Hb 361
- Thread starter Ben Lamb
- Start date
howler
Active member
In your e mail you stated that there was an amendment to eliminate all permits systems from all districts, is this part of 361 or not. Or did they approve of 285 also or incorporate the two ???
The committee worked two amendments: the First would have stripped the units around CMR out of the bill. That amendment was voted down. Another amendment which corrected the oversight of the bill sponsor and makes the bill even worse in that it specifically eliminates the permit system from all districts. That amendment passed 6-4.
The committee worked two amendments: the First would have stripped the units around CMR out of the bill. That amendment was voted down. Another amendment which corrected the oversight of the bill sponsor and makes the bill even worse in that it specifically eliminates the permit system from all districts. That amendment passed 6-4.
Lawnboy
Well-known member
I'll admit that I took the bait
Although it's hard not to be emotionally attached when it affects something that you have so dearly enjoyed. Especially when the reasons made no sense.
I've argued with some on here that have admitted to not having a dog in the fight and I can respect that. I can only liken it to the ditch bill. I've only pheasant hunted once. Never hunted ducks or geese. I don't river or stream fish really. My point is that I just wasn't that passionate about what the consequences of the ditch bill were because it didn't really affect me(Ignorance I'm sure). I could understand it and am glad that those affected and those that were educated enough fought it. You might not understand my disdain for limiting tags in the eastern part of the state. I've learned a lot in this whole process and can see the danger the legislature can put us in by over riding the commission.
I really do appreciate all the opinions that have been presented. I'm amazed at the resolve that some of you have and am encouraged that if you work hard enough you can make a change. I look forward to joining our local group and hopefully I can be more of an advocate than a complainer.
Although it's hard not to be emotionally attached when it affects something that you have so dearly enjoyed. Especially when the reasons made no sense. I've argued with some on here that have admitted to not having a dog in the fight and I can respect that. I can only liken it to the ditch bill. I've only pheasant hunted once. Never hunted ducks or geese. I don't river or stream fish really. My point is that I just wasn't that passionate about what the consequences of the ditch bill were because it didn't really affect me(Ignorance I'm sure). I could understand it and am glad that those affected and those that were educated enough fought it. You might not understand my disdain for limiting tags in the eastern part of the state. I've learned a lot in this whole process and can see the danger the legislature can put us in by over riding the commission.
I really do appreciate all the opinions that have been presented. I'm amazed at the resolve that some of you have and am encouraged that if you work hard enough you can make a change. I look forward to joining our local group and hopefully I can be more of an advocate than a complainer.
Steve,
I was speaking about the 23 HD's that the bill was aimed at. They cannot (or would not) include specific HD's in the bill. The amendment that moved forward today eliminated the LE permits entirely. The way the bill was written, some were interpreting it to read that permits in place in 2007 would be the same in 2011.
I apologize for speaking broadly. HB 361 will apply to all LE units that went to LE after 2007. That does not include any districts that were LE before 2007.
I was speaking about the 23 HD's that the bill was aimed at. They cannot (or would not) include specific HD's in the bill. The amendment that moved forward today eliminated the LE permits entirely. The way the bill was written, some were interpreting it to read that permits in place in 2007 would be the same in 2011.
I apologize for speaking broadly. HB 361 will apply to all LE units that went to LE after 2007. That does not include any districts that were LE before 2007.
howler
Active member
Ok got it now....
shoots-straight
Well-known member
I'll admit that I took the bait
I've argued with some on here that have admitted to not having a dog in the fight and I can respect that. I can only liken it to the ditch bill. I've only pheasant hunted once. Never hunted ducks or geese. I don't river or stream fish really. My point is that I just wasn't that passionate about what the consequences of the ditch bill were because it didn't really affect me(Ignorance I'm sure). I could understand it and am glad that those affected and those that were educated enough fought it. You might not understand my disdain for limiting tags in the eastern part of the state. I've learned a lot in this whole process and can see the danger the legislature can put us in by over riding the commission.
I really do appreciate all the opinions that have been presented. I'm amazed at the resolve that some of you have and am encouraged that if you work hard enough you can make a change. I look forward to joining our local group and hopefully I can be more of an advocate than a complainer.
I was one that said I had no dog in the fight over there. The fight came from me on the Legislature taking over management of our wildlife.
sweetnectar
New member
Does the commission set the objective level? or what exactly is the objective level?
BuzzH
Well-known member
The herd objectives were set via the EMP (elk management plan)...and are a joke.
As set by the Montana Elk Management Plan. That plan was adopted in 2005(?).
A true eye opener for anyone who reads it with the assumption that we manage elk in Montana based on biology.
Yep EMP with numbers set in 2005. I watched the Bitterroot numbers being set and the numbers were pulled out of the air, socially,,,no bio. We screamed our heads off and no one listened. We wanted 10,000 and got 7700. No where near carry capicaty.
HB 361 would proably help the Bitterroot if it passed, but we continue to battle it,,,it is just plain wrong. We will fight it till BS signs it.
HB 361 would proably help the Bitterroot if it passed, but we continue to battle it,,,it is just plain wrong. We will fight it till BS signs it.
Last edited:
sweetnectar
New member
I tried to look some of it up. There is enough info to make my head spin. I noticed there was a plan in 1992 and 2004 ish... Must be something that gets changed or ammended on occasion with a heated process.
Fin I see what you mean when I saw this statement from the plan:
Fin I see what you mean when I saw this statement from the plan:
Horn Seeker
New member
I'd like to hear about the elk conflicts on public land....
Lawnboy
Well-known member
It's nice to have the elk conflict on public land. Who wouldn't like to choose which bull to shoot out of 20. Bad problem to have
What do the two votes from today mean that are showing on the bill info page?
http://laws.leg.mt.gov/laws11/LAW0203W$BSRV.ActionQuery?P_BLTP_BILL_TYP_CD=HB&P_BILL_NO=361&P_BILL_DFT_NO=&P_CHPT_NO=&Z_ACTION=Find&P_SBJ_DESCR=&P_SBJT_SBJ_CD=&P_LST_NM1=&P_ENTY_ID_SEQ=
http://laws.leg.mt.gov/laws11/LAW0203W$BSRV.ActionQuery?P_BLTP_BILL_TYP_CD=HB&P_BILL_NO=361&P_BILL_DFT_NO=&P_CHPT_NO=&Z_ACTION=Find&P_SBJ_DESCR=&P_SBJT_SBJ_CD=&P_LST_NM1=&P_ENTY_ID_SEQ=
The bill has been re-referred to Fish and Game as Senator Shockley was unable to vote.
The motion that failed was an attempt to vote it back on to the floor of the senate for second reading.
The COmmittee will meet tomorrow at 11 am to take up the bill, and HB 387.
The motion that failed was an attempt to vote it back on to the floor of the senate for second reading.
The COmmittee will meet tomorrow at 11 am to take up the bill, and HB 387.
Similar threads
