Sponsor says new trespass penalty aimed at 'bad actors'; Fish, Wildlife & Parks backs bill to protect private land

Representative Jill Cohenour, sponsor of House Bill 354, told the Senate Fish and Game Committee that the bill would allow revocation of hunting, fishing and trapping privileges for individuals convicted of knowingly trespassing to collect shed antlers or horns on private property or on lands where prohibitions are posted.

“...this language ... is so that any property regardless of ownership,” Cohenour said, explaining the bill’s change to apply revocation language beyond Fish, Wildlife and Parks lands to private property and other posted lands. She described the problem as a targeting of “bad actors” who repeatedly cross posted or otherwise restricted property to collect antlers and said the measure sets a high bar for enforcement because the state must prove the person “knew” the entry was unlawful.

Ron Howell, chief of law enforcement for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, testified in support on behalf of the director, describing an increase in targeted trespass for antlers, including out-of-state actors who use accomplices and night drops to avoid detection. “These bad actors are individuals that had made a conscious decision to knowingly enter posted private property to collect shed antlers for profit without asking permission,” Howell said. He told the committee that the current bond amount often used is $185 and that criminal trespass penalties are currently insufficient compared with the resale value of large elk antler sets.

Other proponents included county residents and interest groups: Will Israel of the Montana Outfitters and Guides Association, Karli Johnson of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation, Andy Moore representing Montana Stockgrowers, Ben Lamb of the Montana Conservation Society, and Charlie Booher of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Representatives of ranching groups and block-management cooperators described livestock stress and safety impacts caused by repeated intrusion during winter and spring.

Committee members asked detailed process questions about enforcement and scope. Howell said the statute requires that land be posted or the landowner notify the individual, and that the burden of proof on “knowingly” entering or remaining unlawfully would be high. He said wildlife-management areas and other state properties can be closed or posted seasonally and that criminal trespass could apply to public state properties while closed.

Sponsor Cohenour noted the bill’s intent is to deter conscious, repeat trespass that harms landowners and vulnerable wildlife in the spring: “This is really about criminals... the bar is high on line 16. It's knowingly.” She asked the committee for a do-pass recommendation.

No formal committee vote on HB 354 was taken in this hearing; the item was presented for committee consideration and elicited extensive testimony from both law enforcement and stakeholder organizations.

Votes were not recorded on this bill during the hearing. The committee requested clarifying questions and discussion and heard multiple examples of enforcement and prosecution challenges, including dismissed or deferred cases where large antler sets had been taken and the low monetary fine was not a significant deterrent.

Evidence: committee sponsor remarks begin in the transcript at the opening of the HB 354 hearing and proponents from law enforcement and stakeholder organizations provided the bulk of testimony through the committee’s question period.