Tom France and Pat Flowers: Montana’s hunting traditions in the crosshairs

However in April, a small entrance group, the United Property House owners of Montana filed a lawsuit whose aim is to take the general public out of wildlife administration choices and to denationalise the general public’s wildlife within the fingers of some highly effective landowners. Claiming elk populations in central Montana are too excessive, UPOM’s swimsuit calls for the rapid discount of elk populations in a lot of the state, and additional claims that each one looking laws issued by the Montana Fish and Wildlife Fee are unconstitutional.

As Montana legislators who sit on the Home and Senate Fish and Wildlife Committees and who take significantly our oversight duties over how Montana’s wildlife is managed, the UPOM lawsuit is of nice concern. Not solely is the muse {of professional} wildlife administration underneath assault, however so too is our looking heritage of equal alternative for all.

UPOM was fashioned 15 years in the past, and its agenda is to denationalise public assets — together with public lands and water, and the fish and wildlife that lives there. They’ve sued over the state’s stream entry legislation, sued to cease the reintroduction of native bison on public lands, and fought payments to extend the high quality for gating public roads that result in public lands. UPOM has all the time been secretive about its monetary backers however there’s little doubt that rich out-of-state landowners present a giant a part of its bankroll.

UPOM’s extremism stands in stark distinction to how Montanans have lengthy approached wildlife administration points. Most Montana farmers and ranchers worth wildlife and acknowledge the necessity to work with Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) to resolve administration points. Many landowners rely hunters nearly as good buddies, and companion with conservation teams and FWP to supply looking and fishing entry and restore wildlife habitat.

In Montana, there’s authorized precedent relationship again many years that firmly establishes the general public possession of wildlife and we’ve confidence that the Montana courts will reject UPOM’s authorized argument and its excessive strategy. We’ve much less confidence over how Governor Greg Gianforte will reply.

Two years in the past, UPOM filed a swimsuit towards a really restrained bison restoration plan adopted by FWP. In a backroom deal, Governor Gianforte settled the case in UPOM’s favor and unilaterally agreed that the state wouldn’t take into account any bison restoration plan for the subsequent decade. There was no advance discover of this deal, no alternative for the general public to remark and no enter from FWP’s skilled wildlife managers.

Given UPOM’s weak authorized arguments, there’s good motive to imagine that their precise technique within the present swimsuit isn’t victory in courtroom however one other backroom take care of the Governor.

Given the stakes of UPOM’s swimsuit over elk administration, and the nice curiosity of the general public and Montana hunters in these points, it’s important that Governor Gianforte is clear in any settlement discussions, and that a chance for public overview exists earlier than any settlement is finalized.

We acknowledge that many wildlife administration points are troublesome, partly as a result of Montanans care so deeply about them. However over many years, Montana has developed a course of the place each Montanan can take part in administration choices, together with landowners, hunters and the general public. That is appropriately for a useful resource that’s a lot part of our heritage and so necessary to our future. There’s no room on this course of for secret offers.