MT Fielder's Constitutional Referendum

[Ben Lamb]

Hopefully they'll be more inclusive than this effort, and actually invite people to participate in drafting who have serious concerns about the current language rather than trying to turn it in to a partisan witch-hunt.

 

[shoots-straight]

Hopefully they'll be more inclusive than this effort, and actually invite people to participate in drafting who have serious concerns about the current language rather than trying to turn it in to a partisan witch-hunt.

The partisan games were played on both sides! Is MWF going to offer to help?

 

[Ben Lamb]

The partisan games were played on both sides! Is MWF going to offer to help?

I respectfully disagree with the first point.

There are legitimate differences of opinion on the language within the bill.

If we get this wrong, then we'll have to suffer the consequences. A conservative approach is warranted.

 

[tjones]

Whoa up Ben, you want the bill tabled so folks can work on it in the interim.

What folks are you saying will work on it? You? MWF? FWP? TU? Trap Free? UPOM? Or are we all going to be waiting for MTA to come up with something for these groups to oppose again?

Fact of the matter is the opponents will not come up with something on their own and anything MTA comes up with will be opposed.

Fact of the matter is some of the vocal opponents oppose the bill because it is a Fielder bill and supported by SFW and BGF.

The best Dockter could come up with was some trespass issues.

The original bill was no good, granted, but this was a chance for sportsmen to come together and get something done and done right. One side choose not to work with the other. This cannot be denied.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Whoa up Ben, you want the bill tabled to folks can work on it in the interim.

What folks are you saying will work on it? You? MWF? FWP? TU? Trap Free? UPOM? Or are we all going to be waiting for MTA to come up with something for these groups to oppose again?

Fact of the matter is the opponents will not come up with something on their own and anything MTA comes up with will be opposed.

Fact of the matter is some of the vocal opponents oppose the bill because it is a Fielder bill and supported by SFW and BGF.

The best Dockter could come up with was some trespass issues.

The original bill was no good, granted, but this was a chance for sportsmen to come together and get something done and done right. One side choose not to work with the other. This cannot be denied.

Tony,

I think every sportsmen's group opponent would come to the table to help if they got invited.

As for the rest of it, again, I respectfully disagree.

 

[tjones]

So all the opponent groups are sitting on their hands waiting for an invite and in the meantime killing what Fielder and MTA came up with?

And I fully expected you to disagree.

 

[Ben Lamb]

No. Several attempts to amend from our end have been rebuffed by the those who didn't want language that added the words hunting, fishing and trapping to the current language. Painting opposition to this as partisan or simply not wanting to work with the sponsor ignore the very real concerns people have on this legislation and it ignores the nature of how this has been crafted over the course of the session.

To believe that people have sat on their hands regarding this is not the truth. It also ignores the 70 other bills the opponent groups have been working on, without the help of many of the proponents of SB 236.

You know my phone number. Call me whenever you want to talk about this.

 

[tjones]

It also ignores the 70 other bills the opponent groups have been working on, without the help of many of the proponents of SB 236.

You know my phone number. Call me whenever you want to talk about this.

There you have it.

I will call.

 

[katqanna]

Don Thomas just wrote an article - Out-of-staters trying to change Montana Constitution

Had they started their campaign with a classified ad, it might have read like this:

“Shady political group, well-financed with unique combination of dark money and taxpayer dollars, seeks to purchase Western state wildlife resources at bargain basement prices. Operating methods designed to insure lack of transparency. Extensive references from energy industry players available upon request. Contact: Big Game Forever, Bountiful, Utah.”

What’s not to love about a group with a name like that, which evokes legitimate wildlife advocacy groups with a proven record of integrity? Same goes for their parent organization, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife. Who can’t be for fish and wildlife? Too bad things aren’t always as they seem...

 

[katqanna]

SB 236 is being heard on the House Floor session today at 1:00 for its second reading. It needs a 2/3 vote from the entire legislature.

 

[katqanna]

In a surprise move, Rep. Jacobson offered an amendment, which would strike most of Fielder's text,

Preservation of harvest heritage. The opportunity to harvest wild fish and (strike -wild game animals) wildlife through hunting, fishing, and trapping is a heritage that shall forever be preserved to the individual citizens of the state and does not create a right to trespass on private property or diminution of other private rights.""

The amendment passed 54 aye to 45 no. Then they voted on the amended bill, it failed second reading, 48 aye to 51 no.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Yippee kayea! Thanks, Kat.