Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management Game Birds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate declines to concur on recognizing two quail species as game birds; later votes to indefinitely postpone
Summary
Senators rejected concurrence on House Bill 57, which would have added California quail and Gambel's quail as recognized game birds, and subsequently voted to indefinitely postpone the measure after debate that included concerns about introduction of nonnative wildlife and agricultural risks.
House Bill 57, carried in the Senate by Senator Logie, would have revised the definition of upland game birds to include California quail and Gambel's quail. Logie said hunters and dog trainers requested recognition of those species to allow regulated seasons and training uses.
Opposition focused on wildlife-introduction and agricultural risks. Senator Ellis, citing a background in bird biology and Audubon work, said Montana law generally requires scientific investigation and public hearing before introducing wildlife and warned that both quail species are susceptible to diseases that can affect domestic poultry. "No one is supposed to introduce new wildlife into the state of Montana without considerable study and assurance that the release won't impact native wildlife, plants and agricultural production," Ellis said, citing statutory limits on introductions.
After debate the Senate did not concur on the bill in second reading: the transcript records the clerk reporting 15 senators voting in favor and 35 against the concurrence, and the bill failed to be concurred in. Majority Leader McGillivray then moved to indefinitely postpone the measure; the Senate voted to indefinitely postpone the bill by recorded tally (49-1) after that motion.
Sponsor supporters said the birds were already present in parts of the state (for example, California quail in the Bitterroot Valley and Gambel's quail used by dog trainers in eastern Montana), and argued formal recognition would allow seasons and regulation. Opponents urged the wildlife commission and agency study before any listing. The Senate action ended the bill’s immediate prospects in this chamber.
