Connect with us

Montana

Advisory group recommends Montana elk hunters choose weapon, season

Published

on

Advisory group recommends Montana elk hunters choose weapon, season


An advisory committee has really helpful that state wildlife managers require elk hunters to decide on between archery or rifle seasons in an effort to cut back crowding and stress on public lands.

The 12-member Elk Administration Citizen Advisory Group was shaped by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Director Hank Worsech earlier this yr following a contentious season setting course of and debate over how you can handle some burgeoning elk populations and difficulties with public entry. The group, made up of a mixture of landowners or managers and public hunters, is charged with creating elk administration suggestions with a give attention to bettering relationships between public hunters, landowners and the division.

The group has met a number of occasions over the previous few months, advancing concepts with the help of a “sounding board.” FWP acquired 243 purposes to serve on the group, and people not chosen got the chance to function sounding board members. Worsech has mentioned advisory group members had been appointed based mostly on range of viewpoints reasonably than curiosity group illustration.

Persons are additionally studying…

Advertisement

On Thursday, the group adopted its first 4 suggestions, starting from a couple of modifications to the sport injury looking program to what could be a monumental shift for a lot of elk hunters in requiring them to decide on both archery or rifles seasons.

FWP spokesman Greg Lemon mentioned that elk administration and looking is at present being tackled by a number of entities. Together with the elk administration advisory group, FWP is conducting public scoping conferences throughout the state on an replace to its elk administration plan. That features a possibility for the general public to weigh in on elk inhabitants aims, which have been a scorching button difficulty as wildlife managers sort out excessive elk numbers in some areas of the state the place non-public land entry is closely restricted. The Non-public Land/Public Wildlife Council has additionally been engaged on parameters for 454 entry agreements in addition to a brand new hunter ethics marketing campaign, he mentioned.

Advertisement

“These three issues are working independently of one another however the entire thought is to make use of these efforts to enhance elk administration in Montana,” Lemon mentioned, with the advisory group’s suggestions built-in into the extra efforts.

With hunters elevating issues about crowding and lack of recreation, the advisory group on Thursday debated at size the “select your weapon/season” proposal, realizing it might probably see some public pushback. Presently hunters could buy a normal elk license in addition to an archery stamp — archers should move a security course. That permits hunters among the longest looking seasons within the West to pursue elk in each the 6-week archery and 5-week normal season. Though many hunters solely hunt with archery tools or firearms, many additionally hunt with each, and a requirement to decide on may symbolize a big lack of alternative.

As well as, the advice requires shifts to some seasons. Archery season would start Sept. 1 and run for 5 weeks. Then for the two- or three-week break earlier than the beginning of the final rifle season in late October, a personal land hunt for cows could be allowed.

The intent of the proposal is to ease overcrowding and looking stress on public land bull elk, committee members mentioned.

Committee member Chuck Rein, a landowner and retired clothing store from Large Timber, mentioned that FWP would wish to carry public hearings if the proposal stands an opportunity of gaining hunter acceptance.

Advertisement

“It’s too huge of a change to not have hearings. If the general public rejects it, it’s by no means going to work,” he mentioned.

Debate on the proposal included issues of whether or not it might have the specified impact and if some unintended penalties may outcome.

Scott Van Dyken, the lone member to finally vote in opposition to the proposal, believed it might probably minimize down on the variety of archery hunters however do little to ease crowding through the normal season. Many who hunt with each a bow and rifle would select rifle on account of larger success charges, he mentioned.

“I don’t see this working to alleviate rifle stress,” he mentioned.

The group noticed some settlement on the necessity for FWP to assemble higher knowledge, together with polling hunters to see what number of would select every possibility.

Advertisement

The group additionally raised some issues that hunters would break up seasons between species, and what that will imply for deer populations. Particularly, archery hunters desirous to pursue bull elk through the rut may hunt through the archery season however then hunt mule deer through the rifle season, which may considerably enhance stress on deer.

The group additionally finalized a suggestion to reform elk shoulder seasons. The seasons had been carried out a number of years in the past in an effort to cut back elk populations in over-objective districts, discovering some blended outcomes.

