I don’t know when the Merriam turkey was introduced to Western Montana, but it was and they have prospered. I can vouch for it.

In the 1980s and ’90s I broke out about 65 acres of timberland into cropland and I planted a lot of oats to “tame the soil.” I put up a lot of the oats as hay and word spread fast in turkey-dom. In short-order my haystacks began to look like the rear end of a threshing machine because the turkeys scratched the bales to get at the oat kernels and popped all the strings. This meant that I had to use a pitchfork to load the hay onto a wagon.

I shall be forever grateful to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, whose staff netted some 400 of them and relocated them to the Flathead where I am sure they were welcomed. To me, it was “good riddance.”

So, when a neighbor of mine asked me, years later, “Jim, how do you get rid of these turkeys?” my advice was simple and straightforward. “Stop feeding them.”

Which leads me from turkeys to tourists.

Two Montana County Commissioners, Josh Slotnick, a Democrat from Missoula County, and Joe Briggs, a Republican from Cascade County, have been working together to come up with a way to mitigate the hardships imposed on Montanans by the historic increase in residential property taxes.

One of the first considerations in collecting taxes is what are the political repercussions going to be. And the best way to avoid repercussions in that regard is to tax people who can’t vote for you. Enter the tourist, like the turkey, ripe for the plucking.

To tax the tourists and use the receipts to offset residential property tax increases is not a terribly new idea and has been used successfully in several small taxing jurisdictions in Montana.

A tourist economy is not entirely beneficial. There are costs associated with tourism that residents, not tourists, have to bear, and the argument is that tourists should pay their share of those costs. There are such things as the need for water and septic infrastructure improvements to address the increased use brought on by tourism.

Places like West Yellowstone and the St Regis Resort Area did not have the tax base to make improvements on the shoulders of residents alone, and the “Resort Tax”, first put into use by West Yellowstone in 1987, I believe, has helped the town immensely.

Almost every town in the Mountain West has seen its economy change from one of industry to what the local governments see as their last best chance, tourism. So, we now have tourism as a major industry in Montana.

One of the reasons that that has occurred is due to the implementation in 1987 of the Lodging Facility Use Tax which was expressly designed to market Montana to out-of-state tourists.

In the last fiscal year (2023) the 4% tax brought in $59 million dollars of which 82.8% ($48.8 million) went to promote tourism in Montana. Some 60.3% went to the Brand Montana program administered by the Department of Commerce and 22.5% to regional tourism bureaus (see https://brand.mt.gov/Programs/Office-Of-Tourism/Lodging-Facility-Use-Tax).

At one time I suggested to the Legislature that it would be simpler to tax tourists at the border. Years ago, there used to be actual gates on the highways leading into Montana which, except when snow closed the roads, were kept symbolically in the open position with a sign nearby which said, “Welcome to Montana, the gate is open.”

An effort to revive them in the 1989 Legislature failed, but today it might be tempting to re-invent the quaint and simple wooden bars with a tollgate and a sign that says “Welcome to Montana, insert credit card to open gate.”

Conservatives who are not in favor of government subsidies might ask why the State of Montana is subsidizing a particular industry. Surely an industry which brings in an estimated $5.4 billion in income revenue to Montana should be, by now, big enough to stand on its own.

Could that $48 million in tourism promotion be used to lower property taxes? Sure, but it won’t be because the industry is too vested in the subsidy to permit it to be diverted.

Still, at some point you’ve got to stop feeding the turkeys.

Montana Viewpoint has appeared in weekly and online newspapers across Montana for over 25 years. Jim Elliott served 16 years in the Montana Legislature as a state representative and state senator. He lives on his ranch in Trout Creek.

Montana’s primary election is now officially in the rear-view mirror. MTPR reporter Edward O’Brien investigated a deceptively simple question from a listener about why Montana’s primaries are so late in the year.

Austin Amestoy: Welcome to The Big Why, a series from Montana Public Radio where we find out what we can discover together. I’m your host, Austin Amestoy. This is a show about listener-powered reporting. We’ll answer questions, big or small, about anything under the Big Sky. By Montanans, for Montana, this is The Big Why.

Welcome back Ed!

Edward O’Brien: Thank you, Austin! Always good to be here. Indeed, we’ve just passed a significant milestone in Montana’s election calendar this year. This makes the question Gillian Glaes posed all the more timely and poignant. In fact, Austin we’re honored to have Gillian join us in the studio today.

Welcome aboard! Great to have you here!

Gillian Glaes: Thanks, you two! It’s nice to be here.

Austin Amestoy: Would you tell us a little bit about yourself?

Gillian Glaes: I’m originally from Montana and grew up in Missoula. I work at the University of Montana and direct the UM’s Franke Global Leadership initiative.

Edward O’Brien: And I also understand you have a passion for history?

Gillian Glaes: I do! I’m an historian and worked in the history departments of Carroll College and the University of Montana, respectively.

Austin Amestoy: Gillian, you’ve piqued my curiosity. What did you ask the Big Why?

Gillian Glaes: I really just wanted to know, why is the Montana primary, held in June, so late on the election calendar?

