Ballot initiative to repeal HB637

[SAJ-99]

I would say YES an initiative is needed for 2 reasons:

1) You are forgetting about the 2PP for booking with an outfitter basically at the current time guaranteed licenses for outfitted clients, while the DIY hunter waits 2 years minimum.

A. Trend was moving this way anyway so it will go to outfitted clients drawing every year to every other while the DIY hunter draws every 3-5yrs. Probably closer to 3-6yrs (assuming 3PP becomes the new 100%)
B. Once you hit 3PP you go back to 0 so if the DIY hunter waits 3yrs doesn't draw they are in for atleast 2 more years before they have a chance while the outfitted client would just need to miss 1 year and be back at 3 for close to 100% chance.

2) While MOGA claims the PP system is hard they aren't dumb or they wouldn't have asked for 2PP knowing it guaranteed tags. So when the demand by DIY hunters keeps going up and outfitted clients aren't drawing with 3PP they (MOGA) will be back saying the 3PP end needs to change.

A. An initiative getting rid of all set aside licenses and preference to the PP needs to be done. Obviously MOGA and your MT legislation doesn't remember what you the citizens wanted with your last initiative.



Of course you want to sit down, you guys realized the hornets nest you have kicked and the long term affect that an initiative would have. Where a "compromise" can be voted out at the 11th hour like 143 got rammed into this bill.

Your time for compromise has sailed, time for MOGA to sleep in the bed they made. Hope the 3000 tags was worth it.

I didn't forget about the PP, but to be perfectly honest, I can't remember how it was structured. Either way, an initiative isn't going to fix the problem in a timing manner.

I don't think the time for compromised has sailed. NOW is the time for compromise. We get nothing done fighting with each other. Matching body blow for body blow is pointless. The only people who win in that case are the politicians.

 

[WIbiggame]

Matching body blow for body blow is pointless. The only people who win in that case are the politicians.

So don't throw a body blow, setup a well defined initiative that delivers the knock out. MOGA thought they threw it compromise keeps them in the fight imo.

I know fullwell that this is a resident issue and I have not pot to piss in but will support this initiative financially to my fullest.

You are right it won't be timely but this isn't the time for instant gratification like MOGA got with ramming this in. It's a time to be methodical and make sure the initiative fixes the tag priorities and PP priorities, along with other things.

Again just a simple NR opinion.

 

[SAJ-99]

So don't throw a body blow, setup a well defined initiative that delivers the knock out. MOGA thought they threw it compromise keeps them in the fight imo.

I know fullwell that this is a resident issue and I have not pot to piss in but will support this initiative financially to my fullest.

You are right it won't be timely but this isn't the time for instant gratification like MOGA got with ramming this in. It's a time to be methodical and make sure the initiative fixes the tag priorities and PP priorities, along with other things.

Again just a simple NR opinion.

I think you are still looking at this as a competitive endeavor with a winner and loser. I would like to change that narrative. It does us no good to see who can buy legislators the most liquor and dinners. I see that the outfitters are trying to run a business and understand their difficulties and contribution to the Montana economy. I think I see their point of view, at least broadly. But NR DIY outnumber their clientele and throw a lot of money around this state as well. We need both. We need to focus on shared problems that can continue to make Montana attractive to both. If we can’t, we are headed down a path of mutual destruction.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I think you are still looking at this as a competitive endeavor with a winner and loser. I would like to change that narrative. It does us no good to see who can buy legislators the most liquor and dinners. I see that the outfitters are trying to run a business and understand their difficulties and contribution to the Montana economy. I think I see their point of view, at least broadly. But NR DIY outnumber their clientele and throw a lot of money around this state as well. We need both. We need to focus on shared problems that can continue to make Montana attractive to both. If we can’t, we are headed down a path of mutual destruction.

The path of mutual destruction is eventually certain unless everyone can agree that the resource must come first. Without healthy herds there is no resident opportunity and no commercial opportunity for outfitters.

 

[Eric Albus]

Lots of legitimate reason to feel this way, and honestly, I was there up until a few days ago. And not just because of 143 & 637, but because it's been 14 years of this back & forth where nobody gets much good done and wildlife suffers for it. So, with the perspective that we need to advocate for the animals, rather than our own selves, I think it makes sense to find common ground where we can on re-structuring the seasons and looking at current permit numbers, etc, as well as mule deer specific hunting season changes across MT, and whitetail changes where it makes sense. That doesn't guarantee any specific outcome, and I'm sure there will be untruthful players looking to game the system for their own selfish needs, but that happens regardless of the issue or the people at the table. The key is being at the table and holding others accountable.

I think you need landowners & outfitters in that discussion, otherwise it's not going to go anywhere, and you'll end up in far more conflict than you would want. Those are public commission processes that need to happen in order to recalculate the seasons and disperse pressure away from public to allow animals to return to those more accessible lands. The 5 week season isn't set in law, so it can be changed administratively. That's the big difference. Additive to that are some statutory changes that would need to be made in terms of updating Block Management, game damage laws, etc to provide 21st century solutions to 21st century problems instead of relying on the good work done in the last century. That doesn't mean wholesale changes, but simple updating to recognize changing landownership patterns, elk & deer distribution issues, predation pressure, etc.

