MT Legislature - Week 5

[Ben Lamb]

Week five is off and running with a slew of really bad bills. SB 237 would require FWP to perform brucellosis prevalence reduction actions - i.e. test and slaughter.

HB 363 makes hunter license dollars available to Wildlife Services in order to pay for livestock work (a diversion issue is raised).

You can check out the bills here, or ask some specific questions on this thread and I'll get the answer for you.

BTW - HB 290, the only PRO-access bill we had this session was tabled in House Transportation. We're still not quite sure how it happened, since there was no recorded vote, or noticed meeting for executive action.


House FWP
10-FEB-11 3:00 PM 152 HB363
Provide for use of wolf license money. Mike Cuffe

10-FEB-11 3:00 PM 152 HB370
Increase motor vehicle fee for state parks and Virginia & Nevada Cities Carolyn Squires

10-FEB-11 3:00 PM 152 HB387
Revise issuance of B-10 and B-11 hunting licenses & related permits. Kelly Flynn

08-FEB-11 3:00 PM 152 HB337
Revising definitions related to fish and game violations. Mike Menahan

08-FEB-11 3:00 PM 152 HB361
Requiring the issuance of archery-only elk permits at 2007 levels. Ted Washburn

08-FEB-11 3:00 PM 152 HB372
Clarify preference system laws for nonresident permits and licenses. Ted Washburn


Senate Fish & Game
08-FEB-11 3:00 PM 422 SB255
Establish criteria for FWP commission decisions. John Brenden


Senate Finance and Claims
08-FEB-11 5:00 PM 317 SB84
Revise deposit of fish and wildlife fines, restitution, damages. John Brenden


Senate Agriculture
10-FEB-11 3:00 PM 335 SB237
Revise laws relating to brucellosis surveillance. Ron Arthun


House Agriculture
08-FEB-11 3:00 PM 472 HB331
State assistance for economic damage by brucellosis. David Howard

08-FEB-11 3:00 PM 472 HB413
Establish net client hunting use as outfitter property. Bill Harris

 

[Ben Lamb]

Please pass along the information below to the next person on your “branch” even if they have email (sometimes emails fail to transmit) then contact YOUR House member as listed on your Phone tree sheet; If you can’t remember who that is go to the legislative map on http://nris.mt.gov/favicon.ico

As implied in previous messages, many legislators change their email addresses after arriving in Helena. If you incur a kickback on your legislator please use the Legislative Electronic Message Service, http://leg.mt.gov/css/sessions/62nd/legwebmessage.asp & listed below, to send your response. Don’t forget to leave a voice message on 406-444-4800 as well.

HB309 has been heard in House Ag Committee AND HAS ALREADY HEADED FOR THE HOUSE FLOOR for 2nd Reading. That could happen as early as TOMORROW OR MONDAY, SO WE MUST ACT FAST.

This is an egregious attempt to stop sportsmen from their right to recreate on any state waters, except lakes, up to the high water mark. Many contradictions are evident in this bill:



All diverted waters will be off-limits:

Even under the narrowest possible interpretation of language in the bill, these AND MANY OTHER waters would become “ditches” and thus off limits:



Ruby River below the Ruby irrigation dam

Poindexter Slough on the Beaverhead River

Side channels of the Jefferson River

Fleshman Creek in Livingston

The East Channel of the Bitterroot River near Tucker Crossing

Sun River

Spring Creek in Choteau

Milk River below the St. Mary’s diversion

Many side channels of the Yellowstone River

Flint Creek

The side channels of Rattlesnake Creek in Missoula



More literal interpretations of this bill indicate it would affect ANY RIVER OR STREAM IN THE STATE WITH FLOWS THAT INCLUDE WATER RETURNED FROM IRRIGATION PRACTICES, INCLUDING WATER THAT ORIGINATED IN THE SAME STREAM. That means these AND MANY OTHER waters would become “ditches:”

Almost every water in Montana has some sort of device to facilitate irrigation; all will be off-limits to recreational use
Sportsmen will be helpless to identify which streams would be off-limits with HB309; constituting an entrapment situation.
Our Stream Access Laws have survived the test of time and many, many State and US Supreme Court battles!!! It’s a valid, secure law that needs no so-called “improvements”.


Lots of sportsmen and sportswomen have fought hard to keep our Stream Access Laws the best in the West. Spread the word today!!!



Remember, all legislators can also be contacted by the Legislative Comment Service as well: http://leg.mt.gov/css/sessions/62nd/legwebmessage.asp; and by calling 406-444-4800 and leaving a voice message.



Thank you for stepping up for Montana’s wildlife, lands, waters and our hunting/fishing heritage.

 

[shoots-straight]

Here's a list of bad bills, this came from the " Montana Conservation Voters"
if you care about Montana, you need to get active right now. We will suffer for a long time if we don't defeat most if not all these bills.
http://www.mtvoters.org/files/Hotlist20110207.pdf

 

[Brudno]

Here's a list of bad bills, this came from the " Montana Conservation Voters"
if you care about Montana, you need to get active right now. We will suffer for a long time if we don't defeat most if not all these bills.
http://www.mtvoters.org/files/Hotlist20110207.pdf

I've never been to Montana, I've heard stories of it being the California of the midwest, due to all the ski towns and excedera, but just for my own information does the average Montana resident beleive in man made global warming? Some of them bills sound good others not. But a number of them seem to be bases around EPA, greenhouse gases, and "renewable" energy thats why I ask.

