interesting. Well, I sent my emails. If such a thing as Constituent Capital exists, HB 505 is a good thing to burn it up on.

At least they know we’re still paying attention to this one I guess.

 

[Ben Lamb]

At least they know we’re still paying attention to this one I guess.

From a legislator's point of view, getting a bunch of emails relative to a blast motion on issues like this - it gets their attention. The Helena bubble is real (just like it is in every legislature) where the lobbyists and legislators both forget about the world outside of the building. While some legislators will think that a blast motion isn't a big deal, the more people comment on procedural issues, the more attention is paid to the issue overall.

6 more weeks and it's bear season. Trout will be eager for early season PMD's, caddis will fly on Mother's Day, the prairie will be sweet smelling after a good rain, and we'll be done with the mishegoss and able to breathe.

 

[sacountry]

From a legislator's point of view, getting a bunch of emails relative to a blast motion on issues like this - it gets their attention. The Helena bubble is real (just like it is in every legislature) where the lobbyists and legislators both forget about the world outside of the building. While some legislators will think that a blast motion isn't a big deal, the more people comment on procedural issues, the more attention is paid to the issue overall.

6 more weeks and it's bear season. Trout will be eager for early season PMD's, caddis will fly on Mother's Day, the prairie will be sweet smelling after a good rain, and we'll be done with the mishegoss and able to breathe.

MISHEGOSS = Montana's Inflamed State Hunters Eliminate Galt's Overreaching Statute Soundly!!!!!