Austin Amestoy: That’s a fascinating question. Gillian, since we’ve got you here in-person, I think I’ll take a step back and let you and Ed drive the story today.

Edward O’Brien: It’s a fantastic and deceptively challenging question. To be candid — I originally assumed I’d have both it answered and this episode wrapped up in a flash. I was so wrong. It stumped a lot of professional and passionate amateur Montana historians. Heard lots of neat guesses. Nothing concrete. In fact, for a while I was convinced the answer was lost to the sands of time.

Gillian Glaes: But you eventually persevered?

Edward O’Brien: Only after pulling on a few threads provided by many bright, patient and generous people.

Gillian Glaes: Ed, how did you approach my question?

Edward O’Brien: The first person I turned to was former Montana Secretary of State Bob Brown. Brown was first elected to the Montana State House in 1970 and served over two decades in the State Senate. Few Montanans have the kind of institutional political knowledge that Bob Brown has.

Gillian Glaes: What did he have to say?

Edward O’Brien: Brown told me with candor and honesty that he didn’t know why Montana’s primary is held in June! Brown, who loves Montana history, told me he did some research and put in some phone calls to friends who share that passion and everyone came up empty.

He wasn’t the only one.I contacted other historians and history professors and all were left scratching their heads.

Gillian Glaes: So, what came next??

Edward O’Brien: The Montana Historical Society. They found an intriguing reference to a bill from the 1979 legislative session titled: “Times for holding primary elections — cost of municipal election.”

Gillian Glaes: So, that must be the answer. Why June?

Edward O’Brien: Not so fast. I accessed this massive electronic file of the bill’s legislative history — gobs of stuff, hundreds of pages of information to chase that lead. But After poring through it, I realized I‘d hit a dead end. None of it even remotely seemed to address your specific question, Gillian. What’s more, many of the legislators from that time are no longer with us.

One name, however, stood out: Fred Van Valkenburg.

Gillian Glaes: The Van Valkenburg family! Will you share with our listeners who Fred Van Valkenberg is?

Edward O’Brien: Most recently, he was Missoula’s county attorney. But back in ‘79 Van Valkenburg was a young man serving his very first term in the State Senate,making a name for himself and rapidly gaining influence. I gave him a call to see if we could jog his memory.

Gillian Glaes: And?

Edward O’Brien: Didn’t ring any immediate bells. In his defense, we’re talking about some bill from nearly 45 years ago. After giving it some more thought for a few days he determined what we were looking at was a — as he put it — ‘minor and technical ‘clean up’ bill regarding elections in general.

But, during our communication, Van Valkenburg mentioned an intriguing lead from a book in his personal collection called “Atlas of Montana Elections, 1889-1976”. I knew we were onto something a few days later when Montana State University Political Science Professor Jessi Bennion responded to my cry for help, coincidentally mentioning the very same title. Sure enough, the Atlas, prized by Montana politicos, is where we finally found the answer to your question.

Jessi Bennion: It is actually just a book that goes year-by-year. It tells who won each election, what the big debates were at the time and it gives a snapshot of what the elections and the outcomes looked like at the time.

Edward O’Brien: The impetus for moving Montana’s primary to June was the 1952 presidential nomination showdown between Republicans Dwight D Eisenhower and Ohio’s conservative firebrand, Senator Robert Taft:

Video: “At Chicago, the battle for the Republican candidature is underway as Senator Taft is noisily championed by his supporters for the presidential election in November. In his hotel, Mr Eisenhower goes into conference …

Gillian Glaes: So this relates to President Eisenhower’s election in 1952? OK, I’m intrigued. Tell me more.

Edward O’Brien: Montana’s primaries bounced around the calendar throughout the 1900’s, and by ‘52 were held in late summer, actually even later than they are today. That butted them right up against the major party national presidential nomination conventions.

Gillian Glaes: That sounds like a pretty small window between the primary and the conventions.

Edward O’Brien: You are right over the target. Montana was Eisenhower country in ‘52. Yet according to the Atlas of Montana Elections, local party bosses pressured delegates to support Taft at the Republican national convention. That didn’t sit well with a cadre of state lawmakers back home. They developed a proposal to essentially put a little more space and time between Montana’s presidential preference primary and the national convention.

Edward O’Brien: Again, here’s Jessi Bennion:

Jessi Bennion: So, I think that they thought by moving the primary to June, seeing a clear election outcome in June, then the party bosses wouldn’t be able to do any shenanigans during the presidential convention.

Edward O’Brien: Apparently the proposal set off a hell of kerfuffle within the halls of the State Capitol. After the dust settled, the reformers won out and a measure was put on the ballot in 1954 to move that primary.

Gillian Glaes: Interesting. How did voters respond?

Edward O’Brien: I’d say pretty well. It passed by almost 70 percent.

Gillian Glaes: Wow, that’s amazing.

Edward O’Brien: As Bennion pointed out to me — can you imagine anything today passing by that margin? Anyway, beginning in 1956, Montana’s primaries were moved to the Tuesday after the first Monday in June.

Gillian Glaes:

That’s really interesting, because a move designed to empower Montana voters, now seems to kind of rob them of national influence in presidential politics.

