MSA Comment to Commission on ESS

 Folks, this is our comment.  Please send in your comments as the 27th is the deadline.

January 26, 2020

Chairman Colton & Commissioners:

The Montana Sportsmen Alliance, MSA is the voice of reason for Montana resident hunters and anglers.  Our leadership group and the many sportsmen and women hale from many places on the Montana map. 

MSA would like to thank Chairman Colton and the Commission for making substantial changes to the 2020-2021 elk proposals. 

First things first; the present Elk Management Plan is still valid today, it is the standard of the industry, so to speak, and as relevant today as it was in January 2005 when it was unanimously approved by the Commission.  Although the EMP has never been fully implemented we strongly feel The EMP has been violated many times resulting from individuals, both in and out of the Department that wanted to take shortcuts or substitutions to circumvent the plan.  Actually, the ESS is one such substitution for the EMP.

The next thing is the matter of the third elk tag.  This is unbelievable that special interests can run something through our Montana Legislature while not even hiding their intended goals. The third elk tag is a travesty and needs to be watered down as much as possible.  It is nothing more than turning our public trust elk into so much vermin.

MSA has never agreed with the ESS, we went along because we are team players that want to help with any situation that may arise.  We also grudgingly agreed to the ESS because they came with specific criteria.  We took the department at their word and we intend to have them keep it. 

Regarding the ESS, we do want to thank those individuals within the Department that made strides to remove ESS from those Hunt Districts not meeting the criteria. 

We have formulated some ideas that we will briefly put to paper, as with anything MSA puts out to the public we will be happy to expound upon and visit with any of the Commissioners, Department personnel and others in the hunting community.

●      The ESS were never meant to replace the general seasons, let’s ensure the ESS do not become the season of choice.

●      Eliminate all ESS prior to the regular archery and end them no later than January 1, with special attention paid to those landowners that have made every effort to help themselves while helping hunters. Real “Skin in the Game”  These landowners are our neighbors, let’s treat them as such.

●      Elk numbers have to be trending in the right direction prior to continuing any ESS.

●      As per the valid EMP, let’s place strong consideration on antlerless-only seasons until objectives are achieved. 

●      We suggest coming up with not only objective numbers but distribution numbers as well, extra work for sure, but we’re all Montanans and used to hard work.

●      Quantitatively evaluate all elk hunting seasons and according to harvest criteria and base decisions on actual performance.

●      Provide a transparent database of the numbers of elk harvested by non-residents; broken out by bulls, cows, and calves; outfitted or non.

●      As per the EMP, exempting from objectives “inaccessible elk” (primarily on private lands)

1)    Use of sub-objectives, again part of the present EMP.  We will offer a further review of this use according to the EMP.

●      Realistic elk objectives

●      Establish elk working groups with equal stakeholders statewide as the Devil’s Kitchen group.  Set the rules at consensus-driven.  Each group messages the Commission and Department directly on items where consensus is reached, not through Department employees or commissioners individually.

●       A clear need to revitalize the hunt roster/damage hunt program to ensure effective and equitable participation while maintaining expediency to benefit all stakeholders. 

To continue the stated 1. From the last page. In the present EMP, it was presupposed that the Adaptive Harvest Management would provide tools necessary to manage elk to accomplish the objectives.  We have to realize that in many areas of Montana that “de facto” refuges exist.  Reality is these elk numbers are mostly impossible or completely impossible to manage to an objective, in those instances, elk in those refuges could be counted separately and sub-objectives established.  This could be very helpful to those landowners that suffer the negative effects of neighboring elk that are off-limits to the public.

In closing MSA again, wishes to thank the Commission for their work.  We wish to have our comment added to the official record.

Respectfully submitted,

MSA Leadership Group

John Borgreen, Great Falls

Jeff Herbert, Helena

Doug Krings, Lewistown

Laura Lundquist, Missoula

Sam Milodragovich, Butte

Joe Perry, Conrad

Steve Schindler, Glasgow

E. Don Thomas, Lewistown

Dale Tribby, Miles City

JW Westman, Park City

Robert Wood, Hamilton

Will Montana leaders stand up to Weyerhaeuser? Missoulian

Will Montana leaders stand up to Weyerhaeuser?

• BEN LONG
• Jan 19, 2020
• 
  

Montanans enjoy the world’s greatest backyard. But much of that heritage is up for grabs.

I am referring to 1,000 square miles now owned by Weyerhaeuser Co. Historically, timber companies — Champion, Plum Creek and Weyerhaeuser — allowed people to use these lands to hunt, fish, pick berries and whatnot.

But being a good corporate neighbor is apparently out of style. Shortly before Christmas, Weyerhaeuser announced it intends to sell 600,000 acres in northwest Montana at a paltry $250 per acre. Even the folks who track these issues closely were shocked by the news.

