In presenting the bill, Blasdel noted that suppressors are not silencers, and passing the bill would put Montana on par with other states. Thirty-three other states allow the use of suppression devices on hunting rifles.

“The facts are finally catching up with the fiction in this bill,” he said. “In the first couple sessions, this was deemed a silencer.”

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks law enforcement chief Jim Kropp has testified against the bill in the other sessions and does not support the use of noise suppressors.

“We’ve been opposed to them from the start, and we continue to resist the measure,” Kropp said.

Public perception of hunting is one reason why he doesn’t support the use of muzzle suppressors on rifles.

“It is important how the non-hunting public reviews hunting itself,” Kropp said. “They consider them silencers, and they don’t recognize why you generally need these things to hunt big game. Their perception is, what are hunters trying to hide?”

Sen. Dee Brown, R-Hungry Horse, testified in favor of the bill.

“We have a field full of gophers,” Brown said. “I think it would be nice for the neighborhood not to listen to me target practicing or plinking gophers — at least a bit quieter on their ears and mine. Any situation which suppresses the noise of a rifle would be a positive in my mind.”

Montana is fairly restrictive on hunting laws, and the noise-suppressor bill does not fit within the state’s conservative approach to hunting regulations, Kropp said. Although other states may be more liberal with hunting laws, Montana does not allow dogs to hunt big game, and trail cameras are illegal.

A bill in similar form was presented during the past three legislative sessions, but none made it past the governor’s desk. A bill to allow suppressors died in committee in 2008, as it did in 2011. A suppressor bill passed in 2013 but was vetoed by Gov. Steve Bullock.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if that happens again,” Kropp said.

This year’s bill has already passed the House 33-17 and now moves to the Senate.

During a February hearing when the bill was first presented in the House, Taylor testified in favor of the bill, saying that noise from a hunting rifle made her deaf in her left ear.

“For that reason alone, we should pass the bill,” she said.

Kalispell Republican Reps. Randy Brodehl and Frank Garner, the former Kalispell police chief, are also co-sponsors of SB 295.

Even with a muzzle suppressor, there is still a report from a gun shot, Blasdel said in presenting the bill.

“It’s just not as loud,” he said.

In previous sessions when the bill appeared, “what you had is a lot of landowners concerned if they had someone out poaching on their land … they wouldn’t be able to hear them,” Blasdel said. “That’s not the case.”

Blasdel said the suppressors are “not easy to get.” Owners must fill out an application with a dealer and notify law enforcement. Owners must submit to a background check and pay $200 to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Once a person buys a suppressor, it’s licensed for one firearm and must stay with that firearm. Owners also must carry paperwork with them in the field.

Blasdel said it’s time Montana joins the rest of the states who allow noise suppressors on hunting rifles.

“We’re a little bit behind the curve on this,” he said.

Kropp said it’s a small segment of the population that wants to see noise suppressors become legal.

“The NRA has been highly supportive in driving to get this passed,” Kropp said. “We’re not opposed to the NRA, but philosophically we feel it’s not a tool we need in Montana.”

Suppressors lessen the recoil of a firearm and are used mainly in bench-rest shooting. A bullet from a high-powered rifle still breaks the sound barrier and creates a report, Kropp said. Whether they’re legal or not would not have an effect on poaching, he said.

“If somebody’s going to poach, they’re going to find a way to do it,” he said.”

FWP carries licenses for four noise suppressors on rifles it uses for controlling urban wildlife “so the public is not alarmed” when an injured animal is killed around homes, Kropp said.

Two other muzzle suppressors bills were introduced in the legislature — one to allow them for hunting mountain lions and wolves, and another for hunting nongame species.

Several local legislators are promoting a bill that would allow the use of noise suppressors on hunting rifles. Senate Bill 295 is sponsored by Sen. Mark Blasdel, R-Somers, and co-sponsored by Sen. Janna Taylor, R-Dayton, and Sen. Bob Keenan, R-Bigfork.

In presenting the bill, Blasdel noted that suppressors are not silencers, and passing the bill would put Montana on par with other states. Thirty-three other states allow the use of suppression devices on hunting rifles.

“The facts are finally catching up with the fiction in this bill,” he said. “In the first couple sessions, this was deemed a silencer.”

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks law enforcement chief Jim Kropp has testified against the bill in the other sessions and does not support the use of noise suppressors.

“We’ve been opposed to them from the start, and we continue to resist the measure,” Kropp said.

Public perception of hunting is one reason why he doesn’t support the use of muzzle suppressors on rifles.

“It is important how the non-hunting public reviews hunting itself,” Kropp said. “They consider them silencers, and they don’t recognize why you generally need these things to hunt big game. Their perception is, what are hunters trying to hide?”

Sen. Dee Brown, R-Hungry Horse, testified in favor of the bill.

“We have a field full of gophers,” Brown said. “I think it would be nice for the neighborhood not to listen to me target practicing or plinking gophers — at least a bit quieter on their ears and mine. Any situation which suppresses the noise of a rifle would be a positive in my mind.”

Montana is fairly restrictive on hunting laws, and the noise-suppressor bill does not fit within the state’s conservative approach to hunting regulations, Kropp said. Although other states may be more liberal with hunting laws, Montana does not allow dogs to hunt big game, and trail cameras are illegal.

A bill in similar form was presented during the past three legislative sessions, but none made it past the governor’s desk. A bill to allow suppressors died in committee in 2008, as it did in 2011. A suppressor bill passed in 2013 but was vetoed by Gov. Steve Bullock.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if that happens again,” Kropp said.

This year’s bill has already passed the House 33-17 and now moves to the Senate.

During a February hearing when the bill was first presented in the House, Taylor testified in favor of the bill, saying that noise from a hunting rifle made her deaf in her left ear.

“For that reason alone, we should pass the bill,” she said.

Kalispell Republican Reps. Randy Brodehl and Frank Garner, the former Kalispell police chief, are also co-sponsors of SB 295.

Even with a muzzle suppressor, there is still a report from a gun shot, Blasdel said in presenting the bill.

“It’s just not as loud,” he said.

In previous sessions when the bill appeared, “what you had is a lot of landowners concerned if they had someone out poaching on their land … they wouldn’t be able to hear them,” Blasdel said. “That’s not the case.”

Blasdel said the suppressors are “not easy to get.” Owners must fill out an application with a dealer and notify law enforcement. Owners must submit to a background check and pay $200 to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Once a person buys a suppressor, it’s licensed for one firearm and must stay with that firearm. Owners also must carry paperwork with them in the field.

Blasdel said it’s time Montana joins the rest of the states who allow noise suppressors on hunting rifles.

“We’re a little bit behind the curve on this,” he said.

Kropp said it’s a small segment of the population that wants to see noise suppressors become legal.

“The NRA has been highly supportive in driving to get this passed,” Kropp said. “We’re not opposed to the NRA, but philosophically we feel it’s not a tool we need in Montana.”

Suppressors lessen the recoil of a firearm and are used mainly in bench-rest shooting. A bullet from a high-powered rifle still breaks the sound barrier and creates a report, Kropp said. Whether they’re legal or not would not have an effect on poaching, he said.

“If somebody’s going to poach, they’re going to find a way to do it,” he said.”

FWP carries licenses for four noise suppressors on rifles it uses for controlling urban wildlife “so the public is not alarmed” when an injured animal is killed around homes, Kropp said.

Two other muzzle suppressors bills were introduced in the legislature — one to allow them for hunting mountain lions and wolves, and another for hunting nongame species.