Montana
Fish and Wildlife Commission sued over open-meeting law, black bear quotas
The Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission was sued Friday for allegedly ignoring state open meeting laws when it approved eliminating some black bear hunting quotas in December.
The seven-member commission unanimously agreed at its Dec. 19 meeting to drop a rule that closed black bear hunting in certain hunting districts of northwest Montana if hunters killed more than 37% of the estimated female bear population there. The lawsuit, filed by wildlife and conservation group members from across the state, claims the commissioners failed to publish the proposal before the meeting and then took action on it without proper notice or public comment.
“I personally care a lot about black bears,” said Denise Boggs, lead plaintiff in the lawsuit and a former Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife division employee. “But we are litigating this because the public process and open meeting laws were violated.”
During a discussion of “corrections and amendments to black bear, antelope, deer bighorn sheep and boundary descriptions/clarifications” listed on the agenda during the December meeting, Region 2 Commissioner Jeff Burrows of Hamilton proposed the black bear rule change. It had not been included in the published agenda before the meeting, according to the lawsuit.
In the online recording of the meeting, Commission Chair Lesley Robinson said Burrow’s proposal was “one the public has not seen, which is perfectly fine. This is completely fine for the amendments to come at the meeting.”
Requests for comment to Robinson and Montana FWP spokesman Greg Lemon were not returned by Friday afternoon.
The change affected FWP Region 1 efforts to sustain black bear populations in northwest Montana. Region 1 Wildlife Manager Neil Anderson told the commissioners in December that hunters were particularly successful in the 2021 and 2022 seasons, killing about 1,500 black bears combined. But through 2023 and 2024, they only took about 900.
Region 1 Commissioner Pat Tabor of Whitefish said hunters were telling him that deer and elk populations were down in northwest Montana and they believed black bears were partly responsible.
“A slight decline in black bears is in order until we get stabilization in ungulates,” Tabor said during the December meeting. “I got a tremendous amount of traffic on this. We need to be more aggressive in predator management in Region 1.”
Region 3 Commissioner Susan Kirby Brooke of Bozeman added she thought over-large populations of black bears were the reason more residents in Kalispell and Columbia Falls were having bear conflicts at their homes.
“If the population is stable, they wouldn’t be coming into neighborhoods,” she said. However, FWP staff said those two things were not related.
“The challenges we have managing altercations with bears is largely independent of population size and hunting,” FWP game management Bureau Chief Brian Wakeling told the commissioners. “Hunting is not the primary method we use to address human conflict that arises from bear interactions or altercations.”
Anderson added that bear-human conflicts in neighborhoods had more to do with food supplies. In dry years when huckleberry crops are small, bears seek out human foods like unsecured garbage, bird feeders and dog food.
“It’s a little more complicated than just black bear numbers,” Anderson told the commissioners. “All the [residential] development is occurring in the valleys and riparian areas [that bears used to frequent]. People want to live there.”
Region 1 wildlife managers suggested the 37% female kill quota in January 2024. The move came in response to the recent extension of black bear hunting seasons, along with new opportunities to chase black bears with hounds. That likely meant more females getting killed, which raised the potential for a population downturn.
“We wanted to use this method for a couple years, and then come back to next year’s biennial season-setting with hard quotas, rather than this 37%,” Wakeling told the commissioners.
But Tabor, who recently retired from an hunter outfitting and guide company in northwest Montana, said he thought the 37% female kill quota was “uber-conservative,” and asked if a limit of 40% or 45% was possible.
Anderson replied that killing 40% of the females in a bear management unit was the expected threshold where populations could start crashing. The 37% point was chosen to avoid reaching that tipping point.
Mike Bader, a Missoula-based wildlife consultant and plaintiff in the lawsuit, said the divergences between what the commissioners proposed and what their FWP staff research showed was part of the reason why the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declined to delist grizzly bears from the Endangered Species Act last week. Federally protected grizzlies are often killed in encounters with black-bear hunters, and the FWS decision cited inadequate state regulatory controls on those hunters as a serious risk to grizzly survival.