Just trying to learn more.

If I may point out though, that HB 159, from what I understand does nothing to say that lead shot can now be used for waterfowl. Thats a federal regulation. But it does sound like it wouldn't allow the FWP to say you guys can no long shoot lead bullets, in an effort to make ammunition costs to expensive for the average hunter or shooter. Under the guise of protecting wildlife. As California has done to allegedly protect the condor.

 

[Drake4]

due to all the ski towns and excedera

huh?
Maybe Miller will post some pictures of the "ski country" up where he lives.

 

[Brudno]

huh?
Maybe Miller will post some pictures of the "ski country" up where he lives.

You know, the Jackson Hole effect.

 

[shoots-straight]

Jackson Hole's in Wyoming, Brudno. In Montana, if you produced power, say solar, or wind, whatever. The excess would be charged back to the utility companies. This was an incentive to install alternative power sources, which are readily available here. It was a win, win for everyone. That's not even considering "GREEN HOUSE GASES". Less pollution, and less dependant on foreign countries is good. NO?

 

[Brudno]

Jackson Hole's in Wyoming, Brudno. In Montana, if you produced power, say solar, or wind, whatever. The excess would be charged back to the utility companies. This was an incentive to install alternative power sources, which are readily available here. It was a win, win for everyone. That's not even considering "GREEN HOUSE GASES". Less pollution, and less dependant on foreign countries is good. NO?

I'm very well aware of Jackson Holes location, and im sure most are aware of the effect it has on Wyoming politics in general. I was asked I assume to clarify my ski towns comment. That was the best way I could clarify it. I was mearly asking a question in my first post to better understand the people of Montana. Its that simple. Just trying to better understand Montana and Montanaians better, for my own personal knowledge.

 

[shoots-straight]

The Agriculture Committee passed HB 309 and now it's moved on to the Floor of the house, on the 2ND reading. This is the bill that attacks the Stream Access law. I"m sure Ben will be trying to fire everyone up on this bill. I"m posting a link to the legislators that are on the Ag Committee, so you can take note of who voted yea, or nay. You might have a legislator that you want to pick a bone with.

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2011/minutes/house/votesheets/HB0309AGH110203.pdf

 

[Ben Lamb]

Jackson's delegation has mostly been conservative, with a couple of moderate to conservative democrats thrown in for good effect.

Laramie has a tendency to produce the only true liberals in the state. And most of those are/were outstanding on Fish and Game issues.

As for the MCV list, a lot of those bills will only further alienate wind companies from installing major facilities in the state. Currently, MT is the cheapest state to site a wind power facility in, followed by WY, and WY just voted to tax the wind producers.

We give our resources away in MT, and then refuse the payment that we're due, or actively seek to create barriers for future development in renewables.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I was in House Fish, Wildlife and Parks tonight, testifying on 3 bills, and watching executive action on a number of them.

HB 373 - would create a preference point system for MT modeled off of the WY system. We opposed as written, but will reconsider given that the sponsor has some amendments that would clear up some language. Any input from the Hunt Talk crowd will be taken in to consideration. Here's your chance to lobby the lobbyists.

HB 337 - Simple rework of title 87 statutes related to language changes and moving in to the 20th century from the 19th (Code is an archaic language in and of itself).

HB 361 - Requiring the issuance of archery-only elk permits at 2007 levels. We opposed this bill. It was lonely up at the podium. The outfitter industry turned out in force on this. It is clearly geared to wards the breaks archery permits. Outfitters want unlimited tags for their areas again. Lots of hullaballoo about elk being over objective, but not one outfitter mentioned opening access up for cow elk hunters to come help thin the herd. FWP and MWF both brought up the issue that hunting bulls w/outfitters does nothing to decrease the overall herd.

This bill really is about who gets to shoot big bulls.

Committee action on the following bills:

HB 339 - Unlimited Class B13 (youth combo license - NR) - passed 19-1
HB Revise Penalties - Waste of Game - passed - 12-8
HB 289 - 3 year wait on lion permits - tabled
HB 214 - Classify all bison as livestock (and eliminate the hunt) - 10-10 - Tabled

Senate Fish and Game was to take action on SB 144 - the anti-bison bill. Will know how that turns out tomorrow.

 

[JCS]

Thanks for all the updates. Keep them coming.

 

[Ben Lamb]

The Agriculture Committee passed HB 309 and now it's moved on to the Floor of the house, on the 2ND reading. This is the bill that attacks the Stream Access law. I"m sure Ben will be trying to fire everyone up on this bill. I"m posting a link to the legislators that are on the Ag Committee, so you can take note of who voted yea, or nay. You might have a legislator that you want to pick a bone with.

