Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Shooting Preserves topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House Bill 106 would remove acreage cap and change tagging and permit terms for shooting preserves

2251026 · February 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Representative Albus presented House Bill 106, which would remove a 2,600-acre cap on shooting preserves, shift some permit terms to five years, remove minimum-release and 80%-harvest restrictions, and replace self-sealing tags with a department form.

Representative Albus described House Bill 106 as a clarification and simplification of laws pertaining to shooting preserves. The bill would eliminate the statutory cap limiting shooting preserves to no more than 2,600 contiguous acres, allow shooting preserves to be located on private property, extend certain permits to five years, remove a minimum birds-released requirement, and replace a self-sealing harvested-bird tag requirement with a department-provided form.

Phil Kilbreth, commercial wildlife program manager for Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, said the bill is intended to reduce administrative burden and allow the agency to provide better customer service. “We feel that this will reduce the administrative burden related to shooting preserves for both the public and the department,” Kilbreth said, and the department recommended a do pass.

Peter Dudley of Montana Audubon and Ben Lamb of the Montana Conservation Society both spoke in support; Dudley said removing the minimum release and the 80% harvest restriction is a positive change but noted concern about the lack of a fiscal note because the fee structure changes to a flat $250 over five years at the high end. An opponent was identified online but was not heard because of technical difficulties; no further opponent testimony appeared in the transcript.

Representative Albus urged the committee to do pass; the transcript records that sponsors indicated the bills (105, 106 and 107) had passed the House 98-2, and no formal Senate committee vote on HB 106 was recorded in the hearing.