Wednesday Apr. 16, 2014
Comments on:
Plan aimed to give hunters and others access to public land that is adjacent to private land
Let’s be civil.
The Flathead Beacon encourages vigorous discussion and lively debate, but we will delete comments that attack other readers, make accusations we can’t verify, stray too far off topic, criticize local businesses (call them if you have a problem), accuse someone of a crime, use profanity or are simply judged to be in bad taste. We don’t always have someone moderating comments, so we ask for your help: If you see a comment that violates these ground rules, or you simply deem it offensive, please e-mail webmaster [at]

The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.

  Newest First
By RussCrowder on 02-18-13 @ 5:04 pm
6 up | 18 down

Unlike the last legislative session when Schweitzer conned the Republican’s into supporting the
Democrat’s last “Takings” Bill, HB 198, this time the Republican’s got it right…..GOOD JOB!
By TallTree on 02-18-13 @ 9:36 pm
14 up | 2 down

And Russ got it wrong concerning Schweitzer and HB 198.  He wanted a sunset clause for 2013 and
said he was going to do an amendatory veto of the bill to add the clause.  However the
Republicans held onto the bill until the last day of the session and then closed the session to
deprive Schweitzer of doing the ammendatory veto.  They wanted what they called their “jobs” bill.
By TallTree on 02-18-13 @ 9:46 pm
13 up | 2 down

SB 180 has been proposed to repeal 2011’s HB 198, the eminent domain bill that handed the power
of eminent domain to private corporations. 

February 7, 2013 Verdell Jackson, a Republican, as a member of the Senate Committee on Energy
and Telecommunications, voted AGAINST SB 180, in effect against the repeal of HB 198, and
against private property rights.  Fortunately the bill did pass. 

We’ll see how the bill fares on the Republican controlled Senate floor.  This time the
Republicans do not have Schweitzer to blame for a failure to support property rights.$BSRV.ActionQuery?P_SESS=20131&P_BLTP_BILL_TYP_CD=SB&P_BILL_NO=180&P_BILL_DFT_NO=&P_CHPT_NO=&Z_ACTION=Find&P_SBJT_SBJ_CD=&P_ENTY_ID_SEQ=
By RussCrowder on 02-19-13 @ 7:19 am
3 up | 11 down

Sorry TallTree,  but HB 198 was all Schweitzer and his Democrats playing naive Republican’s like a
fiddle.  It was an excellent and skillful con job on old Brian’s part.
By TallTree on 02-19-13 @ 9:25 pm
8 up | 1 down

Schweitzer is gone now and The Republicans clearly control both the House and Senate.  So the
Republicans should be able to easily repeal HB 198 by approving SB 180.

The 13 members of the Senate Committee on Energy and Telecommunications are 8 Republicans and 5
Democrats.  SB 180 should have easily passed the committee but barely made it on a 7 to 6 vote.
  5 Republicans voted for the bill and 3 Republicans voted against the bill.  If it wasn’t for 2
Democrats who voted for the bill, the bill would have failed.  This bill should have easily
passed this Republican controlled committee.  Why didn’t Verdell Jackson support this bill?
Doesn’t he support property rights?

Here are the votes and breakdown by party:

Y Arthun, Ron             (R)
Y Essmann, Jeff; by Proxy (R)
Y Priest, Jason             (R)
Y Vincent, Chas           (R)
Y Walker, Edward           (R)
Y Larsen, Cliff               (D)
Y Tropila, Mitch             (D)

N Jackson, Verdell       (R)
N Jones, Llew; by Proxy   (R)
N Olson, Alan             (R)
N Driscoll, Robyn         (D)
N Jergeson, Greg         (D)
N Kaufmann, Christine     (D)
By RussCrowder on 02-21-13 @ 2:43 pm
4 up | 5 down

I can’t argue with your latest post TallTree…We will see.
By jimbo on 02-22-13 @ 7:48 am
9 up | 3 down

HB 235 is not a taking.  There are reams of papers of law that show this.  If you believe in
property rights, you believe in private AND public property rights, or it makes you a hypocrite.

Voting down this bill is just a scam by bought-and-paid-for R’s by wealthy out of state
landowners, outfitters, and the livestock industry to further try to privatize our state
wildlife. If hunters don’t ban together and get of hold of this push, then you won’t need to
call ourselves DIY hunters anymore, we will only be “clients” in the future.  I have told this
story many many times here.  MT SFW and UPOM are now one in the same and they want “joe hunter”
off ALL LAND, and don’t want them shooting the kings game.

They whine about trespassing, but if someone is going to trespass, they will with or without
this bill.  They just don’t want us on our public land that they control. 

There are many more bill on tap that are bad for hunters in MT.  Every one has been brought by a
Republican, I am embarrassed to have voted them in.  It won’t happen again.
By jimbo on 02-22-13 @ 8:33 am
9 up | 0 down

The bottom line with corner crossing is that we need the Supreme Court to decide if it’s legal
or not.  Not the un-educated laser grad morons like Blasdel in the MT legislature playing
amateur lawyer hour.  And you what, we don’t need this bill to get that done.  There is already
talk of one guy willing to “fall on the sword”, go corner cross, take his citation and fight
this to the supreme court.  There will be legal support for him.

That is all that is wanted with this bill, but UPOM and the outfitters don’t want the courts to

I hope hunters in the Flathead reading this blog, really start to pay attention.  In my talking
with many of them, I gotta say, Flathead hunters seem to be the most ignorant of what is
happening to us in Helena EVERY session.  They sit around complaining way too much about wolves,
yet don’t know anything about HB 42, passed in 2003, that mandated FWP reduce elk numbers state
wide.  Yes, Debbie Barrett, rancher in Dillon, her bill, mandated FWP reduce elk numbers state
wide.  They set elk objective numbers so low, region 1 is the only one that has met them.  Even
with all the wolf and lion predation in the “root”, they are still over objective.  You hearing
me? And how about Christy Clark(R) from Choteau, that sponsored a bill that says hunters should
pay for livestock losses to wolves.  How about the bill sponsored by another R this year.  It
says hunters should pay for brucellosis testing of elk, for the cattle industry, that brought
brucellosis to MT.  This would result in drastic reductions of elk as well.  I could go on and
on.  How can anyone defend this, if you are a DIY hunter in MT?  Why do we keep voting these
guys in?  They kill us every session in Helena.  And this one isn’t over. 

I hope I anger enough people that they go and look this stuff up.  Especially HB 42, the Barrett
bill. Start talking about these bill with your friends.  Start putting pressure on the ########
that YOU ELECTED.  Remind them that represent you, joe hunter in the flathead, not the Wilkes
brothers from Texas and the other nonresident GIANTS buying up MT.
Kellyn Brown
Kellyn Brown1h
Thank you! RT @sportmanskihaus: @kellynjbrown Super excited to support the running club!
Dillon Tabish
Dillon Tabish1h
Report: Hg concentrations measured in bull trout from Lake McDonald approached levels of concern for tissue-based fish toxicity
Molly Priddy
Molly Priddy1h
"Concentrations (of mercury) from a third lake in Glacier were among the highest observed"
Tristan Scott
Tristan Scott4h
Your Survival Guide To Coachella via @IamJessicaLima
Flathead Beacon
FB Headlines37m
FVCC Faculty Senate to Hold School Board Candidates’ Forum