HB 505 - Elk Need Your Help

[MThuntr]

I have received a few responses now that boil down to, "What is your solution to elk overpopulation?"

I want to say, "Remove the gun from my head, and we can talk."

What I am doing instead is referencing the Citizens Elk Group, highlighting how complex an issue this is, and how the conservative way forward would be not to rush the largest change to elk management in MT history without any public input.

I'm hoping someone will reply to my emails. That hasn't happened ever because I'd love to have a conversation about alternatives without being forced to make such quick reactions. It will take years and compromise from all stakeholders.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I have received a few responses now that boil down to, "What is your solution to elk overpopulation?"

I want to say, "Remove the gun from my head, and we can talk."

What I am doing instead is referencing the Citizens Elk Group, highlighting how complex an issue this is, and how the conservative way forward would be not to rush the largest change to elk management in MT history without any public input.

Both answers are correct.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Is this being too much pointing out the politics? I did it anyway lol.

"I write again in opposition to HB 505. I listened with interest to the entire hearing. The North American Model states that, “Science plays a key role in managing wildlife. Wildlife populations are sustained and scientifically managed by professionals in government agencies.”

FWP has already been working on a coordinated proposal to modify the EMP with the input of all stakeholders.

I'm not sure why, early in the Governor's administration, there is such an urgency to pass a bill which will alienate a large majority of the sportsmen and women of Montana.

I thank you for your consideration."

Good note. Well done. Pointing out the politics sometimes is the only thing that gets through.

 

[SAJ-99]

Done...again... (Im starting to feel like Bill Murray in Groundhogs Day.)

 

[SAJ-99]

I have received a few responses now that boil down to, "What is your solution to elk overpopulation?"

I want to say, "Remove the gun from my head, and we can talk."

What I am doing instead is referencing the Citizens Elk Group, highlighting how complex an issue this is, and how the conservative way forward would be not to rush the largest change to elk management in MT history without any public input.

That seems like progress. My answer is lets redo the EMP within a conversation with ALL STAKEHOLDERS.

 

[Schaaf]

I have received a few responses now that boil down to, "What is your solution to elk overpopulation?"

I want to say, "Remove the gun from my head, and we can talk."

What I am doing instead is referencing the Citizens Elk Group, highlighting how complex an issue this is, and how the conservative way forward would be not to rush the largest change to elk management in MT history without any public input.

I got the same response from my one reply to my follow up email yesterday.

I think the Representative and a lot of others are going about "the solutions" in the wrong way. The solution isn't just one thought or in this case, bill. "The solution" is instead a process to helping fix the situation that involves Montanans from all across the state with a variety of backgrounds. The public support will be there for these solutions if they decide to drop the gun from our heads.

 

[brocksw]

Even though it may have little effect beings I am a NR, I've emailed the committee twice since the hearings.

KEEP THE HAMMER DOWN!

 

[JLS]

He brought up an idea that is being talked about was eliminating all bull licenses in over objective areas to force cow take and provide incentive for landowners to allow public access.

I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure this was an option delineated in the EMP.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I got the same response from my one reply to my follow up email yesterday.

I think the Representative and a lot of others are going about "the solutions" in the wrong way. The solution isn't just one thought or in this case, bill. "The solution" is instead a process to helping fix the situation that involves Montanans from all across the state with a variety of backgrounds. The public support will be there for these solutions if they decide to drop the gun from our heads.

Provide the solutions then: Follow the council & allow FWP to go forward with redrafting the EMP with all stakeholders at the table.

The Legislature needs to get out of the way, and let Montanans get to work.

 

[Gerald Martin]

The “ solutions” being considered are to “problems” being defined by interests who view wildlife as competition, not a priceless public trust resource. Keep that in mind as you engage in discussion.

The outdoor community has been accepting the oppositions terms and definitions for too long because we have been acting in good faith to try to help mitigate financial impacts wildlife causes to working ranches and ag producers.

The professional groups advocating for HB-505 do not represent working ranchers or hunters regardless of their claims.
I think it’s time we start defining terms in ways more favorable to our interests and try to be proactive at assisting the working rancher with wildlife problems who is actually willing to stay within the NAWM to find solutions.

 

[Brad W]

The “ solutions” being considered are to “problems” being defined by interests who view wildlife as competition, not a priceless public trust resource. Keep that in mind as you engage in discussion.

The “ solutions” being considered are to “problems” being defined by interests who view wildlife as competition, not a priceless public trust resource. Keep that in mind as you engage in discussion.

The outdoor community has been accepting the oppositions terms and definitions for too long because we have been acting in good faith to try to help mitigate financial impacts wildlife causes to working ranches and ag producers.

The professional groups advocating for HB-505 do not represent working ranchers or hunters regardless of their claims.
I think it’s time we start defining terms in ways more favorable to our interests and try to be proactive at assisting the working rancher with wildlife problems who is actually willing to stay within the NAWM to find solutions.

I think there is a bait and switch here as well. If this was really about elk numbers on private ground the proposed B-13 license would be antlerless only on the landowners deeded property. From my point of view this bull really has a similar objective to SB 143. Create a stable pile of NR tags that landowners/outfitters can profit from. The fact that it is either sex and will almost certainly be opened up unit wide if the commission gets stacked with ranchers per SB 306 means those tags would be incredibly valuable. Shift some objectives to align with reality and there is some serious money at stake.

