House Agriculture Committee hears bill to repeal state authorization for taking eagles, hawks and owls

Rep. Jamie Isaly introduced House Bill 73 to the House Agriculture Committee, saying the measure would repeal state statute 87-5-209 and remove a state-level authorization that could mislead Montanans about the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. "HB 73 is designed to eliminate code 87-5-209… which allows for the killing of eagles, hawks, and owls by livestock and poultry owners in Montana," Isaly told the committee.

The bill is an agency proposal from Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP). Quentin Kudula, FWP chief of conservation policy, told lawmakers the state code appears to contradict federal protections and could lead legally well-intentioned people into federal violations. "It does contradict federal law… The pathway to address depredation is petitioning the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for authorization," Kudula said, urging the committee to approve the cleanup to avoid confusion.

Montana Audubon and tribal representatives also urged support. Peter Dudley said removing the state language would better protect birds and people from accidentally committing a federal offense, noting federal penalties for taking protected raptors. "Shooting Bald Eagles and taking Bald Eagles and Golden Eagles is illegal in two sections of federal law," Dudley said, and cited fines and possible jail time as a risk for people who misinterpret state code. Patrick Yawaki and Alissa Snow, speaking for Blackfeet, Rocky Boy and Fort Belknap tribal nations, emphasized cultural reverence for eagles and recommended nonlethal livestock protections such as sturdy coops, netting and guard animals.

Committee members asked how common depredation incidents are, whether prosecutions have occurred, and how quickly the federal permitting process can respond when producers face immediate losses. FWP’s witness said the agency cannot quantify statewide take or prosecutions from this statute because the presence of a state authorization may have reduced reporting; he described the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit process as the correct pathway but not typically an immediate, in‑the‑moment remedy. "It's a permitting process… you want to think proactively about it," he said.

Isaly closed by describing the bill as a narrow statutory cleanup that preserves producers’ access to federal processes while removing a confusing state-level authorization. He asked for a due‑pass recommendation from the committee. The committee took no final vote on the bill during the hearing.

The committee record shows proponents from FWP, Montana Audubon and several tribal delegations; no opponents spoke during the hearing. The next procedural step will be committee executive action or scheduling a subsequent hearing, depending on committee timing and whether amendments are proposed.