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2011/minutes/house/votesheets/HB0309AGH110203.pdf

HB 309 is up for second reading tomorrow. It is critical for both hunters and anglers to get comments in on this. Our collective attempts to maintain the access rights that we have are under constant attack this session.

Act now, if you want to keep what you have.

Find your legislator here, or leave a message to be delivered here.

it's easy, and your kids will thank you for it when they are sitting streamside, soaking their toes.

 

[tjones]

Thanks for all you are doing Ben, I know it has to be a grind. Hang in there.

 

[Antler King]

The Agriculture Committee passed HB 309 and now it's moved on to the Floor of the house, on the 2ND reading. This is the bill that attacks the Stream Access law. I"m sure Ben will be trying to fire everyone up on this bill. I"m posting a link to the legislators that are on the Ag Committee, so you can take note of who voted yea, or nay. You might have a legislator that you want to pick a bone with.

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2011/minutes/house/votesheets/HB0309AGH110203.pdf

Thanks for the update I have a friend on the committee hopefully he voted the right way

 

[Brudno]

Jackson's delegation has mostly been conservative, with a couple of moderate to conservative democrats thrown in for good effect.

Laramie has a tendency to produce the only true liberals in the state. And most of those are/were outstanding on Fish and Game issues.

As for the MCV list, a lot of those bills will only further alienate wind companies from installing major facilities in the state. Currently, MT is the cheapest state to site a wind power facility in, followed by WY, and WY just voted to tax the wind producers.

We give our resources away in MT, and then refuse the payment that we're due, or actively seek to create barriers for future development in renewables.

So windmills is somthing you guys are for as well? I would of thought the other way on that. I dont know what kind of tax relief they or what the benefit would be to the citizens or sportsman of your state. Just merely going off my knowledge and expierence from working on the electrical grid, I've seen what those things produce, it aint much some of the time, and nothing most of the time. There more PR machines than anything else. Again just wondering for my own knowlegde here.

 

[Ben Lamb]

So windmills is somthing you guys are for as well? I would of thought the other way on that. I dont know what kind of tax relief they or what the benefit would be to the citizens or sportsman of your state. Just merely going off my knowledge and expierence from working on the electrical grid, I've seen what those things produce, it aint much some of the time, and nothing most of the time. There more PR machines than anything else. Again just wondering for my own knowlegde here.

We're for alternative energy sources, you bet. Those are high paying jobs, with skilled labor. MT currently produces 271 MW of electricity through wind, with another 100 MW permitted. It's not the end all -be all, but it's a good source of energy. Storage issues are being dealt with in some form or another as well (I'm not an energy guy much any more).

One of the bills proposed would double tax folks who produce energy as well. It would reduce the incentive for people to install solar, wind or geothermal units on their own properties in order to supply themselves w/ energy, and then sell the surplus back to the power company (net metering).

 

[Big Fin]

So windmills is somthing you guys are for as well? I would of thought the other way on that. I dont know what kind of tax relief they or what the benefit would be to the citizens or sportsman of your state. Just merely going off my knowledge and expierence from working on the electrical grid, I've seen what those things produce, it aint much some of the time, and nothing most of the time. There more PR machines than anything else. Again just wondering for my own knowlegde here.

The wind blows like hell out here. Those things are spinning all the time. Not sure how much they produce. We do have requirements with the coal fired stations that they have to assist with the firming of the power delivered by these units, allowing them to deliver more of what they produce without messing up the grid.

Maybe they are PR machines, but if they got on tenth of the Federal tax subsidy dollars that oil and gas gets, or even one percent of the Federal tax subsidy dollars ethanol gets, they could build a lot more of them.

 

[Drake4]

Thanks for the update Ben..seems like the stream access law is constantly under attack. That bill is a complete joke.

Regarding HB 373...is that the right number? I wanted to read up on it, but the HB 373 I kept finding, dealt with water and sewer.

 

[Lawnboy]

I am all for HB 361 to return to 2007 levels. I don't hunt the Breaks but the current system started last year is a crock of crap. Instead of only applying this to the Breaks they run a broad brush over the majority of the units in central and eastern Montana. Limiting archery hunters in areas other than the Breaks or those areas that seem to be overcrowed is crazy. There are elk numbers in the district that I hunt in that are over objective, so why not make it unlimited like it used to be? Now if you don't put in for archery as your first choice you run the high risk of not getting it as second choice. Anyone who archery hunts knows that archery is not a very successful means of reducing herd numbers anyway.

If this is a tool to help with overcrowding in certain units by making hunters choose then lets do a study to find out which units really have the issues. Not by saying "well to be fair to the Breaks we must make all the other areas out there the same".

One other note since I'm frothing. If the Breaks are sooo crowded why can't people just pull out some maps and try another part of the state? Mule deer hunting around Bozeman stinks so I can either whine that there are too many others hunting mule deer in my area or I can get the maps out and head east to find better chances.

This is nothing more than a pissing match between Fwp and the landowners and outfitters. It has nothing to do with sound biology. They aren't going to let you on to hunt cows but you are going to punish the rest of us by limiting our choices?