Mont Wildlife Federation Shoulder seasons are being abused by FWP

 

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Montana Wildlife Federation" <mwf@mtwf.org>

Subject: Shoulder seasons are being abused by FWP

Hi John, When Montana began extended elk “shoulder seasons” in 2015, they were not meant to be permanent, and more importantly they were never meant to replace the harvest of elk during our archery and rifle seasons.    But under a proposal from Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, that’s where shoulder seasons are heading in 18 hunting districts. They include HDs 262, 290, 298, 390, 391, 393, 411, 417, 502, 510, 511, 520, 530, 540, 560, 575, 580 and 590. These are areas with very limited public hunting access during the archery and general seasons to help us manage elk populations.   The Commission last year shortened these seasons because they weren’t meeting the criteria that were agreed to with the hunters of Montana. Those included data collection on how they’re working, whether we’re seeing the increase in elk harvest during the 11-week archery and rifle seasons, and whether we’re getting half of the needed harvest in the longstanding archery and rifle seasons.     If the Commission considers accepting these recommendations, it has yet to provide the public the data on how these seasons are working, and whether they’re meeting the criteria for a shoulder season.   The shoulder seasons in the long run encourage some landowners to harbor elk. They can sell trophy bull hunts for six weeks of archery hunting and five weeks of rifle, then get hunters in for winter cow elk hunts to address the over population.   Contact the Commission today and tell them to stick to the agreement with the hunters of Montana. The deadline to comment is July 26, so please send your message by emailing the Commission at fwcomm@mt.gov.   PLEASE WRITE YOUR OWN MESSAGE, but hit these main points. Shoulder seasons aren’t meant to replace the harvest during Montana’s archery and rifle seasons. Hunters support fair chase and ethical hunting. Chasing elk in deep snows and bitter cold when they’re just trying to survive is not supported by hunters, or the general public. We need to see the data on whether these hunts are opening up more hunting access in the archery and rifle seasons, when we need the most elk harvest to effectively manage them, including by getting elk back onto public lands. This was never the deal that FWP made with the hunters of Montana, and it’s wrong to extend these hunts another month after elk have already been hunted for five months. Shoulder seasons mean fewer elk on public lands, more leasing of private lands and de facto game farming of our public elk for private interests to profit off of it. DONATE   Montana Wildlife Federation PO Box 1175 Helena , MT 59624 United States If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, pleaseunsubscribe.

 

GUEST VIEW

Guest view: Republican claims about outdoor legislation are inaccurate

• SKYLINE SPORTSMEN'S ASSOCIATION

The June 15 guest view published in the Montana Standard titled Our outdoor heritage, authored by Representatives Wylie Galt, Casey Knudsen, and Sue Vinton, suggested that Republican legislators worked to improve Montanans' recreational opportunities during the 2021 legislative session. They claimed to have improved wildlife management, expanded elk hunting opportunity, reduced efforts to shut off access to public lands, improved habitat, and reformed Montana’s outdoor management agencies. They accused Montanans, frustrated with their actions, of generating false claims about their work.

As a group of Montana resident sportsmen, the Butte Skyline Sportsmen’s Association respectfully disagrees with many of these claims. From our perspective, the 2021 legislative session was one of the most demanding and frustrating experienced, because of Republican-sponsored legislation. We do appreciate Republican-sponsored HB 353, which authorized replacement hunting licenses for harvested game deemed unfit for consumption, and the portion of HB 637 that increased Block Management reimbursement to landowners. We also appreciate funding allocated to the Habitat Montana Program through HB 701. However, funding allocation to the Habitat Montana Program — a program Butte Skyline Sportsmen's Association views as one of the most beneficial to Montana resident sportsmen and general public lands users — was not the result of Republican effort. Montanans spoke clearly, through their votes on Ballot Initiative 190, regarding our desire for this funding. Subsequently, Montanans had to fight Republican legislators to include this funding in HB 701.

From our perspective Republican-sponsored legislation also attempted to or did:

- commercially privatize our public elk to the benefit of some private landowners and wealthy nonresident hunters (HB 505, SB 143);

- increase the nonresident big game hunters in Montana (HB 637);

- reduce the public's ability to collectively purchase land for our interests (HB 677);

- reduce the public's ability to provide comment on environmental reviews by allowing financial charge for our comments (HB 695);

- require hunters to financially compensate some private landowners for crop damage resulting from over-objective elk populations even if hunters had no legal access to harvest those elk (HB 697);

- reduce the public's opportunity to pursue mature bull elk on public lands by removing long-established limited entry bull elk permits (HB 417);

- remove voter-approved conservation funding generated by taxes on marijuana (HB 670);

- complicate the public's ability to acquire private land conservation easements by adding layers of government hurdles (SB 115);

- remove administration of sportsmen-purchased Wildlife Management Areas and Fishing Access Sites from our Fish and Wildlife Commission (SB 153);

- secure a perpetual voting majority for some private landowners on the Fish and Wildlife Commission (SB 306);

- remove the public's ability to legally challenge disputed public rights-of-ways to public lands (SB 354);

- spend large amounts of sportsmen's funds on pheasant raise and release efforts that have long been proven ineffective (HB 637);

- remove hunters' ability to donate permit and license refund monies to the Habitat Montana Program (amendments to SB 208);

- prevent sportsmen-supported Andrew McKean from serving on the Fish and Wildlife Commission (SR 61);

- remove Montana resident sportsmen representation on the Board of Outfitters (SB 275);

- and overturn voter-approved Initiative 161, which made clear that the majority of Montanans don't support outfitter-guaranteed hunting license allocation (SB 143).

