Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Predator Board GPS reporting requirement sparks privacy and contract concerns
Summary
A Predator Board contract provision requiring ground trappers to submit GPS coordinates and photos for kills drew objections from landowners and some commissioners, who said coordinates would expose trap locations on private property and become public records.
A newly added requirement in Predator Board contracts — that ground trappers submit photos and GPS coordinates for each kill — prompted an extended and sometimes heated discussion at the July 7 meeting.
Pam (a participant who raised the item) said she and other landowners worry that GPS points would disclose trap locations on private property because contract reports become public records. She asked whether the Predator Board or trappers obtained written landowner permission to include coordinates in county records.
Matt (Predator Board representative) said the measure began as a trial intended to add accountability and create evidence to support future grant requests to Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. He said trappers have begun sending photos with embedded lat/long information and that the Predator Board planned to store those images in monthly folders; the requirement was put in contracts this year to see whether the data proved useful and whether it constituted an undue burden on contractors.
Several participants, including Bill Kennedy and Robbie (a contracted trapper), raised practical and safety issues: aircraft crews and pilots may not have time to collect GPS points while operating, photos taken at 3 a.m. or after long field shifts may be impractical, and trappers working in remote brush may lack phones or risk losing them. Robbie said he already sends pictures when practical but that requiring GPS would add steps and potentially expose his trap-lines to public scrutiny.
Multiple commissioners and Predator Board members suggested compromise approaches: (1) accept photos and landowner or allotment names as the primary record rather than point coordinates; (2) make GPS reporting voluntary where landowners object; or (3) keep GPS points in an internal Predator Board folder that are not posted publicly unless required by a formal records request. Several participants asked the Predator Board to revisit the contract language and to have the county attorney advise on public‑records obligations before changing or rescinding contracts.
The chair asked the Predator Board to convene, clarify a consensus position and discuss whether GPS fields should be mandatory, optional or restricted to non‑public internal files; commissioners said staff will consult the county attorney for legal guidance on public-records implications before implementing a contractual change. No formal rescission of the contract was made at the meeting; commissioners asked the Predator Board to return with a recommendation and to document whether landowner written permission will be required when GPS points are recorded.