The group really helpful shoulder seasons proceed however be used extra strategically. Proposals embody ready two weeks after the top of normal season to start shoulder seasons, including the shoulder season between archery and rifle season, and that shoulder seasons solely be used on non-public land — the fee authorised some public land shoulder seasons over the past season. Additionally, early shoulder seasons held in August would stop in favor of recreation injury hunts.

Committee member Race King, a ranch supervisor from Dillon, famous that Montana’s looking seasons are very lengthy and shoulder seasons have seen some issues from looking teams, however mentioned they’re an essential device to handle elk numbers in some locations.

“The intent is to reassess, not put off (shoulder seasons),” he mentioned.

Advertisement

The group additionally recommends modifications to the sport injury hunt program.

Presently, hunters who add their names to a roster are referred to as at random ought to a recreation injury hunt be authorised. With the intention to qualify for a injury hunt, landowners by legislation should enable some public entry.

The advice seeks to outline public entry as unpaid, together with by block administration, family and friends, and 454 agreements along with open public entry. The proposal additional requires permitting biologists or landowners to pick out a portion of hunters for a injury hunt and to strike hunters on account of “unhealthy conduct.”

Hunters can also be required to both reside inside 150 miles of the hunt or comply with attend the hunt inside 24 hours on the time of software. Hunters can also be charged a charge. Lastly, the advice proposes two sign-up durations for hunters to use for late or early injury hunts.

The group’s last suggestion requires promotion of native elk working teams. Biologists and presumably different FWP workers would attend working group conferences the place members would share info between landowners, hunters, outfitters and FWP, and work to handle issues or wanted regulatory modifications.

Advertisement

The elk working group will meet a minimum of twice extra this month because it vets further suggestions. Proposals at present on the desk embody a particular private-land-only cow elk license for districts over goal; higher collaboration between state and federal entities; bettering FWP communication to encourage higher hunter conduct; and a brand new block administration class giving landowners extra management over necessities for public entry. Whereas not a proper suggestion, the group additionally inspired FWP to handle administration, together with predation, in areas with under-objective elk populations.






Tom Kuglin is the deputy editor for the Lee Newspapers State Bureau. His protection focuses on open air, recreation and pure sources.

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Montana

Man who carried out armed robbery with no pants on at Montana gas station jailed

Published

on

Man who carried out armed robbery with no pants on at Montana gas station jailed


A man who carried out an armed robbery at a Montana gas station while wearing no pants has now been jailed.

The bizarre robbery unfolded on October 16 2023 when Samuel James Collins barged into a Town Pump gas station in Townsend, near Great Falls, wearing a hooded blanket coat, but no pants or shoes, and fired a round from a pistol, prosecutors said.

Collins, 34, then demanded money from two employees who handed over roughly $330 in cash, before he fled the scene in a pickup truck.

The entire incident was captured on surveillance footage, showing the armed robber’s unusual choice of attire.

Advertisement

Just 20 minutes after fleeing the scene, the 34-year-old was tracked down by Meagher County Sheriff’s Office deputies and taken into custody.

Officers found a loaded 9mm pistol, $329 in cash and a shell casing inside his truck.

A bullet and shell casing recovered from the gas station were found to match the pistol, prosecutors said.

Collins pleaded guilty in July to possessing and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, according to the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Montana.

On Wednesday, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison followed by three years of supervised release.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Judge hears arguments over effort to block Montana rule barring sex designation changes • Daily Montanan

Published

on

Judge hears arguments over effort to block Montana rule barring sex designation changes • Daily Montanan


A district court judge in Helena heard arguments Thursday afternoon from attorneys seeking a preliminary injunction on behalf of two transgender Montanans who argue that a rule from the state public health department preventing them from changing their government documents to denote their gender instead of their birth sex is unconstitutional.

ACLU of Montana attorney Alex Rate told Lewis and Clark County District Court Judge Mike Menahan that the Department of Public Health and Human Services’ rule finalized in February essentially prohibits transgender Montanans from changing the sex designations on their birth certificates.

