How to get rid of HB 42

[drahthaar]

Ben or Fin, someone smarter than me. How do we go about getting rid of this scourge upon MT hunting? How do we get a new comprehensive statewide elk management plan written?

Shouldn't MT FWP be doing this because it is the responsible thing to do as bios? Or are they so controlled by the legislature and this 9 year old bill, that they don't even think about it?

Until there is a new plan, a new goal, something to "shoot for", no pun intended, we are functioning on nothing, an aberration of what is going on in each region of the state. We have to take into account all the changes that have taken place over the past 9 years. Far more wolves than in 2003, changes in lion harvest and numbers, effects of MT's youth hunt, changes in ownership of lands, I-161, etc, etc.

Until we do this and have all parties involved, no transparency, the declination of hunting in MT will continue.

How does this happen?

 

[shoots-straight]

I'm still up so I'll jump in and give my .02 cents.

We have to amend that bill so in areas with more public lands we aren't forced to let the landowners dictate to us so much. Much of the accessible public lands of the west have been hurt by that bad bill.

 

[drahthaar]

My point is, if that is the case, if it has to be amended, then we are really in a bind. If we have to wait every two years to maybe have some progress in letting bios and not politicians manage our game, then we are in trouble.

 

[Big Fin]

It is going to take a huge effort to get the Department to revisit the EMP. It was a big political thrash when it was adopted and not sure the Department would want to go through that again.

Now, if hunters, outfitters, and some landowners were to get together and pressure the Department to update the EMP, that might have some weight. If we are about elk abundance, then we need to discuss where abundance and tolerance intersect among the given parties. The last EMP process had very little emphasis on abundance.

It will be a much more challenging issue next time for two simple reasons - 1) Elk are no longer overflowing on the public lands of the western part of the state, and 2) Elk are getting pretty thick on the private lands of central and eastern Montana.

How do we work on higher objectives in western Montana, where we have the most public lands? That seems to be where most the focus should be. But, given the EMP has objectives in that area set way below carrying capacity, HB 42 forces the Department to have seasons where cow elk are being killed in Feb/March, as happened this year, even in areas around YNP.

Not sure many hunters know that we were shooting the crap out of cow elk in some areas of SW Montana this winter. Seems difficult to restore herds, when we are shooting pregnant cow elk in late winter, in units already way below past levels. Instead, we get idiotic bills such as SB 397 the do nothing more than deflect the focus from where it should be.

As far as HB 42, there is only one way that is going to change. Change the cast of characters in the legislature. Not just the people who are sponsor bad bills like HB 42, but the leadership that would appoint a corrosive figure, such as John Brenden, as Chairman of the Senate F&G Committee. That is flat out irresponsible governing, and the leadership knows it. They just thought it would be funny to take another whack at FWP and resident hunters.

 

[RobG]

I wouldn't have known about HB 42 if it weren't for this site so keep spreading the word. The more I look into it, the more I realize how well played it was, although given the sponsor I refuse to believe it was intentional. By forcing very low objectives the wolf advocate/anti-hunting industry is booming because they can claim the wolves are having no effect because elk numbers are "over objective" (mostly in areas that have low wolf populations, but that's just a minor detail...). Similarly, extractive/ag industries are conquering the land unfettered since they can take elk habitat away and blame the wolves for the decline. Finally, whole industries like lobo watch and SFW's hysteric anti-predator smokescreens are booming based on blaming the wolves for all our problems, and the issue is so polarizing people don't see SFW's actions behind the scenes. Meanwhile, hunters and MFWP are characterized as nature haters, rancher haters, or phoney sportsmen/extremist environmentalists (depending on the politics of the accuser). I guess you could call it a jobs bill.

That said, I expect most people are like I was and aren't aware of the law so somehow we have to reach a wider audience.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Don't mean to demonstrate my ignorance, but HB 42 of this session concerns "Destruction of property by minors." Are you discussing the EMP and a related bill of a prior session or what?

 

[RobG]

Don't mean to demonstrate my ignorance, but HB 42 of this session concerns "Destruction of property by minors." Are you discussing the EMP and a related bill of a prior session or what?

HB 42 of the 2003 session:

 

[Straight Arrow]

Thanks, got it. That "HB 42" likely has an MCA title and number now. Maybe here call it Barrett's EMP objective enforcement law or something less confusing during an active legislative session.