But that also doesn't include eliminating the point theft, seasons set in statute, etc that need to be removed, and that's where the Constitutional Initiative would need to come in to play. That's where you can set a level playing field for all and eliminate the ability to pick winners & losers through tag giveaways, etc. Think of an initiative as re-setting the cracked foundation on your house, while the legislative piece is the framing & utilities, and the season structure is the finish work.

Ben, as you know we have felt backed into a corner since 161. This was not the fix(637) I envisioned. I personally am tired of watching us beat on each other and dead horses. A ballot initiative is costly and time consuming, and has little chance of success again. The money wasted to fight will be useless, only benefitting the media and lawyers. I'd rather pool the $$ and spend it on access. Myself, Rod, and the MOGA brass agrees, we need to sit down and figure out a compromise.

I(we) want stability for our industry. I realize the angst with this, no need to bore everyone with details, over and over.

I am sick of seeing the resource(elk/deer) being put last on the priority list(both sides culpable). If we(R, NR DIY) put the resource first all falls into place. I hope most of you noticed I did not put the NR outfitted client's opinion out there, the outfitter/landowner they hunt on is responsible for their actions.

I didn't forget about the PP, but to be perfectly honest, I can't remember how it was structured. Either way, an initiative isn't going to fix the problem in a timing manner.

I don't think the time for compromised has sailed. NOW is the time for compromise. We get nothing done fighting with each other. Matching body blow for body blow is pointless. The only people who win in that case are the politicians.

I hope you are correct in this. Only thing worse than politics is politicians. After going to the capitol I feel the need for a shower in gasoline to cut through the slime.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Ben, as you know we have felt backed into a corner since 161. This was not the fix(637) I envisioned. I personally am tired of watching us beat on each other and dead horses. A ballot initiative is costly and time consuming, and has little chance of success again. The money wasted to fight will be useless, only benefitting the media and lawyers. I'd rather pool the $$ and spend it on access. Myself, Rod, and the MOGA brass agrees, we need to sit down and figure out a compromise.

I(we) want stability for our industry. I realize the angst with this, no need to bore everyone with details, over and over.

I am sick of seeing the resource(elk/deer) being put last on the priority list(both sides culpable). If we(R, NR DIY) put the resource first all falls into place. I hope most of you noticed I did not put the NR outfitted client's opinion out there, the outfitter/landowner they hunt on is responsible for their actions.



I hope you are correct in this. Only thing worse than politics is politicians. After going to the capitol I feel the need for a shower in gasoline to cut through the slime.

I’m all for having a serious conversation about how all the shareholders can work together.
I am not interested in hearing how important outfitters are to MT’s economy and how they deserve tags before everyone else.

I want to know what the outfitters are willing to bring to the table. As of now, I haven’t seen much willingness to take less, just an awareness that lots of us residents are very unhappy with how MOGA and outfitters are working the political system for their benefit.

 

[sacountry]

I’m all for having a serious conversation about how all the shareholders can work together.
I am not interested in hearing how important outfitters are to MT’s economy and how they deserve tags before everyone else.

I want to know what the outfitters are willing to bring to the table. As of now, I haven’t seen much willingness to take less, just an awareness that lots of us residents are very unhappy with how MOGA and outfitters are working the political system for their benefit.

Lots of good stuff there. I do think we know what the outfitters bring to the table. It is a valuable service that brings in a certain hunting clientele. Just like with other forms of tourism, not all clientele will stay in a hotel. Some prefer the bed and breakfast. It's important to have a little something for everyone.....and at the end of the day it's important for everyone to have a chance to encounter our wildlife.

I joke with Gerald about hating but he's not a hater, nor is Eric. When the emotions come down good ideas are had. It's going to take that to have a good discussion. 637 may have to be dismantled to get the house built on a good foundation. But I'm pretty sure MOGA can come up with better ideas if give the chance. I know the DIYers would just like the chance to give actionable input.....not "we listened to you now swallow this"

 

[WIbiggame]

Myself, Rod, and the MOGA brass agrees, we need to sit down and figure out a compromise.

Eric you and Rod probably do want to sit down now. But it comes back to a quote I was brought up on "Actions speak louder than words" and so far MOGA's actions are speaking louder than any narrative you and Rod have tried defending.

I think you are still looking at this as a competitive endeavor with a winner and loser

You are probably correct and Ben pointed that out in an earlier post. The sting is still pretty fresh for me. Ultimately tho I know my days of hunting MT every Sept are gone, and I have made plans for this. I love your state almost more than my own and it sucks knowing that bc I choose to hunt DIY my chances are less bc of this choice.

 

[timmy]

If we were actually serious about it outfitters and nonresident diy hunters are both taking a hit. Residents as well. Let’s see how popular this is.

