Big Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2008
- Messages
- 482
Bulls for Billionaires - MT EQC Meeting today 1:30 PM
- Thread starter Ben Lamb
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
You're right, you didn't, you lumped all diy hunters as slobs.
It's all horseshit...same old story, hunters left the gate open and the prized bull got out, shot my cows left litter, blah blah.
Landowners lease to outfitters for one reason, and one reason only...$$$. fact.
Did hear a new one from a rancher and current gf commissioner this year though, damn diy hunters burned his wood fence posts in a campfire.
Hey, at least it's original...
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,552
It would probably be as fitting a generalization to consider lumping all outfitters and guides as poachers.
At least the one l licensed guide I videoed snagging brood stock at the kids fishing derby is. It didn’t matter that he was convicted of multiple wildlife violations. One of the current MOGA board of directors hired him that fall to guide for him.
@Eric Albus @Big Shooter Has the director done a good job?https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/ballot-initiative-to-end-nr-big-game-hunting.312042/post-3354198
What about those comments? I literarily don’t care someone needs to stand up for Montana wildlife. @Big Fin is right there with the rest of them. Nobody is trying to make it better it is getting exploited from all sides. For money? I question everyone’s intentions.
What about those comments? I literarily don’t care someone needs to stand up for Montana wildlife. @Big Fin is right there with the rest of them. Nobody is trying to make it better it is getting exploited from all sides. For money? I question everyone’s intentions.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I can not agree with that. Money is part of the reason landowner lease. I know plenty of landowners that lease because it is more convenient to have an outfitter deal with hunting. Some also lease because they feel the outfitter will do a better job of game management than FWP.
Big Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2008
- Messages
- 482
No I didn’t. Go back and read it again…..or have someone read it for you. Here is a project for you…take a poll on 10 outfitters in eastern Montana and ask them how they get the leases they have…..or better yet…contact 20 landowners that are leased to outfitters and ask why they are. The predominant answer you will get from either party is…..poor hunter behavior! ”FACT” (as you like to spout). So maybe….just maybe…if the laws were put into place to make it actually sting when caught trespassing and/or poaching the perpetrators may think twice and actually treat landowners with respect instead of like someone that owes them something. After that possibly some landowners would open up some access. Just a thought.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
What’s it got to do with the bull permits?
BuzzH
Well-known member
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
Why do eastern MT outfitters and MOGA love Hank? 
Big Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2008
- Messages
- 482
Absolutely not….and why should they?? Whatever they are getting is better than the smoked Turkey and cheap bottle of booze that they were getting before……if that! And to answer Greenhorns question, in many cases it has a lot to do with bull permits. Elk have gotten over objective in some areas because landowners are not willing to let people on to help manage the numbers because they are tired of dealing with the public. In the case that you cited earlier on this thread Buzz when you were trying to be the upstanding citizen/hunter that you claim to be and offered to kill a landowners cow elk but he said no because he had someone coming in to hunt that would actually pay, maybe you should have offered something instead of thinking that you were doing him a favor. I realize that it goes against how things went down when you were in high school in the early 60’s…..but like you’ve stated before “times, they are a changing!”
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
I’d have a little more respect for Hank and crew if they came out and said it was all about giving much needed bull permits to big landowners and making sure there’d be plenty of archery clients for outfitters. The BS about objectives and laws to meet them, pretty lame, dirty lies. Simple as that. Bend the public land elk and hunters over. Nobody should believe a word that comes out of the guys mouth going forward.
It’s not about “managing the numbers.”
It’s not about “managing the numbers.”
BuzzH
Well-known member
First off it wasn't a he, it was a she. I guess women aren't allowed to own land in your world.
Secondly I never asked this person to hunt until after I listened to their sob story.
I'll go without killing an elk before I pay to help them manage problem elk that they complain about.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I don't know for sure as I never ask what neighbors are getting paid. The only ones I know what the pay rate is when the neighbors volunteer the info. One on my neighbors is leasing for far less than if he was to take bids on the property. He could likely make more if he was in BM. He has often told me he leases to an outfitter because he doesn't want to deal with hunting. Far more convenient to hand it over to an outfitter.
The money Mars made by leasing was a rounding error in his accounting. Money was not a big part of the reason he went with an outfitter.
@Big Shooter is right, the first step in trying to improve access should be to ask outfitters and landowners why they lease, Would open the minds of those that think it is all about the money.
I remember when we gave permission to everyone that asked to hunt. Every time we restricted access can be tied back to poor hunter behavior.
I can give examples if you want.
Dakotakid
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 813
Are there bad outfitters/guides- certainly yes.
But bad outfitters are NOT an impediment to sportsman access. Bad hunters are an impediment to sportsman access.
Bad logical equivalents do nothing for improving sportsman opportunity.
There are lots of properties that do not lease to outfitters or guides but do want better managed wildlife.
But bad outfitters are NOT an impediment to sportsman access. Bad hunters are an impediment to sportsman access.
Bad logical equivalents do nothing for improving sportsman opportunity.
There are lots of properties that do not lease to outfitters or guides but do want better managed wildlife.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
Dakotakid - do you hunt much on public land in the MT areas you’ve described on this topic?
Art/Rod: I’ve no doubt there’s a mountain of shitty behaving hunters, but back to the 454.. what does hanks fascinating program of giving bull permits out, as well as his other attempts and successes at pumping up all the bull permits in eastern MT do to address 1) elk objectives 2) elk distribution problems, and 3)landowner/sportsmen relationships?
Art/Rod: I’ve no doubt there’s a mountain of shitty behaving hunters, but back to the 454.. what does hanks fascinating program of giving bull permits out, as well as his other attempts and successes at pumping up all the bull permits in eastern MT do to address 1) elk objectives 2) elk distribution problems, and 3)landowner/sportsmen relationships?
Dakotakid
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 813
I hunt 80% public
Most private I hunt is BMA
I do get invited to hunt private but one ranch that was after general season.
Most private I hunt is BMA
I do get invited to hunt private but one ranch that was after general season.
There it is.
Yes, Hunter behavior absolutely needs to be addressed. As others like to point out, punitive isn't always the best approach here, and some could argue that the lack of elk distribution on public land exacerbates the issues that private landowners have relative to poor hunter behavior. Season structure certainly is a big part of this discussion and hopefully we can have a process that actually works next time, rather than the goat rodeo that just happened.
454 could be used effectively as a carrot when it comes to elk management, but it has to be done at the local level. The local biologists have to be part of the decision matrix in order to ensure that the public is getting the best bang for it's bull. Any trustee would do the same for an actual financial trust that they are managing, and the Commission needs to do so by empowering local biologists to do their jobs, rather than simply follow orders from a top-down administration.
Free licenses that are simply given out without any thought towards the overall dynamics relative to distribution, bull/cow, cow/calf numbers, etc at play are a bad idea. "We got caught with our pants down" was the response about how poorly the process was run, regardless of the fact the agency has had protocols in place for a long time relative to this program. The plain and simple fact is that the agency and commission can turn down these agreements as noted by statute. They did not have to approve them, but did so and created the appearance of favortism to wealthy, out of state landowners who are known to have funded one political party across the spectrum. I get why people don't want to talk about all of the backstory,but the history of this issue cannot be ignored, lest we simply repeat the same mistakes of the last 20 years.
Are the elk numbers even over objective in many of these areas? We don’t have a clue because they won’t update the EMP. Day 1 as director Hank should have been working on getting the new EMP implemented. Many of these so called 200% over objective areas wouldn’t have been over objective anymore. I think it was a convenient way to say awe shucks we have to do something look how bad the problem is. Here is some more bull tags to get the population down.
Even if the areas are over objective how in the heck does killing a couple trophy bulls help bring them into objective? I’m sure there are plenty of less than trophy class bulls that will get the breeding done or is it just a magic situation that when you’re able to hang a big bull in your house or a clients that high elk numbers are suddenly not a problem?
Schaaf
Well-known member
Can’t speak for other regions but in R6 almost all wildlife populations are down approximately 40% from just 2 years ago-according to their counts. The gurgling from going down the drain is getting louder.