Throughout the session, Montana sportsmen overwhelmingly commented to the Senate Fish and Game committee on bills that were not in our best interest that were then moved out of committee on 7-4 party-line votes, with Republican legislators voting against Montana sportsmen's interests. Republican avoidance of Montana resident sportsmen input was clearly demonstrated when sportsmen-opposed elk management legislation that increased nonresident elk licenses was amended into HB 637 and voted out of committee in the final hours of the session without soliciting any public comment.

If the authors of "Our Outdoor Heritage" truly worked to benefit Montana resident outdoor opportunity last legislative session, what’s the need to write guest editorials explaining public benefit? Shouldn't the results of your work and the responses from the public speak for themselves?

The Butte Skyline Sportsmen's Association wants to emphasize these are our perspectives of the 2021 legislative session. We encourage Montana resident outdoor enthusiasts, especially resident hunters, not to blindly accept our perspectives or the perspectives of politicians, regardless of party affiliation. We encourage you to review the bill introductions and voting records from the 2021 legislative session and develop your own perspectives on how ongoing legislation is impacting your outdoor heritage. Information on introduced bills, bill amendments, and bill votes can be found at https://www.leg.mt.gov. If you need assistance navigating the Montana State Legislature website, please contact the Butte Skyline Sportsmen's Association at skylinesportsmen@gmail.com or our Facebook page at Skyline Sportsman’s Association Butte, MT.

Twitter

Email

Print

Galt-Vinton-Knudsen Reply Lte

 Galt-Vinton-Knudsen Reply
    This paper recently ran an opinion piece by politicians Galt, Vinson, and Knudsen that cannot go unchallenged. No matter how hard they try to spin the facts, the last legislative session hurt Montana’s resident hunters, anglers, and other outdoor enthusiasts more than any in memory. While they correctly note that Montana would not be Montana without the ability to live, work, and play outside, their own legislative agenda took dangerous steps toward making this impossible.
    Providing landowners with big game tags to do with as they please and drastically increasing the number of tags reserved for outfitters and their wealthy out-of-state clients is but the first step in the move toward the complete Texas style commercialization of our wildlife resources, which properly belong to everyone.
    I’m not sure who the “environmental groups” making these allegedly false claims are (probably the same ones whose finances Galt and company sought to “investigate”) but the people I know who were left dismayed by this agenda are hard-working Montanans of ordinary means who are tired of seeing their outdoor heritage wrested away and sold to the highest bidder. We don’t need “shooting ranges and fish cleaning stations.” We need reasonable public access to public lands and waters in accordance with the Montana constitution. We don’t need commercially exploited wildlife and more “no trespassing” signs as Montana continues to be bought up by wealthy out of state interests who will never pay their fair share of our tax burden—the real beneficiaries of the legislation Galt and company have touted.
    I am an independent voter with no partisan agenda, but as these writers acknowledge in their piece, these legislative insults originated from one side of the aisle. Personally, I look forward to a day when I can once again vote for Republican candidates based on issues and qualifications, without knowing that I’m voting to destroy my way of life by doing so.
    Do Galt and company really think Montana hunters and anglers are naive enough to swallow the nonsense presented in their recent letter? If so, I feel insulted. So do a lot of my friends, all of whom plan to vote in the next election.
                            Don Thomas
                            Lewistown, MT
                            thomasdon@me.com
                            406-366-6401

"RESPECT" Lte from Tim Thier and Toby Spribille

 Respect

Montana is home to a great diversity of wildlife with many animals not found in most states. For years, it has led the country in developing wildlife management policies that balanced sustainability with family traditions of hunting and trapping. The maintenance of these traditions have always relied on ethics and respect – respect for the land, respect for the animals we hunt and trap, and respect for each other. By acknowledging that wildlife and the outdoors belongs to all of us, a delicate balance was reached that allowed hundreds of mountain lions, wolves and black bears to be harvested each year, while maintaining populations of both predators and prey.

The recent legislative changes that allowed for the greatly liberalized taking of wolves that includes snaring and bounties and the chasing and hunting of black bears with hounds has legalized practices that have upset this balance. Not only is this opposed by the vast majority of wildlife professionals in this state, but also a great number of hunters and trappers. Numerous, unforeseen consequences are inevitable with these changes that will only further alienate the image of hunters and trappers with the public. If our traditions of hunting and trapping are going to continue, we need broader public support, not less.

By allowing and encouraging these new methods of harvest, not only will it lead to an increase in captures of pets and non-target wildlife, but also the harassment of females while they are rearing their young. Ultimately, the abuse of these new liberties will lead to increased public pressures to curtail the traditions we all enjoy. We all share this beautiful place we call home and it is imperative that we all show greater respect for each other and the animals we hunt. Just because something is legal, it does not mean it is the best for wildlife, or our community.

Tim Thier
Toby Spribille