Elk Shoulder Season FWP Commission Public Comment Jan. 2016

January 20, 2016

Montana FWP Commission

1420 E. Sixth Avenue

Helena, MT 59602

Dear Chairman Vermillion & Commissioners:

The Montana Sportsmen Alliance formed as a result of the disastrous 2011 Legislative session where we saw more than 150 bad pieces of legislation against the resident Montana hunters and anglers. From those humble beginning we have grown in numbers and strength even though we charge no one for joining the Alliance nor do we have a membership list showcasing how many of us there are. We have followers from basically every geographic region of our great state. Most MSA followers are private property owners; believe strongly in private property rights, as we believe steadfastly in public property rights as well. MSA members are strong believers in the Public Trust Doctrine and the Montana Model of Fish & Wildlife Conservation. The Montana Model has a long, successful history of achievements that came through involvement from many Montanans.

There are several items Montana Sportsmen Alliance would like to comment on to this Commission. Our voice is for the Montana resident hunters regarding our comment. The first comment is regarding the “Shoulder Season” proposals. We were opposed to SB 245, late season elk hunts, this past Legislative session, we saw them as another iteration of the same unsuccessful attempts we all remember from 10 plus years ago, those past late seasons were by and large unsuccessful by reason of one main point, lack of reasonable public access. If the public is kept from pursuing their public trust resource, management is most difficult for the department. MSA sees the shoulder seasons as nothing more than those past unsuccessful late seasons. MSA members are very diverse and have seen areas in our state that are now being proposed for shoulder seasons. Although not all inclusive, we see areas proposed where little or no public access is allowed, including the East side of the Crazy Mountains, Drummond area, Dillon area, Little Snowies and the White Sulfur areas. Many of these, and others as well must be removed from shoulder season consideration.

MSA members look at 5 pilot program shoulder seasons and ask the question of how do we go from a beginning of 5 pilots to proposals for 44 hunt districts? It is our belief that the department has gone to full-scale implementation. Show us the data that was collected and analyzed, something Montanans were told would happen to ensure those pilots were doing what they were supposed to be doing. MSA holds a firm belief that the department was and still is using a top down heavy hand in having the Regions come up with proposals. We suspect this from the large amount of proposals coming from hunt districts, in the past, that have been off limits to the public hunters, why would those folks out in the hinterlands propose something that sets up a fail situation as it has in the past? MSA opposes ramping up to 44 hunt districts from the 5 pilots, especially when the only criteria is a hunt district being over objective and there being no present data available that would indicate the widespread implantation of 44 shoulder seasons. Extreme care must be exercised from this Commission regarding shoulder seasons. You must vote for Montana, not commercial interests.

MSA is strong believer in the 5 week season structure as the main tool for managing numbers of elk. Most of MSA have been around long enough, we have a historical perspective, and we’ve witnessed what has happened on the ground and in Legislative sessions. Some main points supporting the 5 week season:

We talk often of the 5 week season; this discussion is far more than just the 5 week portion. The 5 week season came as the main tool in the toolbox; however there are many other tools included in that toolbox that come attached to the 5 week season.
Any discussion of the 5 week season must include a comprehensive answer. The 5-week season was not created as an individual action item, but rather included the following:

• The general season was liberalized in all elk hunting districts that were over objective;

• Management seasons, season extensions, the hunt roster, and landowner qualification criteria were simultaneously created as part of this process;

• A second elk license (b license) was created a few years later;

• The elk plan included all of these aspects of the proposal into a commission approved environmental assessment that received significant public review and support.

Therefore, we believed then and we believe today, that landowners have been provided with appropriate tools to address over-objective elk population issues if they choose to utilize the available tools. However, since elk are a public trust resource, and since this list of tools has been provided, we felt strongly, and still do, that landowner qualification criteria is a requisite part of the management effort.

Shoulder seasons by contrast, ignore landowner qualification criteria, and the only requirement being that the hunting district be over objective for a shoulder season to be implemented. This is unacceptable!

Suggestions on shoulder season criteria…..

Have shoulder seasons terminate after two years. Given that commissioners term out before 4 years and some fwp folks retire, 2 years provides an assurance some  folks that made the decision are still around.  There is a huge push to get these on the ground statewide with no data in place and no report to the public.

Please eliminate the obvious loophole to extending these shoulder seasons without meeting criteria.  This seems to be an opening for abuse by MOGA and legislator meddling  and pressuring for special treatment for their buddies.  It seems ludicrous to use an exemption clause negating the other 4 criteria.  

The next item in the tentative proposals is Hunt District 426 being pulled from the bundling package from years ago. That bundling project took a large amount of time and effort by then Commissioner Colton and Vermillion. They devoted a large amount of time and effort to come up with something that so called kept “peace in the family”. MSA believes this to be an action to remove, one piece at a time from our public trust, something that was democratically decided by Montana hunters through a broad public process. We strongly suggest leaving HD 426 in the bundle where it was placed.

The last item MSA wishes to comment on is the Hunt District 313 proposal to limit that district to 75 permits, we support this as we believe in biology, not the entitlements of commercial operators. We just can’t support unlimited permits for this area. We strongly support limiting permit numbers in this area; Montanans have broadly accepted this elsewhere. We stand behind the biologist’s recommendations and urge the Commission to do the same! The Montana Resident Hunter has always been willing to make sacrifices for the resource. Commercial interests must respect the resource they have abused.

A discussion that always seems to be lacking in Legislative sessions and proposals, such as these before us are the elements of disease transmission. At some point a broad, honest discussion must take place. Part of the problem with even having to discuss these proposals comes from the fact that harboring of wildlife has been taking place for a long time and continues on today’s landscape unabated. This unnatural concentration harms neighboring landowners, domestic livestock and our precious public trust wildlife. We can no longer bury our collective heads in the sand-this huge issue must be addressed by all stakeholders.

In closing MSA appreciates the ability to be part of this process, a main tenet of the Montana Model. We wholeheartedly support science based decisions and do have a firm grasp of social conditions regarding these issues. MSA members are for the most part private property owners and have never attempted to pry our way onto private property, and never will. However, if private landowners don’t use the tools given to them to control numbers they must suffer from their own decisions and the impending consequences as wildlife is a public trust resource.

Respectfully submitted,

Montana Sportsmen Alliance