Habitat Montana Under Attack - All Hands on Deck

Conference committee should be tomorrow. Hopefully hey follow Rep. Flynn's passionate floor speech yesterday and restore the bill back to it's original form.

In other news, HB 5, which contains the full authority to spend funds on land acquisition for programs such as Habitat Montana, Upland Game Bird Enhancement Program, Migratory Bird Fund and the Governor's tags was passed 84-16 on concurrence to the senate amendments. The vote should hold on third, and if it does, then we should thank the Legislature for restoring the ability of Fish, Wildlife and Parks to implement the law as written and move forward with more WMA's and strategic purchases of land. This will be one of the more significant victories for hunters and anglers this session if it sails through on third reading tomorrow.

Good news, in the conference committee today, which met at 11:30, comprised of Senators Hinkle, Welborn and Phillips, as well as Representatives Redfield, Court and the bill sponsor Flynn, the Senate amendments previously inserted, the dead HB 651, were amended out.

Flynn stated, "thought I had a tight title", a bill that "improved things for all people". Sen. Hinkle thought Sen. Thomas' amendment (the bulk of HB 651) and the word "shall" was a good fit, wanted "independent eyes (the state land board). Rep. Flynn, again clarified Pittman-Robertson dollar projects being governed by USFWS tenets, so that it does not become a diversion of funds. Now that the bill has been restored, it should be supported.

Additionally distressing was a closing statement by the Committee Chair, Sen. Hinkle, who continues to disparage the public and our participation. Addressing a previous statement by Rep. Flynn, he said,

You had made a comment that you wanted to keep politics out of this bill. And it's very sad to me that in reading emails and listening to different groups, organizations, that the same individuals who are the loudest voice for public land access have also been the loudest voice against measures like this, to try and improve, and to try to work on the issue of public land access. And this has been the first session that I've really seen that come into fruition here. I know there's a bill in the House to do virtually the same with a public lands advocate and it's amazing, the same individuals came out and opposed that. Soon as you touch the money, that in my opinion, they think they hold, then they're screaming and yelling about that rather than working with both sides on this issue. So I'm disappointed by that, I think it's hypocritical and for the record I wanted to state that.

Click to expand...

As a member of the public, I am disappointed that he cannot understand the USFWS MOU principles concerning Pittman-Robertson dollars, and though the general public land supporter wants to ensure legally allowed public access and legally pursued easements and public land purchases, we don't want to jeopardize the MOU governed Pittman-Robertson dollars, nor be fiscally irresponsible with redundant positions that divert more funds.

Whatever became of the position created by Gov Bullock under Montana DNRC as a "public access specialist"?

Thanks for all of you who fought to have the amendments taken out of HB 424. It needed to be done to get it passed and not vetoed.
And Kat and Ben, thanks for keeping us up to speed with the day-to-day movement of this and many other bills in Montana.

Straight Arrow said:

Whatever became of the position created by Gov Bullock under Montana DNRC as a "public access specialist"?

Click to expand...

It still exists. We had suggested to the sponsor of 651 that he should direct his bill to fund and better establish that existing position but that suggestion wasn't taken to heart. Despite the protestations of some legislators, the groups who worked on 434 and opposed this amendment were never consulted on the amendmenr nor were they consulted on 651 before being introduced. And to be perfectly clear, ALMOST EVERY sporting group opposed 651 and the amendment to 434.

Thanks, Ben. That was my understanding. It really concerns me that Sens Hinkle, Thomas, Fielder, etal did not understand the redundancy with the proposed similar position, nor did they understand the diversion issue regarding P-R funding. The remedy in tweaking language and administratively attaching a position is a blatant "smoke & mirrors" ploy. It seems to me a resolution to require training and education regarding such federal or other national larger funding for Montana would be significantly more beneficial to legislators and support staff than "Federalism Training"!

Straight Arrow said:

It really concerns me that Sens Hinkle, Thomas, Fielder, etal did not understand the redundancy with the proposed similar position, nor did they understand the diversion issue regarding P-R funding. The remedy in tweaking language and administratively attaching a position is a blatant "smoke & mirrors" ploy. It seems to me a resolution to require training and education regarding such federal or other national larger funding for Montana would be significantly more beneficial to legislators and support staff than "Federalism Training"!

Click to expand...

Amen, especially if they are the chair and vice chair of the frickin Senate Fish & Game Committee!

Yes, the relief at the end of the era with Brenden as Chair of the Senate Fish & Game Committee was short lived.

They don't have the new printed version of the revised text up yet, and the new fiscal note is requested, but the schedules for the 2nd reading for both the House and Senate are on the 24th.

The Senate just approved the Conference Committee report with Flynn's amendment to strike the senate amendments. 44 aye and 2 no (Fielder and Regier)

The House votes on this at the 1:00 session today. 99 aye, 1 no (Casey Knudsen)