“They just don’t seem ready to manage the species,” Bader said Friday. “They can’t just say ‘we’ll make adjustments and fix it next year.’”
A group of 40 wildlife experts made a similar point in a letter to the Fish and Wildlife Commission after the December meeting.
“This is management based on the whimsy of commissioners rather than on data, analysis and consultation with biologists on the ground,” the letter stated. “A particular irony in this case is that FWP recently initiated research to update our understanding of both black bear abundance and elk population dynamics in northwestern Montana. Rather than awaiting the results from FWP staff tasked with providing objective information, the commission moved forward based on some anecdotes they heard and their obvious personal bias against predators.”
During a public comment session later in the meeting, several speakers supported removal of the black bear quota. Two hunting outfitters noted it was difficult for hunters in the backcountry to know if their district black bear season had been closed early because the quota had been reached. They also said it was hard to book late-season hunting clients not knowing if the district might be closed before the regular season ended.
Mike Mershon, of the Montana Wildlife Federation, praised a different rule change involving bighorn sheep, but then added a warning about the commission’s process.
“These agenda amendments make it difficult to get it out to the public,” Mershon said, “so they can respond to developing amendments.”
Montana
Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case – Transnational Litigation Blog
Image by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay
The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act discourages forum shopping in child custody disputes by assigning subject-matter jurisdiction to the court located in the “home state” of the child. In Allen v. Allen, decided on April 21, 2026, the Montana Supreme Court had to determine whether the child’s “home state” was Montana or the Netherlands. This case shines an important spotlight on the importance of timing in international child custody disputes. The left-behind parent’s likelihood of success is strongly correlated with how quickly he or she acts to vindicate their legal rights.
Facts
Jonathan Edward Allen (Father) and Petronella Gerline (Van Oosterom) Allen (Mother) were married in Colorado in 2009. Father is a United States citizen. Mother is a dual citizen of the United States and the Netherlands. Their child (R.A.A.) was born in 2015. In 2020, the family moved from Colorado to Montana.
In August 2023, after Father and Mother began having marital difficulties, Mother and R.A.A. relocated to the Netherlands. In February 2024, Mother filed a petition for divorce and custody with the District Court of Central Netherlands (Netherlands District Court).
In January 2025, Father filed a petition with the District Court of The Hague seeking the return of R.A.A. pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. This petition was denied. Although the court held that R.A.A. had been wrongfully removed from the United States, the court reasoned that the one-year automatic return period had passed and that R.A.A. had become settled in her new environment in the Netherlands. This decision was affirmed on appeal.
In September 2025, Father filed an Emergency Motion for Temporary Custody and Petition for Permanent Parenting Plan in Montana state court. That court dismissed the petition on the grounds that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Specifically, it held that it lacked the power to adjudicate the dispute because Montana was no longer the “home state” of R.A.A. Father, acting pro se, appealed to the Montana Supreme Court.
Analysis
The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) assigns exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction to courts located in the child’s “home state” when it comes to matters relating to child custody. The “home state” is “the state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as parent for at least 6 consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child custody proceeding.” The UCCJEA specifically provides that courts “shall treat a foreign country as if it were a state of the United States” for purposes of resolving these disputes.
On the facts presented in Allen v. Allen, the Montana Supreme Court correctly held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to consider Father’s emergency motion. Mother and R.A.A. relocated to the Netherlands in August 2023. Six months later—in February 2024—R.A.A.’s home state shifted to the Netherlands. The Dutch courts—rather than the Montana courts—now had exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction to resolve custody disputes involving R.A.A. Father did not file his motion in Montana until September 2025, which was nineteen months too late.
Conclusion
If Father had filed his suit in Montana before February 2024, he could have shown that Montana was R.A.A.’s “home state” because the child had not yet resided in the Netherlands for six months. The suit was, however, not filed until September 2025.
If Father had filed suit in the Netherlands before August 2024, he could have argued that R.A.A. should be returned to the United States pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction because the child had not yet resided in the Netherlands for a year. The suit was, however, not filed until January 2025.