He argued that the state Motor Vehicle Division is not allowing the plaintiffs, Jessica Kalarchik and Jane Doe, to change their sex designations on their driver’s licenses because they are unable to change those designations on their birth certificates in the first place.

Rate used the words of Missoula County District Court Judge Jason Marks when he struck down a bill to prohibit youth from receiving gender-affirming care in September 2023.

Advertisement

“The purported purpose given for these policies is disingenuous. It seems more likely that the policy’s purpose is to ban an outcome deemed undesirable by the State of Montana. This conduct is replete with animus towards transgender persons,” Rate said, citing Marks’s order.

The state, represented by the Attorney General’s Office, argued that sex and gender are not interchangeable, and that court precedent recognizes sex as a binary of male and female.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to issue an injunction barring DPHHS from enforcing its rule and the MVD from not changing sex designations on driver’s licenses, which has not been introduced as a written policy but one which the plaintiffs’ attorneys say is being enforced on the ground.

They are also seeking to certify a class of transgender Montanans in what they hope will become a class-action lawsuit protecting the rules from being enforced for all current and future transgender Montanans who want to change their birth certificates and IDs or driver’s licenses.

Marks said issuing a preliminary injunction would restore the status quo in place in 2017, when Montanans were allowed to change their sex designations without issue. He said that even though a 2021 law that was similar to the DPHHS rule finalized this year was struck down as unconstitutional, the department was in 2023 found to be in contempt of court for “openly and repeatedly” defying the injunction.

Advertisement

And in February, the department moved ahead with the rule change after the Legislature passed a bill, Senate Bill 458, aiming to state in Montana law that there “are exactly two sexes, male and female.” DPHHS said the only changes to sex designations allowed would be to correct errors on birth certificates. A district court judge this past summer found Senate Bill 458 to be unconstitutional as well, though the state is appealing that decision.

Rate told Menahan that backstory is key to proving that the State of Montana is targeting transgender people with the rule and discriminating against them in violation of the state Constitution, its equal protection clause, and the right to privacy it affords Montanans. He argued the state offered no compelling interest for the rule.

“The state says that this isn’t speech at all, but rather a record. But that is a statement of your sex, and the state is forcing our clients to present their view of their sex,” Rate said. “The state cannot arbitrarily decide what is an individual’s sex and force them to speak that into the world. That is the definition of compelled speech.”

Assistant Attorney General Alwyn Lansing (right) tells Judge Mike Menahan why he should not issue an injunction blocking a DPHHS rule concerning birth certificate changes. (Photo by Blair Miller, Daily Montanan)

Assistant Attorney General Alwyn Lansing argued on behalf of the state, telling Menahan that the plaintiffs were trying to get the court to make transgender people a protected class.

“To adopt plaintiffs’ argument would be to create a new protected class, which is gender identity, that is in direct conflict with Montana Supreme Court precedent. The Legislature is the only one who could do that,” she said. “…The right to privacy does not include a right to replace an objective fact of biological sex on a government document with subjective gender identity.”

Advertisement

She also contended that since not all transgender Montanans are seeking to update their personal documents, siding with the plaintiffs would prescribe “personal values of some onto the laws which govern all.”

Rate said the state could not rely on Senate Bill 458 because it is enjoined, and the expert testimony the plaintiffs submitted from two medical experts in the transgender field showed there is a strong relationship between sex and gender identity, and that disallowing that expression was harmful and discriminatory to transgender Montanans.

Arguing as to why a class should be certified in the case, ACLU attorney Malita Picasso said state data showed at least 280 Montanans had sought to amend their birth certificates during the past seven years, at least 85 since 2022. She said certifying a class of transgender Montanans who currently or in the future may want to change their sex designations would ensure that any court decision would apply to all transgender Montanans, not just the current plaintiffs in the case.

She also said that certifying a class for the case would prevent confusion should separate cases be filed in other Montana district courts and judges come to differing conclusions. Assistant Attorney General Thane Johnson told the court that whatever Menahan decides regarding the injunction would apply to the entire state of Montana, and he believed the plaintiffs did not meet all the necessary prongs to turn the case into a class-action suit.