 

[Big Fin]

Great work, folks. The swing votes are asking, "Why is an FWP-sponsored bill such a firestorm?"

Code word for, "There a way out of this mess?"

Some important votes on this committee are showing, at least behind the public view, that they'd rather this go away. You are having an impact.

Deferral until Tuesday shows the concern some have at the degree of opposition. Please keep at it and get your friends to do the same.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Great work, folks. The swing votes are asking, "Why is an FWP-sponsored bill such a firestorm?"

Code word for, "There a way out of this mess?"

Some important votes on this committee are showing, at least behind the public view, that they'd rather this go away. You are having an impact.

Deferral until Tuesday shows the concern some have at the degree of opposition. Please keep at it and get your friends to do the same.

The committee could easily introduce & pass a study bill so that the Legislature is a part of this process of revamping elk mgt in MT. There's the legislative solution.

 

[BRI]

Keep up the good work all! We can only hope they listen.

I believe there are FWP personnel reading this thread and I hope so. I used to believe they looked out for the interest of hunters but I haven't felt that way for several years now. I interact with a lot of landowners in my job and they generally feel FWP doesn't listen to them either. Then every two years the legislature tries to tell them what to do. I absolutely believe they see us at the bottom rung and no matter how bad it gets in Montana, we'll still line up to buy tags every year.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Keep up the good work all! We can only hope they listen.

I believe there are FWP personnel reading this thread and I hope so. I used to believe they looked out for the interest of hunters but I haven't felt that way for several years now. I interact with a lot of landowners in my job and they generally feel FWP doesn't listen to them either. Then every two years the legislature tries to tell them what to do. I absolutely believe they see us at the bottom rung and no matter how bad it gets in Montana, we'll still line up to buy tags every year.

FWP employs some of the finest civil servants in government, and the field staff, biologists, wardens, conservation education, fisheries administration and state parks folks are outstanding stewards of our resource. We all have issues with specifics of how FWP manages, but we need to remember that those folks have to deal with changing administrations and even if there is a director they have issues with, their duty is to carry out those activities. It is dangerous to equate what is happening right now, with a systemic failure of the agency. Those folks who wear the grey shirt need support, not abandonment.

 

[TheTone]

If moral among FWP wildlife bios and wardens isn’t bottoming out I’d be shocked

 

[BRI]

FWP employs some of the finest civil servants in government, and the field staff, biologists, wardens, conservation education, fisheries administration and state parks folks are outstanding stewards of our resource. We all have issues with specifics of how FWP manages, but we need to remember that those folks have to deal with changing administrations and even if there is a director they have issues with, their duty is to carry out those activities. It is dangerous to equate what is happening right now, with a systemic failure of the agency. Those folks who wear the grey shirt need support, not abandonment.

Thanks for the reminder Ben. I know many excellent FWP personnel as well and it appears I generalized and lumped them together. My disappointment is directed at that higher level and I will still stand by what I believe.

Let's keep making our voices heard!

 

[OntarioHunter]

Done. This was my quick notes for the voicemail, feel free to use.

"I see that HB505 has been amended and want to continue to urge you to Vote NO on the bill.
HB 505 is a fundamentally flawed bill from its unfair treatment towards resident hunter draw odds, its attack against the North American model of conservation and its decades of wildlife management, its obvious attempt to privatize and commercialize wildlife and its lack of foresight for future management goals.

This bill will not be fixed with amendments, it is at its core fundamentally flawed and needs to be tabled."


Rep Reksten mailbox was full so she got a txt. Rep Durham answered and seemed open to the idea of a No vote, though he said he is undecided as he hasn't looked at the amendments yet.
Also Rep. Durham brought up an idea that is being talked about was eliminating all bull licenses in over objective areas to force cow take and provide incentive for landowners to allow public access. Interesting. Though I think that idea is separate from hb505.

That sounds like a helluva good idea. But I think it would mean defeating 505 first?

 

[MTLivin]

FWP employs some of the finest civil servants in government, and the field staff, biologists, wardens, conservation education, fisheries administration and state parks folks are outstanding stewards of our resource. We all have issues with specifics of how FWP manages, but we need to remember that those folks have to deal with changing administrations and even if there is a director they have issues with, their duty is to carry out those activities. It is dangerous to equate what is happening right now, with a systemic failure of the agency. Those folks who wear the grey shirt need support, not abandonment.

A agree Ben. This is a systematic failure of our elected governor to represent his constituents who elected him over his high dollar donors. I’ve heard from folks in the know that the new FWP director Hank Worsech is following marching orders (he is a retired marine) against his better judgement from his boss, Governor Gianforte. Was even told Wylie Galt is doing the same and didn’t want to be associated with all of this, due to the negative public view affecting his future political career.

Now, that’s not an excuse. Personally, my moral compass is stronger than my economic ambitions, but you usually don’t get that high up politically if you don’t play the game.

We will keep playing the game from our low political standing but play it straight & with sheer number. In the future we need to figure out how to get a lobbyist representing us now that the fox is in the henhouse.

 

[Eric Albus]

Ben, agree with you on the wardens working for FWP, their resources are
stretched way to thin.
I personally don’t like this bill. 10 bull tags for each 640 acre landowner is insane. The bull elk quality will look like public land mule deer in 1-2 yrs. Harvesting bulls also does nothing to address over population.
If the number were reduced, which I assume amendments were thought to happen but apparently haven’t, to reduce number to 1-2 tags per 640 I maybe could support it. As written, no way.