The key takeaway of Allen v. Allen is the need for speed in international child custody cases. The timelines baked into the relevant laws and treaties mandate that the left-behind parent move quickly to assert their rights. If they are slow off the mark, they be forced to litigate in foreign courts under less favorable legal rules.
Montana
Clark Fork River remains central to Missoula’s identity, conservation groups say
MISSOULA, Mont. — The Clark Fork River has long been a defining feature of Missoula, shaping the city’s culture, economy and outdoor lifestyle.
The river is so closely tied to the area that it helped inspire the well-known book and film “A River Runs Through It.” But local conservation advocates say its importance goes far beyond scenery.
“Without the Clark Fork River, Missoula would just be another town,” said Lisa Ronald, Northern Rockies associate conservation director for American Rivers. “We wouldn’t be the River City. I think we’re known in Montana as Missoula the River City, and it’s really because of the Clark Fork River and its central role in business, in economics, in recreation, that really makes Missoula the town that it is.”
Carmen Murill, a field organizer with Wild Montana, said the river is deeply woven into daily life for people who live in Missoula.
“A lot of us would wonder what to do on a beautiful or a rainy summer day,” Murill said. “I mean, it’s really a lifeforce of town. And I think it’s pretty unique that Missoula, as a community is living and breathing on both sides of the river. It’s really like two downtowns but connected by the Clark Fork.”
Conservation groups say protecting the river begins with community involvement.
Advocates encourage residents and visitors to spend time outdoors, whether on a trail, in the woods or along the river, and to learn how they can become better stewards of the environment.
Montana
Forstag secures democratic nomination for Western Montana Congressional District
MISSOULA — Sam Forstag edged out Ryan Busse to secure the Democratic nomination in Montana’s 1st Congressional District.
Busse conceded the race to Forstag on Wednesday morning. Forstag had trailed behind Busse Tuesday evening, but he made up ground as the votes were counted into the early hours of Wednesday morning. The other two candidates in the race, Russl Cleveland and Matt Rains, are sitting at third and fourth, respectively.
Forstag leads in close race for Montana’s 1st Congressional District
Forstag spent eight years as a wildland firefighter, including four as a smokejumper, and he’s been vice president of the local National Federation of Federal Employees union. Last week, U.S. House of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, held a rally in Missoula to support Forstag’s campaign.
He told MTN on Tuesday that his campaign has been for the working class.
“We got a whole lot of people here that have been working their tail off to finally get some working-class representation in Washington,” Forstag noted. “So proud of everything we’ve done and so grateful.”
Forstag further noted he wants Montanans to be able to afford groceries, have universal free childcare and restore and expand Affordable Health Care Act subsidies.
“Hearing people’s stories and struggles and commonalities in the ways that we’re all fighting in the system that does not serve us so often, and the government serves corporations and the richest people in this country more than working people. It has been frustrating and saddening, but it has also inspired so much hope in me, like the fixes we can actually make,” he told MTN.
The 1st Congressional District covers much of western Montana, including Kalispell, Missoula, Butte and Bozeman. It is currently held by Rep. Ryan Zinke, R-Montana, who chose not to seek reelection.
By securing the nomination, Forstag is slated tol face off against Libertarian candidate Nick Sheedy and Republican candidate Aaron Flint in November.
-
News11 minutes agoTrump’s name must come off the Kennedy Center by June 12
-
Los Angeles, Ca2 hours agoOvernight military training brings loud flash bangs, simulated gunfire to quiet Pasadena neighborhood
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoDetroit Lions add UDFA rookie WR during OTAs
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoHow to watch San Francisco Giants vs. Milwaukee Brewers
-
Dallas, TX2 hours ago3 different Cowboys 53-man roster projections pinpoint contested roster spots
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoJeff Hafley suggests Miami Dolphins entertain Malik Willis Tush Push
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoKaren Read sues the police agencies that investigated her Boston police boyfriend’s death
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoPedestrian dies after hit by car on southbound E-470, Aurora police say