Committee considers tougher penalties, privilege revocation for criminal trespass tied to shed‑horn thefts

Representative Jill Cohenour introduced House Bill 354 on Feb. 4, characterizing the measure as a response to growing trespass for shed‑horn collection and calling for stronger penalties to protect landowners and wildlife. Proponents—ranchers, sportsmen’s groups and FWP law enforcement—told the House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee the current maximum fine for criminal trespass is too small to deter repeat offenders and that those people can profit far more by selling antlers than the state can extract in fines.

The nut graf: supporters said mandatory suspension of hunting, fishing and trapping privileges would provide a stronger deterrent against organized trespass for antler collection and would help wardens and county attorneys take cases more seriously; opponents cautioned about drafting, the scope of enforcement and impacts on recreators.

Multiple witnesses described examples of organized trespass. Ron Howell, chief of law enforcement for Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, presented recent field cases and photographs from one area and said three people who collected roughly $1,900 worth of antlers were each cited and paid $185; Howell noted that the current criminal‑trespass fine is often small relative to the commercial value of antlers. "Many of the same individuals that are willing to break the law to obtain these antlers are also avid hunters," Howell said and urged a "due pass" for the bill.

Proponents included Joe Konauer (local rancher and law‑enforcement background), Ben Lamb (Montana Conservation Society), Tom Jacobson (Montana Wildlife Federation), Jeff Lucas (Trout Unlimited) and representatives of the Montana Stock Growers Association, Montana Farm Bureau and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. They said the statute requires proof the trespasser "knowingly" entered posted private property and that the bill would raise the penalty for egregious or repeat trespass.

Opponents and commenters raised implementation concerns. Ryan Featherston, who described himself as an avid shed hunter and small business seller of shed‑derived products, said the market price for antlers (he cited about $14 per pound in his testimony) makes a $185 fine a weak deterrent and urged more comprehensive solutions including seasons, education and case‑by‑case enforcement. Others urged precision in the bill’s language — for example, whether corner‑crossing or being on access sites after posted hours would trigger the most severe sanction.

Committee members questioned enforcement mechanics. Howell said the department must prove the defendant "knowingly" entered private property and that, where privileges are revoked under the bill, Montana’s membership in the Wildlife Violator Compact would cause reciprocal suspension in other compact states. Howell also confirmed a judge already has discretion to raise fines or jail time in individual cases; proponents argued the bill would make a stiffer, mandatory sanction available for the most egregious violators.

The hearing closed without a committee vote. The bill would make criminal trespass, when committed while hunting, fishing, trapping or collecting antlers, subject to mandatory suspension of hunting, fishing and trapping privileges for up to 24 months upon conviction; existing fines and sentencing ranges remain available according to statute and judicial discretion.