Picasso responded that the state’s record showed it would try to fight the changes even if an injunction was granted, however. She said that if Menahan issues an injunction and the two plaintiffs do get their documents changed, the state could then claim the case and injunction were moot because the plaintiffs had gotten the relief they had sought, then apply the same rules to other transgender Montanans.

Advertisement

“If the defendants would like to enter a stipulated agreement in which they, you know, say that they won’t enforce it as to others, then I think that maybe we could reconsider,” Picasso said. “But at this stage, it seems pretty clear that were the injunction to be issued only as to the named plaintiffs, that the defendants would be arguing for that to be limited to just them.”

Menahan did not issue any orders from the bench Thursday and did not state when he might do so following the two-hour hearing.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Montana

What Montana HC Travis DeCuire Said After Grizzlies Fell At Tennessee | Rocky Top Insider

Published

on

What Montana HC Travis DeCuire Said After Grizzlies Fell At Tennessee | Rocky Top Insider


Photo via Montana Athletics

Tennessee basketball handed Montana its second loss of the young season on Wednesday night, using a big second half to coast past the Grizzlies 92-57.

Following the game, Montana coach Travis DeCuire met with the media and discussed the strong play of his sophomore guard Money Williams, what makes Igor Milicic Jr. tough to defend and more. Here’s everything DeCuire said.

More From RTI: Three Quick Takeaways As Tennessee Coasts Past Montana To Remain Unbeaten

Opening statement 

“Rough night for the Griz. We had a little more fun in the first half than we did in the second half, obviously. I think Coach Barnes’ halftime speech was a little better than mine, in terms of getting this team ready to go in the second half. But I thought we did a good job defensively in the first half taking away some of the rhythm, some of the shots that they were trying to get. Obviously, some some fouls. Got some of their better players out for some stretches, which allowed us to make some runs as well. Second half, they ramped up their defensive intensity and I think we lost ours. To give up 63% in a half, regardless of who we were playing, is not like us. I don’t know the last time we’ve done that. But Chaz Lanier obviously going early in the in the second half and I thought that was a difference in terms of getting that team going.”

Advertisement

On what Montana guard Money Williams did to have such a strong game

“Money is good at making plays, whether it’s in a ball screen or in space. I think he generates offense for us in a lot of ways. Tonight he scored the ball, he made shots. But there are times when he is creating shots for others as well. We just did not have a great shooting night. So he felt he needed to score more for us to stay in the game, which was true.” 

On what adjustments Montana made on defense after Tennessee started 6-for-6 from the field 

“Our biggest thing was beat screens. Coach Barnes still plays a style of basketball that I believe in. A lot of people call it a old school, where you set a lot of screens away from the ball for shooters. From watching them in film, we saw that they really set screens very well. So for us, our goal is to beat the screens, to get through them and not require a bunch of help. And I thought we did a good job at the first half. As fatigue set in, fouls set in, I think we just did not execute that as well in the second.”

On what makes Tennessee’s Igor Milicic so difficult to guard

Advertisement

“Well, he wasn’t difficult to scout. We we knew he made over 100 threes in his previous school, but he hadn’t been shooting threes, or at least not very many. And so they hadn’t really been catering to that. Obviously they made some adjustments. They watched us defensively saw how aggressive we are on the ball screens. So they were looking for that early in the half. And then he got open for some drop-offs and lots out of ball screen coverage. But that wasn’t necessarily him making a play. That was that was (Zakai) Zeigler making a play.” 

On Montana’s defense forcing nine first half turnovers

“We wanted to be physical. We wanted to apply pressure on everyone other than Zeigler. We thought containing him was the most important thing. Not a lot of assists coming from other people. So we thought that if we could apply a little pressure on the post and the wings and force them to try to create, that maybe we could either force some turn some turnovers or low-percentage shots, which that did happen early. But eventually they got out of that.”

On Money Williams being able to attack the Tennessee defense

“We got we got a little taste of that last year. He only played 12 games last year, but his best games were Houston, Nevada. So when the lights are bright, it’s typically when he can’t show enough. Unfortunately his season ended early with an injury, so we weren’t able to see that level of consistency. But we knew he was capable of that.” 

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending