Black bear hunting with in Montana-- HB 144

[Ben Lamb]

And you know what else? I went to a few hounding boards and read what you guys are doing. Maybe get a different perspective on this. You have MT SFW guys speaking for you in Helena? That churns my guts. And then a pile of you houndsmen are clueless to what the SFW is!!! I guaran-freekin-tee you, if the MT SFW is for something, I am diametrically opposed to it, because in the end, those bastards are gonna turn around and screw all the average joes in this state, just to satisfy the mothership. Align yourselves with the SFW? FOOLS!

So after reading this I googled the threads you're talking about.

Ridiculous.

You know, I'd be open to a hound season for bears if the Houndsmen would sit down with groups like MWF, MSA, MBA and others to discuss it rather than think they can team up with anti-public hunter groups like SFW.

I think a lot of us support using hounds for lions, etc and have stepped up to maintain that opportunity. I think a lot of us would support hound hunting of bear so long as we can calmly and rationally talk about how to ensure that facet of the sport doesn't interfere with other folks method of hunting.

Whenever someone tells me I have to support something or I'm dividing the hunting community, I laugh. It's not a one way street guys. I'm open to the idea, but not without some dialog. It's how people try to shut down the conversation when they realize other people don't think like they do.

A diversity of ideas is a good thing.

 

[SimpleMan]

I did have the opportunity to speak with a member of the MBA committee a week ago and this bill did come into discussion. I do not know about of the legislator that drafted this bill or where the motivation was behind introducing this bill, so I do not know if the SFW is active in this bill. But I think that I know the other thread that you are talking about and I do not think from reading other posts on that forum that the SFW is representing the majority of the houndsman/woman. But this issue will have to go in front the FWP Commission to determine if they will implement it and what the limits/opportunities will be, and the FWP Commission will have opportunities for public comment.

 

[Straight Arrow]

SimpleMan, I am a third generation Montanan who has hunted for over five decades in Montana. I also closely follow hunting issues and proposed Montana hunting-related legislation. A basic premise of mine is that if a proposal favors the want's and desires of a special interest, comprised of small numbers, as opposed to a proposal that remedies some fully substantiated wildlife or hunting problem, then I will oppose the bill that is proposed just to fulfill wants and desires, while potentially adversely affecting the larger group of hunters.

cur dog, I appreciate you responding to my question. I also respect and appreciate your memories and support of hunting coons with hounds. 'Sounds like good stuff that formed a wonderful basis for your hunting passion. But this is a proposed bill for hunting black bears in Montana, so that is why I am chiming in with my two cents worth, as a Montana hunter.

 

[Toadslayer]

I would support hounds AND baiting. ESPECIALLY for Grizz.

 

[wyoming556]

I would support hounds AND baiting. ESPECIALLY for Grizz.

You would never make it in Montana with your pro crossbow, pro bear baiting, and anti weed legalizing perspective from across the border in Wyoming. WY is full of idiots from a MT perspective

 

[Toadslayer]

You would never make it in Montana with your pro crossbow, pro bear baiting, and anti weed legalizing perspective from across the border in Wyoming. WY is full of idiots from a MT perspective

Well, I was born and raised there for 39 years before moving. Couldn't change it from the inside, so I moved Thank god for the nonresident native tag though, now I can hunt both states for CHEAP!

I can remember fighting with everyone in Montana to adopt Wyomings radical wolf stance years ago and how they had the right plan, I was right the whole time.

Toad

 

[SimpleMan]

Straight Arrow, I don't know if I'm following what you are referring to you when mentioned fully substantiated hunting problem. I think if we limited our hunting to a fully substantiated hunting problem we could probably get rid of all bird hunting, sheep, moose, goats, if your rationale is based on numbers of animals we are trying to control. We hunt because these animals are a renewable resource. If the fully substantiated hunting problem is when two different outdoor groups could be hunting at the same time, fall bears season with guns and archery season exist at the same time - I don't know about you but I pick fall archery season chasing the elk around over carrying my gun and I've never been interrupted by a bear hunter shooting a bear right when I am putting a sneak on some elk. I do fish in the fall when bird hunting is going on and maybe I do like your thought, cause it could be a little nerving knowing "Willie" and "Si" could be packing their shotguns in my vicinity. But I have to bet there are more fishing licenses sold than waterfowl stamps.

 

[shoots-straight]

You know, I'd be open to a hound season for bears if the Houndsmen would sit down with groups like MWF, MSA, MBA and others to discuss it rather than think they can team up with anti-public hunter groups like SFW.

So Ben, would you be open to allow the use of baiting, if the same thing happened?

You said you didn't support it before you knew SFW was involved, and now your open to it.

So just wondering now!

 

[RUT JUNKEY]

wow this thread has hit some nerves. . . .Montana sounds great for hunting, but, the damn drama is crazy.

 

[wyoming556]

wow this thread has hit some nerves. . . .Montana sounds great for hunting, but, the damn drama is crazy.

And entertaining.

