I-193 to exempt MT Landowners from elk/deer/bear regs

[Big Fin]

I'm on the road for a while, but a friend sent this EQC meeting agenda item to me. If you're a Montana hunter, this should get your attention. It is a proposed ballot initiative that will exempt landowners from hunting regulations during elk, deer, and black bear season.

Link here - https://leg.mt.gov/content/Committe...C_Meetings/2023-Dec-6/I-193-Petition form.pdf

If you want to contact EQC members, here is the webpage. This also contains the "Referral letter" from the person submitting, along with the AG opinion letter of legal sufficiency. EQC web page is here - https://leg.mt.gov/committees/interim/eqc/meeting-info/

The meeting date is December 6. It will be interesting to see who shows up to support this idea.

Key part of the initiative is the Statement of Purpose that I've copied below.

Statement of Purpose and Implication:

I-193 will allow increased hunting opportunities for landowners. If passed, the initiative prohibits hunting regulations that would impose or effect a prohibition on a landowner hunting deer, elk, or black bear on the landowner’s private property during a statewide general hunting season. Landowners would still need to be licensed and follow all hunting laws and regulations pertaining to means of take and bag limits. An exception would allow the Fish and Wildlife Commission to limit this landowner hunting right when wildlife populations are in severe decline due to environmental factors such as disease or drought.

I-193 may result in a decrease in non-resident license revenue; however, that reduction cannot be determined at this time. I-193 will also likely require additional game wardens to administer; however, that cost cannot be determined.

 

[Nameless Range]

Don’t Texas My Montana.

 

[YukonGold]

thus ownership of Montana wildlife shall pass from the people to the elite.

 

[Nameless Range]

Curious if there is a place to find out who brought this to the EQC as an agenda item? Is it the fellow from Polson referenced in the referral letter?

 

[Gerald Martin]

Curious if there is a place to find out who brought this to the EQC as an agenda item? Is it the fellow from Polson referenced in the referral letter?

Sounds like the attempt to ad 30 days to pheasant season because someone suggested it to Cebull.

 

[shoots-straight]

Smell of UPOM.

 

[shoots-straight]

https://ballotpedia.org/Rick_Schoening This guy was an MTFW&P's game warden for 23 years and has a biology degree from the U of M

 

[RandanP]

The attorney general said it’s cool so I’m not too concerned.

 

[cgasner1]

Smell of UPOM.

Check the bottom of your boot

 

[44hunter45]

Are you F'ing kidding me?

Hayduke lives!

 

[Dave N]

Could you explain this a little more for us flatlanders?

 

[DFS]

Could you explain this a little more for us flatlanders?

What would be the implications of this? Like if you had to have a permit to hunt elk you wouldn’t need that anymore?

 

[rtraverdavis]

What would be the implications of this? Like if you had to have a permit to hunt elk you wouldn’t need that anymore?

Right? How could something like this even be legal? Like I understand that if it passed, it would become the law, but wouldn’t it completely contradict the public trust foundation of all of the other wildlife laws that already exist?

 

[Gerald Martin]

Okay, I think I have relatively good reading comprehension but the more I read this the more confused I am.

How can this initiative prohibit any regulation that prohibits a landowner, his guests or lessors from hunting on his private land yet also establishes that all hunter’s hunting said private property must be licensed and abide by bag limitations and season restrictions?

I’m assuming the intent is to allow NR landowners, guests and lessors guaranteed licenses?

But, if they must be licensed and the law caps the number of NR licenses how will everyone be licensed?

 

[Gerald Martin]

Or is this an attempt to exempt landowners from needing a LE permit in permit areas?

 

[Nameless Range]

Or is this an attempt to exempt landowners from needing a LE permit in permit areas?

This is how I read it.

 

[DFS]

Or is this an attempt to exempt landowners from needing a LE permit in permit areas?

That’s what I’m wondering

 

[DFS]

The money is behind them. Friendly fire from native Montanans. Lee and Tiffany and the crew that bought first must feel they are entitled to tags every year.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Since the language reads “landowners, guests and lessors” I take it that outfitted clients will be accommodated with being included in that designation when hunting private lands?

 

[DFS]

Since the language reads “landowners, guests and lessors” I take it that outfitted clients will be accommodated with being included in that designation when hunting private lands?

I would take it as rich nonresidents take whoever has a tag to their hunting lodge.