UPOM suing FWP over elk regulations

[mtnkid85]

"The lawsuit requests the judge declare elk regulations void, and require FWP and the commission, within 90 days to develop a plan to “remove, harvest or eliminate thousands of elk” as expediently as practicable."

Looks like UPOM has filed a lawsuit concerning the recent elk regulations.

Furthermore "The lawsuit further alleges two state laws are unconstitutional. The first law in question delegates wildlife policy power to the commission, countering that setting policy rests with the Legislature. The second requires public access as a condition of allowing game damage hunting."

Looks like they are also attempting to neuter the commission.

Lawsuit asks judge to overturn Montana's elk hunting regulations

The lawsuit accuses state officials of attempting to force public hunter access to private land through restrictive hunting regulations and programs such as game damage hunts, which require public access.

billingsgazette.com

 

[MThuntr]

UPOM as an Anti-Hunting, Anti-Fishing Organization

I heard Becky Dockter left within the last couple weeks. This man is correct. https://www.helenamt.gov/home/all-news/news-item?tx_news_pi1%5Baction%5D=detail&tx_news_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=News&tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=181&cHash=c467f61d5836163b29d73bd037d117bd

www.hunttalk.com

 

[MTGomer]

Looks like they are also attempting to neuter the commission.

Insert distasteful joke about Tabor.

 

[mtnkid85]

UPOM as an Anti-Hunting, Anti-Fishing Organization

I heard Becky Dockter left within the last couple weeks. This man is correct. https://www.helenamt.gov/home/all-news/news-item?tx_news_pi1%5Baction%5D=detail&tx_news_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=News&tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=181&cHash=c467f61d5836163b29d73bd037d117bd

www.hunttalk.com

I figured it was somewhere!

 

[Eric Albus]

This will certainly be a topic at the upcoming PLPW meeting in Billings here in a day or two.

 

[Eric Albus]

Funny how gov, FWP are accused of catering to the likes of UPOM. Where all all the loudmouth bashers on this one?

Conspiracy theory SEZ!! Must be a dark secret meeting in which Hank conspired with UPOM to have a double secret probation law suit come out, reflecting off the aluminum foil hats in the moonlight. Moonpies and free bubble up for the first guy with evidence proving this one!!

 

[Schaaf]

Funny how gov, FWP are accused of catering to the likes of UPOM. Where all all the loudmouth bashers on this one?

Conspiracy theory SEZ!! Must be a dark secret meeting in which Hank conspired with UPOM to have a double secret probation law suit come out, reflecting off the aluminum foil hats in the moonlight. Moonpies and free bubble up for the first guy with evidence proving this one!!

Might not be Hank but it’s certainly not a stretch to say that UPOM and Austin Knudsen cooked this up behind closed doors.

 

[shoots-straight]

Funny how gov, FWP are accused of catering to the likes of UPOM. Where all all the loudmouth bashers on this one?

Conspiracy theory SEZ!! Must be a dark secret meeting in which Hank conspired with UPOM to have a double secret probation law suit come out, reflecting off the aluminum foil hats in the moonlight. Moonpies and free bubble up for the first guy with evidence proving this one!!

This one is certainly ironic isn't it? They are catering to UPOM, and UPOM doesn't even recognize that. They are too busy trying to control the narrative. This is far from a "Conspiracy".

 

[DFS]

This one is certainly ironic isn't it? They are catering to UPOM, and UPOM doesn't even recognize that. They are too busy trying to control the narrative. This is far from a "Conspiracy".

Hanks season setting starting point was straight from UPOM. That’s what they want and that is what they are going to get one way or another. I had/have sympathy for outfitters that have spots that need to be filled but burning down the only decent hunting in Montana was certainly not the way to remedy it. There are a lot of ways to fix it but throwing as many tags as possible at it will not turn out good for anyone.

 

[DFS]

Hanks season setting starting point was straight from UPOM. That’s what they want and that is what they are going to get one way or another. I had/have sympathy for outfitters that have spots that need to be filled but burning down the only decent hunting in Montana was certainly not the way to remedy it. There are a lot of ways to fix it but throwing as many tags as possible at it will not turn out good for anyone.

Going to make elk hunting in Montana mule deer hunting real quick. I’m disgusted from all sides.

 

[RandanP]

Might not be Hank but it’s certainly not a stretch to say that UPOM and Austin Knudsen cooked this up behind closed doors.

I expect a flaccid legal response from the state and some sort of settlement that that gives UPOM most of what the want. A sort of soft legal collusion.

 

[Schaaf]

I expect a flaccid legal response from the state and some sort of settlement that that gives UPOM most of what the want. A sort of soft legal collusion.

Yep. That’s definitely UPOM’s goal.

 

[JLS]

Yep. That’s definitely UPOM’s goal.

While the EMP is not a binding document, I think Ben Lamb is correct in that FWP might be a sitting duck for a lawsuit if the do not follow their own EMP in addressing overpopulation.

 

[rogerthat]

While the EMP is not a binding document, I think Ben Lamb is correct in that FWP might be a sitting duck for a lawsuit if the do not follow their own EMP in addressing overpopulation.

I’m good with that. Emp says inaccessible elk don’t count to the objective…they can follow that too than

 

[JLS]

I’m good with that. Emp says inaccessible elk don’t count to the objective…they can follow that too than

And they should. The EMP isn’t legally binding, but it would be fun to watch FWP try to ‘splain why 1) they didn’t go to a cow only season in over objective units and 2) why they are counting all elk instead of trying to differentiate between accessible elk and inaccessible elk.

 

[mtnkid85]

And they should. The EMP isn’t legally binding, but it would be fun to watch FWP try to ‘splain why 1) they didn’t go to a cow only season in over objective units and 2) why they are counting all elk instead of trying to differentiate between accessible elk and inaccessible elk.

Honestly how would we ever differentiate "accessible" and "inaccessible" elk? Without real time data, it is a constantly changing data set. Whats the definition of accessible? If the elk walks across a single section of state land once in the season is it an accessible elk? Is it only accessible when it is physically on accessible land?
I mean I get it, but how would we ever go about doing it?

 

[shoots-straight]

I propose that if the AG rolls on this, that we (Citizens of Montana) start an Initiative to ban Outfitting in Montana. Zero payment allowed to harvest game at all. Zero trespass fees allowed to access for hunting. You can't receive money for the harvest of a big game animal.

 

[JLS]

I mean I get it, but how would we ever go about doing it?

GPS collars

 

[shoots-straight]

Honestly how would we ever differentiate "accessible" and "inaccessible" elk? Without real time data, it is a constantly changing data set. Whats the definition of accessible? If the elk walks across a single section of state land once in the season is it an accessible elk? Is it only accessible when it is physically on accessible land?
I mean I get it, but how would we ever go about doing it?

The way it read in the EMP was something on the lines: If Elk are mostly inaccessible then their numbers shouldn't be included in the counts.

 

[antlerradar]

I propose that if the AG rolls on this, that we (Citizens of Montana) start an Initiative to ban Outfitting in Montana. Zero payment allowed to harvest game at all. Zero trespass fees allowed to access for hunting. You can't receive money for the harvest of a big game animal.

I 161 passed by less than eight points. Banning Outfitting would likely fail miserably.