Montana Right to Wild Game Hunting and Fishing, C-41 (2004)

Voting on Hunting & Fishing Ballot Measures By state By year Not on ballot Montana Constitution Preamble Articles I • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII • XIII • XIV • Schedule

The Montana Right to Wild Game Hunting and Fishing Amendment, also known as C-41, was on the November 2, 2004 ballot in Montana as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The measure added a provision to the Montana Constitution that recognized and preserved the opportunity of Montana citizens to harvest wild fish and wild game animals.

Election results

Montana C-41 (2004)
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		345,505	80.60%
No		83,185	19.40%

Election results via: Montana Secretary of State

Text of measure

The text of the measure can be read here.

Background

See also: History of right to hunt and fish constitutional amendments

As of November 2024, 24 states had constitutional provisions providing for the right to hunt and fish. Vermont was the first state to constitutionalize such a right in 1777. The other 22 states have adopted right to hunt and fish amendments since 1996. The state constitutions of California and Rhode Island include amendments guaranteeing the right to fish, but not to hunt.

List

The following is a list of state ballot measures to adopt right to hunt and fish amendments:

State	Year	Type	Title	Description	Result	Yes Votes	No Votes
FL	2024	LRCA	Amendment 2	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt and fish	a	6,941,307 (67%)	3,365,987 (33%)
UT	2020	LRCA	Constitutional Amendment E	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt and to fish	a	1,063,212 (75%)	355,848 (25%)
NC	2018	LRCA	Right to Hunt and Fish Amendment	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife	a	2,083,123 (57%)	1,563,090 (43%)
IN	2016	LRCA	Public Question 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and trap, including traditional methods	a	1,893,467 (79%)	492,300 (21%)
KS	2016	LRCA	Constitutional Amendment 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and trap, including traditional methods	a	926,970 (81%)	213,104 (19%)
TX	2015	LRCA	Proposition 6	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and trap, including traditional methods	a	1,260,763 (81%)	294,973 (19%)
AL	2014	LRCA	Amendment 5	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife, including traditional methods	a	789,777 (80%)	199,483 (20%)
MS	2014	LRCA	HCR 30	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and trap, including traditional methods	a	524,423 (88%)	71,683 (12%)
ID	2012	LRCA	HJR 2	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and trap, including traditional methods	a	456,514 (73%)	165,289 (27%)
KY	2012	LRCA	Amendment	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife	a	1,298,340 (84%)	238,320 (16%)
NE	2012	LRCA	Amendment 2	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife	a	557,534 (77%)	169,250 (23%)
WY	2012	LRCA	Amendment B	Provide for a state constitutional right to harvest wild bird, fish, and game	a	212,561 (89%)	25,564 (11%)
AR	2010	LRCA	Amendment 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, trap, and harvest wildlife	a	612,495 (83%)	127,444 (17%)
AZ	2010	LRCA	Proposition 109	Provide for state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife		714,144 (44%)	926,991 (56%)
SC	2010	LRCA	Amendment 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife	a	1,126,228 (89%)	139,668 (11%)
TN	2010	LRCA	Amendment	Provide for state constitutional right to hunt and fish	a	1,255,840 (87%)	181,465 (13%)
OK	2008	LRCA	State Question 742	Establish a constitutional right to hunt, trap, fish, and take game, granting authority to the Wildlife Conservation Commission.	a	1,082,341 (80%)	269,787 (20%)
GA	2006	LRCA	Amendment 2	Preserve the ability to fish and hunt in Georgia and ensure it is managed by law and regulation for the public good	a	1,626,226 (81%)	379,024 (19%)
LA	2004	LRCA	Question 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and trap	a	1,195,445 (81%)	279,926 (19%)
MT	2004	LRCA	C-41	Provide for a state constitutional right to harvest wild fish and game	a	345,505 (81%)	83,185 (19%)
WI	2003	LRCA	Question 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, trap, and take game	a	668,459 (82%)	146,182 (18%)
ND	2000	LRCA	Measure 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, trap, and take game	a	206,443 (77%)	61,531 (23%)
VA	2000	LRCA	Question 2	Provide for a right to hunt, fish, and harvest game	a	1,448,154 (60%)	970,266 (40%)
MN	1998	LRCA	Amendment 3	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt, fish, and take game	a	1,570,720 (77%)	462,749 (23%)
AL	1996	LRCA	Amendment 1	Provide for a state constitutional right to hunt and fish	a	955,149 (81%)	218,350 (19%)

Map

The following map shows which states have constitutional rights to hunt and fish in their state constitutions:

Support

The proponent argument was prepared by Senator Duane Grimes, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee; Rep. Joe Balyeat (R-34), Chairman, House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee; and Gary Marbut, President, Montana Shooting Sports Association. They made the following points:

• Hunting and fishing is an important recreational opportunity, a multi-million dollar source of tourist income, and a great source of healthy food.
• Hunting is a major facet of Montana culture, with more Montanans hunting than any other state.
• Revenue from hunting/fishing licenses provide the bulwark of wildlife conservation funding.
• Hunting/fishing are "perhaps the healthiest environment to connect with our children; especially teens."
• C-41 would help protect Montana's hunting/fishing culture from "'animal rights' extremists."
• The amendment strikes a "great balance." While it recognizes hunting/fishing in the constitution, it does not create an absolute right that would prevent the Dept. of Fish, Wildlife & Parks from continued regulation of hunting/fishing activity. The amendment also balances hunting/fishing rights against property rights, recognizing that sportsmen have no right to trespass.

Opposition

The opponent argument was prepared by Senator John Cobb. He argued that the amendment was "a solution in search of a problem" and that there was no threat of banning hunting or fishing in Montana. Senator Cobb also argued that the amendment has no real impact on hunting/fishing rights and would do little to protect those rights if they were under attack in the future. The Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the state legislature would still have the power to "regulate hunting and fishing to its death.."

Campaign financing

Montanans for Our Hunting and Fishing Heritage, proponents of the amendment, donated $199 towards the measure.

See also

Suggest a link

• Montana 2004 ballot measures
• 2004 ballot measures
• List of Montana ballot measures
• History of Initiative & Referendum in Montana

External links

• Montana Constitutional Amendments
• Montana Initiative and Referendum
• Constitutional Amendment No. 41

Footnotes

---

This historical ballot measure article requires that the text of the measure be added to the page.