The buyer is Georgia-based Southern Pine Plantations. While the company says it has no plans to change access policies, it’s naïve to take that at face value. The company has a track record of selling land to developers and billionaire land hogs who buy up acreages in Idaho and Montana, locking out traditional uses and blocking access to adjacent public land.

There are very good reasons why Montana's elected officials need to engage. One is the hundreds of good, family-wage timber industry jobs that are at stake. Second is the damage done to our economy and outdoor heritage if these lands are locked behind no-trespassing signs. Third is the enormous costs to taxpayers as we pay to extend police, firefighting and other expensive services to more and more remote developments.

One wonders if Weyerhaeuser’s shareholders are paying attention. Is dumping this land at $250 an acre really the best value for the company? Did Weyerhaeuser even approach public agencies or conservation groups about a better deal?

The good news is, Montanans have a track record of protecting both our outdoor freedoms and our productive timber land. We already have the tools and potentially the dollars to succeed.

But do we have the political leadership? There is little sign of that so far.

The Montana Legacy Project is our largest success story, conserving habitat and access in the Seeley-Swan and beyond as Plum Creek liquidated its holdings starting in the 1990s. More recently, Weyerhaeuser, public agencies and the Trust for Public Lands secured the Whitefish Lake Watershed Project.

If Montanans are going to have a seat at the table, we need continued funding through programs like the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the Forest Legacy Program. These are proven tools to fund solutions.

Ironically, the recent announcement also proves that conservation efforts work. Decades ago, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and Plum Creek signed a conservation easement protecting habitat and access in the Thompson and Fisher river drainages. The land was sold to Weyerhaeuser, but the easement stays intact. No matter who buys that Weyerhaeuser land, our right of access will be protected there valleys because of that contract. But that easement covers just 100,000 of the 600,000 acres Weyerhaeuser wants to sell.

We don’t have to sit by and be force-fed our future. We can engage. But time is short.

From our county commissioners, legislators and congressional delegation, now is the time for elected officials to demonstrate they are for Montana workers and outdoor families over corporations and billionaires. Voters will reward elected officials who protect our freedoms.

Weyerhaeuser’s bombshell threw a lot of dust in the air. Now is time to act. Once our access, habitat and timber base are gone, there’s no getting them back.

BHA Speak Up for Reasonable Elk Management in Montana

Speak Up for Reasonable Elk Management in Montana

Note:  MSA and most other sportsmen organizations are on the same page.  Here is a concise package from BHA.  We would include the request to go to Bulls only in the districts not meeting performance objectives!  Please send in comments!!

Joe   MSA 

 

 

Posted by Montana BHA Chapter | January 13, 2020

The Montana Chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is deeply concerned about the manner in which Elk Shoulder Seasons (ESSs) are being used to manage elk in Montana.
The Shoulder Seasons were created as an emergency tool in response to legislative pressure to meet population objectives set in Montana’s 2004 Elk Management Plan. The ESS was meant to be temporary, used only on private land, and used only when and where effective.

Image courtesy of Erik Petersen Photography

However, according to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP), the ESSs have proven ineffective in many areas and have been damaging to accessible elk herds in other areas. Yet, they continue to be applied in many of these districts across the state.
You can make a positive change: Montana FWP Commission is seeking an alternative to ESSs and is requesting public input for the 2020 and 2021 hunting seasons. FWP is accepting public comment through January 27th, 2020.
We encourage you to speak up and make your concerns known. Comments are being accepted via email.
The official comments from the Montana Chapter of BHA can be found here. If your concerns mirror ours, we suggest and invite you to consider using the talking points below in your comments, as you see fit:

• Eliminate all ESS prior to the regular archery season and end them no later than Jan. 1.
• Continue ESS in only those hunting districts where harvest criteria are being met and elk herds are trending in the desired direction until objectives are met.
• Explore additional regular season antlerless harvest opportunities in districts with ESSs.
• Evaluate all elk hunting seasons quantitatively and according to harvest criteria and make decisions based on actual performance.
• Exempt “inaccessible elk” (those residing primarily on private land) from the objective number as provided for in Montana FWP’s current elk management plan (#5, p. 55).
• Finalize the revised elk management plan prior to the 2020 fall hunting season including establishing realistic elk management objectives.
• Establish elk working groups statewide (similar to the Devil's Kitchen group and recent efforts by FWP Region 2) to work collaboratively among diverse and representative stakeholders.
• Revitalize the hunt roster/damage hunt program to ensure effective and equitable public participation. 

Send your comments to fwpwld@mt.gov, or by mail to FWP Wildlife, PO Box 200701, Helena MT 59620-0701.

Thank you for speaking up for reasonable elk management in Montana.