Montana's stream access law under fire!! Help is needed! No on HB309!

#33
How about getting FFF headquartered in Livingston to threaten to move their conclave from West Yellowstone and boycott MT, and urge all their members to do so. It would be some work for them, but this is a serious issue. Get the hotels, restaurants and everybody associated with the travel industry lined up. They all have to be heavily dependent on fishing income.
 

Old Man

Just an Old Man
#34
Well I did my thing this morning. I called in my vote on this bill.

I was dreading doing this as I had no idea on what was the correct way to do this. Well all I did was call and it was all good. So now I'm a good Montanaian or what ever you all call me.(probably ass hole)
 
#36
The guy is a moron. I think he should just come out and say how much money he plans on recieving if this bill passes and what he is going to do with it. He must think most people are retarded and not capable of reading. Read the bill....it is pretty cut and dry on what they are trying to do. They are not changing the 1987 laws.....they are just manipulating the term ditch to cover a broad spectrum of water features in order to privatize a lot of currently public water. Com'on guys see, he's not changing the access law.......what an idiot.
 
#37
Rick, the REAL PROBLEM IS ... he found 'enough like minded people' to get the damned thing passed. He's just the tip of the iceberg. 53 others voted 'yes.'

Be Afraid, be very very, afraid.
 

bitterroot

Love vintage graphite!
#43
I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, just simply pointed it out. It does, however, raise an eyebrow since the Mitchell Slough decision was ranchers vs. sportsmen.
 

bitterroot

Love vintage graphite!
#45
I don't believe Welborn was directly involved in the whole Mitchell Slough fiasco, but the Mitchell Slough decision by the Montana State Supreme Court is what precipitated HB309.