watchers and rock hounds use toilets as do hunters or fishermen - the "non- consiunptive" user 

 needs to pay his/her share. 



Response: Comment recommends raising revenue from nonhunting recreationists to 

 help fund wildlife management actions. Under the preferred alternative FWP would 

 continue to negotiate block management agreements with private landowners and 

 develop new sources of revenue to fund activities related to nonhunting recreation. 



ISSUE #3 

 Land Program/Access — 13 comments 



Summary 



Although a cross section of public comment was supportive of FWP efforts to acquire habitats 

 through easement, lease or purchase, two opposing points of view emerged. The most common view 

 is that FWP should not acquire habitat for wildlife without a guarantee of public access, particularly 

 for hunting. If hunting access is not a condition of acquisition, then the acquisition should be funded 

 by a source other than license revenue. Based on comment received, the minority view is that land 

 acquired for wildlife by FWP should emphasize wildlife and habitat values over recreation; thus, 

 these acquisitions should not be made contingent on availability of access. 



Several individuals took issue with the statement in the document that Montana residents prefer 

 easements and leases over fee title. 



Samples of Comments 



• The Issues, Access, 3 (p. S-2): Montana hunters DO NOT "favor the use of leases and 

 easements over acquisitions." 



• We favor alternative 1 plus the second paragraph of alternative 5 "consider public access a 

 condition for acquiring an interest in land through easement, lease, or outright purchase." 



• In all efforts to acquire property or property rights, highest priority should be given to the 

 quality and value of the habitat. Public access and recreation should be secondary concerns. 



• We strongly support continuation and expansion of state purchase of wildlife habitats, 

 especially habitat for game animals. 



• We do not support purchase of conservation easements without public recreation and himting 

 rights. The exception to this is the purchase of key winter ranges, where deer and elk are 

 available on adjoining public land during hunting season. Preserving elk habitats simply for 

 the sake of preserving elk habitats, when the public cannot enjoy those elk through 

 observation, photography or hunting is not a wise use of public money. 



57 