Edward O’Brien: It’s a great point. Montana’s primary is near the tail end of the presidential nomination process. Iowa, New Hampshire, Super Tuesday — all those states and many more get to weigh in before we do. Bennion feels your pain, Gillian.

Jessi Bennion: The presidential race gets all the attention. It’s what fires people up. So, if Montana voters already know who the nominee is going to be, it probably de-incentivizes them from showing up at the primary.

Austin Amestoy: I just love it when we can put a nice bow on a good mystery. Gillian, Ed, thanks so much for unpacking this for us today. Great to have you on.

Gillian Glaes: Thank you so much for having me, this was a ton of fun and I really appreciate the time you took to answer my question.

Edward O’Brien: You bet, Gillian, thanks for joining us.

Austin Amestoy: Now we want to know what makes you curious about Montana. Submit your questions below. Find us wherever you listen to podcasts and help others find the show by sharing it and leaving a review. Let’s see what we can discover together!

Mark Estes of the popular TikTok group the Montana Boyz was accused of felony federal assault in February 2021 after allegedly beating up a group of students, Page Six has exclusively learned.

A spokesperson for the Gallatin County Sheriff’s Office confirms the influencer – who is now dating “Hills” alum Kristin Cavallari – was involved in the violent incident three years ago, which led to the hospitalization of one of the alleged victims. Estes, 24, was ultimately never charged.

We’re told Estes – who was a student at Montana State University at the time – and his friends allegedly got into a brawl with another group of students in an off-campus fight.

However, by the time law enforcement arrived at the location, everyone was “gone and separated,” which is why no immediate arrests were made.

A Gallatin County Sheriff’s Office public information officer, who worked on the case, tells Page Six that police were not informed of the incident until the injured parties were already at the hospital.

He notes, however, that the group who fought Estes and his pals were at the hospital for just one person, though the entire group seemingly went to support their injured friend.

“If we’re coming to those kinds of things after the fact, we might not arrest the person even if there’s probable cause for them to be charged,” the officer explains.

“We’ll put in what’s called a request for prosecution at the County Attorney’s Office, and they will either issue a warrant or a summons if they feel that probable cause exists to continue on with the case.”

The officer on the case says he pursued a request for prosecution for Estes in particular because this was not a situation in which the then-student athlete was at the wrong place at the wrong time, alluding to the fact that the TikTok personality was allegedly one of the aggressors.

“I put in the request that Mark Estes be charged with aggravated assault and misdemeanor assault because there were two victims,” the officer says.

“I felt that there was probable cause [because] one person’s injuries sustained rose to the level of aggravated assault. The other person who was involved, his injuries were significantly less, just minor scrapes and bruises, which is more of a misdemeanor charge.”

Despite the officer’s requests, Page Six learned that the Gallatin County Attorney’s Office ultimately decided not to press charges against Estes or others involved because they felt it was “mutual combat.”

We’re told no charges were filed against the other parties, and the status of the injured student’s health was not revealed due to it being “private medical information.”

The public information officer notes, though, that there were “some penalties that Montana State imposed” since Estes and the other parties involved were students at the university at the time.

Michael Becker, a rep for Montana State University, declined Page Six’s request to comment on the situation, stating, “Matters concerning individual students’ discipline are protected by federal privacy law.”

According to online records, it appears that Estes transferred schools shortly after the incident. However, it’s unclear whether the incident had anything to do with his move.

He appeared in Montana State’s football roster in 2020 but by 2023 he was playing for Montana Tech.

In recent years, Estes has rose to prominence on social media for his lip-synching videos with pals Kaleb Campbell Winterburn and Kade Wilcox.

The trio boasts more than 800,000 followers on TikTok and nearly 400,000 followers on Instagram.

“The boys began posting on TikTok and in a matter of weeks became viral for their good looks and country flair,” a spokesperson for the group recently told us in a press release.

“Former college football stars, these guys are more than just athletes — they’re models and cowboys, balancing ranch life with the stardom of social media. They seamlessly blend the rugged allure of cowboy life on the ranch with the polished finesse of fashion, crafting a unique persona that captivates audiences.”

Estes, for his part, has garnered even more fame for his romance with Cavallari.

The social media personality and 37-year-old “Laguna Beach” alum – who have a 12-year age gap – went public with their relationship in February. They are reportedly getting “pretty serious” and he has met her kids, whom she shares with ex-husband Jay Cutler.

Page Six has reached out to a rep for Cavallari for comment on her boyfriend’s alleged criminal background but did not immediately hear back.

The Gallatin County Sheriff’s Office also confirms to Page Six that neither Winterburn nor Wilcox’s names appear on the February 2021 assault case files.

However, Page Six obtained video that shows Winterburn’s track record is not squeaky clean, either.

In the clip, the TikToker appears in the front seat of a car – with Estes beside him in the front-side passenger’s seat and another friend fooling around in the back of the vehicle.

Winterburn then says into the camera while looking at the friend behind him, “Hey, Seth. You’re a n–r,” prompting Estes’ jaw to drop before the video cuts off.

Page Six has reached out to reps for the Montana Boyz for comment but did not immediately hear back.