Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Policy Migratory Birds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to repeal state authorization to kill eagles, hawks and owls
Summary
House Bill 73, sponsored by Representative Jamie Isaly and carried on behalf of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, would repeal a Montana statute (87-5-209, MCA) that could be interpreted to authorize killing certain raptors; supporters said the statute conflicts with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and could expose residents to federal penalties.
Representative Jamie Isaly introduced House Bill 73 as an agency bill carried on behalf of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, saying the measure would "remove the state's authorization of the destruction of eagles or predatory hawks and owls by livestock or poultry owners" and would repeal section 87-5-209, MCA.
Quentin Kugela, chief of conservation policy for Fish, Wildlife and Parks, testified in support and told the committee the statute is ‘‘misleading’’ and could lead law-abiding citizens to violate the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. ‘‘We do think it's contradictory. We do it does, contradict federal law, Migratory Bird Treaty Act,’’ Kugela said, and he described a permit pathway through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for authorized take.
Peter Dudley of Montana Audubon urged support for the bill and noted federal penalties: taking bald or golden eagles without federal authorization is illegal and punishable by fines and potential jail time. ‘‘Shooting bald eagles and and taking bald eagles and golden eagles is illegal in 2 sections of code in federal law. Also, punishable by up to a $5,000 fine or 1 year in jail,’’ Dudley said.
Tribal representatives testified in favor. Patrick Yawake, representing the Blackfeet, Fort Belknap and Rocky Boy tribes, stressed cultural and conservation values and urged support; Alissa Snow of the Fort Belknap tribes also testified in support.
Committee members asked how often the state statute causes problems and how quickly federal permitting could respond to ongoing predation. Kugela said the principal concern is that the existing state statute could mislead people into thinking they may take these birds without federal authorization; he said Fish and Wildlife cannot quantify how often that has happened because the statute itself could discourage reporting. He described the federal pathway: Wildlife Services ordinarily participates in assessing an incident and information is packaged for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which issues or denies any take permits.
Committee members pressed on timeliness for producers losing poultry; Kugela said the permitting process is not generally intended to be a quick in‑the‑moment remedy and advised producers to consult Wildlife Services for short-term mitigation options while pursuing any federal authorization.
Representative Isaly closed by asking the committee for a due pass. The transcript does not record a committee vote on HB 73 during this hearing.
Votes at a glance: No committee roll-call vote recorded on HB 73 during this hearing; motions earlier in the meeting concerning proxies were approved by voice vote.