 

[WIbiggame]

I know the DIYers would just like the chance to give actionable input.....not "we listened to you now swallow this"

This 100%!!! I have been fairly vocal especially for a NR guy (thanks for putting up with me) and have said throughout; Eric and Rod I know can vouch for this; I hold absolutely no ill will towards outfitters wanting to make a living and their value to MT and hunting in general. All I want is a level playing field where the resource isn't sold to the highest bidder.

And to have such an overwhelming opposition to something yet bc of political affiliation it gets rammed down our throats regardless of what the public wants or says.

 

[Big Shooter]

Haters gonna hate

I didn't forget about the PP, but to be perfectly honest, I can't remember how it was structured. Either way, an initiative isn't going to fix the problem in a timing manner.

I don't think the time for compromised has sailed. NOW is the time for compromise. We get nothing done fighting with each other. Matching body blow for body blow is pointless. The only people who win in that case are the politicians.

Well said!

 

[Big Shooter]

I think you are still looking at this as a competitive endeavor with a winner and loser. I would like to change that narrative. It does us no good to see who can buy legislators the most liquor and dinners. I see that the outfitters are trying to run a business and understand their difficulties and contribution to the Montana economy. I think I see their point of view, at least broadly. But NR DIY outnumber their clientele and throw a lot of money around this state as well. We need both. We need to focus on shared problems that can continue to make Montana attractive to both. If we can’t, we are headed down a path of mutual destruction.

I can’t disagree.

 

[Sytes]

It would be a first opportunity to have a united front... for our wildlife - for conservation.
If MOGA, MWF, RMEF, et al found a united public voice to declare the "facts" as agreed by the collective and did a media blitz to uniformly announce support to reduce hunt seasons, raise residential rates, re-define limited tags, promote select animal hunt by tool used: general rifle, traditional archery / muzzleloader, OR general archery species.
2 weeks each.
This does not cover all nor need to have all. Merely my opinion for an initial salvo of thought.

Outside an actual uniformed media blitz, the MT population will remain divided**Hu, I think there is no way in hell such a measure would ever gain as much traction.

 

[timmy]

If we were actually serious about it outfitters and nonresident diy hunters are both taking a hit. Residents as well. Let’s see how popular this is.

Why can’t I like my own posts.

 

[Big Shooter]

Eric and I visited for an hour or so this morning about different options that both of us liked......but we aren’t MOGA and will have to sell those ideas to our membership. We feel that some of these ideas will be well received by “the opposition” (meaning some of you folks.....just saying). Rain days are great for us as we finally have time to discuss these topics. Most everyone on here are sharp folks and with a little brain storming and less rock throwing (from both sides), we could come up with a plan that would satisfy both sides. Just a thought.

 

[Big Shooter]

Why can’t I like my own posts.

I will like it Timothy!

 

[Derek44]

Thanks for the kind words pal! Not a surprise. My point was is that there are two sides of the fence and who is the opposition and who is not. But.....with that being said......I look forward to the day that you make that comment to my face and not hiding behind a computer. The offer is always open. The one thing that I respect on both of these threads is that there has not been any name calling or personal attacks from either side......until you chimed in. Carry on.

Actually, in a very passive aggressive way, Eric did his absolute best to basically call me a liar and say I wasn’t a man in the other thread. My thoughts were it was quite immature, but to each their own. Haha.

 

[Wildabeest]

So Rod and Eric, it seems the main rationale for needing a “solution” for outfitters was “uncertainty” of the draw. A compromise was put forth via amendment to 143 that put the draw earlier to mitigate some of that uncertainty. However, it appears that compromise was soundly rejected by MOGA and the amended bill suffered a quick death. I’d like to hear your thoughts on that, and whether you’re open to something similar in a new compromise or whether OSL’s are hard liners requirement for you / MOGA.

Obviously, that by itself doesn’t fix all the other issue regarding the resource, but I think it will be central to any compromise solution.

 

[LostinOregon1]

I am hoping for the same vigor and enthusiasm when Wyoming tries to limit DIY non-residents to just 10 percent of the licenses. What I have learned that its all about the DIY guy's and protecting their ability to get a tag? I learned a long time ago in Eastern Montana that the ranchers look at the first few numbers on a resident hunter's license plate and make an assumption about them based upon where they live. It appears that some of you are doing the same thing and throwing out all the bad outfitter stories to get everyone's lather up.

The tragedy of all of this is that folks don't see the benefit of having small to medium family ranches throughout Montana. The margins are thin and leasing their property to hunters or outfitters for some extra income can be the difference between losing and keeping a ranch. Once the families sell out, they will be bought by corporations and the very, very rich. I am not against capitalism at all, but once all the family ranches are gone, it won't matter who has the tags, and the DIY guy will suffer greater than losing a few tags to outfitters. The ranches will become so big, that the wildlife will never leave, even with pressure. It doesn't matter if the wildlife belongs to the people of the State if they all live on private land.

If I came back to this board in 30 years, would we all be arguing on who gets to shoot the last mule deer. We have more in common than most of you realize.


Rich

 

[shrapnel]

So, as this soap opera continues, it seems to stop in a time frame of only going back to I161 of 2010.

When did the original 5,000 allotted outfitter tags start and what was the rationale? There must be something missing that no one has yet drug into this dogpile.