 

[AH64DMatt]

I'm not from Montana, and I probably won't get there any time soon to hunt, however I have to say that the debate on this forum has taken a nasty turn. I have never hunted bear. I would LOVE to, but I just haven't lived in a state where bear was a possibility.

From a deer hunting perspective, when I was stationed in Alabama I saw a great buck and put a stalk on him. Biggest buck I'd seen south of Kansas. I stalked him for a mile before I could get within shooting distance with my bow, and when I was waiting for him to turn, someone on the other side of the forest unleashed his dogs to push all the deer out towards his friends. Missed it by THAT much! He took off, and ended up being stacked like cordwood with 4 other does and a spike. I felt like the dad from "A Christmas Story" with Bumpus' dogs ruining my long, LONG day. After a string of four-letter words, I returned to my truck and vowed never to hunt Alabama ever again. It was a great day, just me and my prey, creeping around from tree to tree, controlling my breathing, using the wind, and then "BAWR BAWR BAWRRRR!!!"

I would hope that the debate cleans up on this forum because just because you disagree with someone, doesn't mean that you have to belittle him or her to make your point. Randy, you amaze me with your eloquence when it comes to dealing with ignorant people. You are a far more patient person than me.

If I lived in Montana, I'd oppose that bill too. When I'm alone in the woods, using woodcraft, stealth and every fiber of my primal hunting being, the last thing I'd want is Bumpus' dogs crashing my party...

Have a great day everybody!
Matt

 

[AH64DMatt]

And I realize that I have lived in Arizona now for a short while, where bear is a possibility, however I travel so much for work that I can't make the seasons line up with my travel schedule. I'm moving back to Kansas in the next coming months, where I will be processing out of the Army. After that? Maybe chasing bear in Montana with string of trained attack poodles...(imagine that auditory nightmare next time you're in the woods...)

 

[Straight Arrow]

An example of a "substantiated hunting problem" is the failure to reach wolf hunting quotas considered in conjunction with a burgeoning wolf population, which nearly all parties agree should be reduced or at least held in check. The hunting related proposal is a bill to allow for multiple tags, electronic calling, reduced NR hunter tags cost, and removal of the hunter orange requirement outside general seasons. It is a recognized, substantiated problem with a viable solution proposed.

There is no substantiated problem with the bear hunt. If it aint broke ... don't fix it! This is merely a proposal from a special interest group comprised of a relatively low number of hunters (houndsmen) who merely want and desire to hunt bears with hounds. One "slippery slope" that is not just an illusion, but actually happens in other states, is that one by one, every special interest group gets their way. Then eventually conflicts and many problems evolve. So the next logical step is choose your weapon, your week to hunt, and exactly where you wish to hunt, that is if you are lucky enough to obtain a very limited permit. Yep, I'm spoiled and feel highly appreciative of the hunting opportunities I have in Montana. That's why I want to preserve them for my grandkids and beyond.

SimpleMan, merely because you personally have not experienced any hunting conflict situations, it does not follow that they don't exist.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Montana sounds great for hunting, but, the damn drama is crazy.

Right on both accounts. You should have followed the insanity during the session when the six or so Montana atlatl hunters wanted a couple weeks out of the archery only season to be set aside only for atlatls. And last session, the Governor quipped about the "spear chuckers" wanting their weapon recognized as a big game weapon.

 

[RUT JUNKEY]

Right on both accounts. You should have followed the insanity during the session when the six or so Montana atlatl hunters wanted a couple weeks out of the archery only season to be set aside only for atlatls. And last session, the Governor quipped about the "spear chuckers" wanting their weapon recognized as a big game weapon.

Wow. . .too funny. From here it looks like your "powers that be" just sit around thinking up crap to put in. . . .everytime you turn around they are screwing with something. . .good and bad of course. good luck to all of you that deal with that every year in and out. How thick is your Hunting Regulations book out there? Bet it looks like a Chinese phonebook!!!!!

 

[Straight Arrow]

good luck to all of you that deal with that every year in and out

Actually it's a ninety-day session every two years. Many of us would like to see a two-day session every ninety years.

 

[RUT JUNKEY]

Actually it's a ninety-day session every two years. Many of us would like to see a two-day session every ninety years.

I bet thats right!!!

 

[Gerald Martin]

As someone who really enjoys cat hunting with hounds and spot and stalk bear hunting, I'd have to say that I prefer the seasons to stay as they are.As has been pointed out by others, hunters, are doing fine job of keeping black bears in check. I would really enjoy hunting bears with hounds but I think the negative drawbacks outweigh the positives.

I think every guy on this site would support houndsmen if there was an effort to ban hounds, but that is not what is happening here.

 

[Trigger50]

I propose a compromise. Set the bear season somewhat like Wisconsin. Bear baiters/stalkers/callers get a couple weeks of hunting. Next, after that season, immediately open it to hounds for 1 week. Everybody wins !

 

[The Hedgehog]

I propose a compromise. Set the bear season somewhat like Wisconsin. Bear baiters/stalkers/callers get a couple weeks of hunting. Next, after that season, immediately open it to hounds for 1 week. Everybody wins !

Or not..