Generally revise laws related to aquatic invasive species.
HB 829 would substantially revise Montana’s aquatic invasive species prevention framework. The bill requires a person to complete a Montana aquatic invasive species awareness and education course before being issued an aquatic invasive species prevention pass. The course must be department-created, include instruction on preventing the transfer of invasive species, explain Montana regulations and inspection-before-launch requirements, and be designed to take no more than an average of 30 minutes. It would also require the department to adopt rules for verifying course completion and implementing the new training requirement.
The bill also changes the rules for aquatic invasive species prevention passes for certain vessels. Under the bill, operators of motorized vessels exempt from registration and nonresident-owned nonmotorized vessels must still obtain a pass to launch on Montana waters, and the pass must be carried in physical or electronic form. The annual fees remain set at $10 for nonmotorized vessels and $30 for motorized vessels, with the pass expiring at the end of each calendar year and not being transferable. The bill preserves existing exemptions for certain government-owned vessels and some tax-exempt property categories.
HB 829 would strengthen enforcement by revising penalties for violations of aquatic invasive species laws and related rules. It increases the civil penalty for certain violations from a maximum of $2,500 to a maximum of $25,000, while keeping misdemeanor penalties for negligent and knowing violations and felony penalties for purposely or knowingly attempting to introduce an invasive species. It also expands the penalty section to cover violations of the new training requirement and continues to allow warnings in cases where a warning best serves the public interest. Revenue from fees and civil penalties would continue to support the invasive species account.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available voting history appears mixed but generally supportive of the bill’s policy goals, at least at the committee level. The House Fish, Wildlife and Parks committee voted 17-3 to table the bill, and the bill ultimately died in process, indicating that despite some support, it did not advance. Because there are no committee transcript excerpts, the record does not show detailed debate, but the vote suggests the proposal drew enough concern to prevent it from moving forward.
The main points of contention likely centered on the bill’s added training requirement, broader enforcement structure, and especially the large increase in civil penalties. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a stronger prevention and education measure to protect Montana waters from invasive species, while opponents may have questioned the need for mandatory training, the administrative burden, or the severity of the penalty increase. The bill’s failure in committee suggests disagreement over whether the proposed changes were the right approach to invasive species management.
HB 829 would amend sections 23-2-541 and 80-7-1014, MCA, and add a new section creating a mandatory aquatic invasive species awareness course as a condition for receiving a prevention pass. It would affect vessel operators who need aquatic invasive species prevention passes, the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks or other issuing authorities, and enforcement personnel responsible for inspections and penalties. The bill would also increase civil penalties for certain violations and direct collected fees and penalties into the invasive species account, while taking effect January 1, 2026.
The available record suggests the bill was viewed as a serious invasive species prevention measure, but not one that could secure enough support to advance. The 17-3 committee vote to table the bill indicates some backing for its goals, but also significant resistance. With no transcript excerpts available, the precise arguments are not documented, but the final outcome of dying in process points to a generally unfavorable legislative result despite a policy focus that may have had some support.
The most notable likely points of contention were the mandatory education requirement for obtaining a prevention pass, the expanded rulemaking and administrative responsibilities for the department, and the steep increase in civil penalties from $2,500 to $25,000. Opponents may have viewed these changes as overly burdensome or punitive, while supporters likely argued they were necessary to improve compliance and protect Montana waters from aquatic invasive species. The committee’s decision to table the bill suggests these concerns outweighed support for the proposal.