Montana legislation toughens penalties for unlawful use of UAVs in hunting

The Montana Legislature has introduced House Bill 202, a significant piece of legislation aimed at regulating the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in hunting and wildlife management. Introduced on April 18, 2025, the bill seeks to address growing concerns over the ethical implications and potential misuse of drones in hunting practices.

The primary purpose of House Bill 202 is to establish strict penalties for the unlawful use of UAVs to hunt or take wildlife, including deer, elk, and various other species. Key provisions of the bill include a range of fines and potential imprisonment for offenders, with penalties escalating based on the type of animal involved. For instance, individuals convicted of using UAVs to hunt large game could face fines up to $20,000 and the forfeiture of hunting licenses for up to three years.

Notably, the bill outlines specific exemptions where UAV use would still be permissible, such as during emergency situations, search and rescue operations, predator control, and agricultural support. This aspect has sparked debate among lawmakers and stakeholders, particularly regarding the balance between technological advancement in agriculture and the preservation of ethical hunting practices.

Opposition to the bill has emerged from various hunting and wildlife advocacy groups, who argue that the legislation may be overly punitive and could hinder legitimate agricultural operations. Proponents, however, emphasize the need for regulation to protect wildlife and maintain fair hunting practices.

The implications of House Bill 202 extend beyond wildlife management, touching on broader social and economic issues. As drone technology becomes increasingly prevalent, the bill raises questions about the intersection of technology, ethics, and conservation. Experts suggest that the legislation could set a precedent for how states regulate UAV use in outdoor activities, potentially influencing similar laws in other regions.

As the bill moves through the legislative process, its future remains uncertain. Lawmakers will need to navigate the competing interests of conservation, agriculture, and recreational hunting to reach a consensus that addresses the concerns of all stakeholders involved.