Bulls for Billionaires - MT EQC Meeting today 1:30 PM

[Deleted member 28227]

Yes!!! I’m thinking more like an Airbnb app where you can “book” your ranch on the calendar. With the same rating system as you described just like on Airbnb. Of course there will be lots of fees also, my app management fee and cleaning fees etc. Heck I will even put my new ranch that I buy with all the fees I collect on there available for booking. I like it!!

Explicitly no fees... there already are apps like that.

 

[DFS]

Pitchforks and torches if that's what it takes.

And being willing to make the sacrifices to make it happen.

Like go to jail for punching Hank in the face? Joking, kind of

 

[rogerthat]

Like go to jail for punching Hank in the face? Joking, kind of

Wasn’t he like military special forces? I think you should stick to buzz’s crowd idea

 

[DFS]

Wasn’t he like military special forces? I think you should stick to buzz’s crowd idea

Fair point. And I was joking people have been up tight lately.

 

[Elkmagnet]

What a bummer. I’ll trade them my home in town straight up. Never had an elk problem, but have had a couple yard moose eating my hard earned apples

If you are looking for a moose tag as compensation get in line...

 

[S-3 Ranch]

It's something around 70-30 split in favor of R's.

Here's a handy chart from the agency: https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content...slature/fwp-101-fish-wildlife-budget-fy21.pdf

License revenue is is about $63-64 million, give or take. That means the Resident contribution is about $20 million. In order to bring that up and eliminate NR's, each person who purchased a base hunting license would have to spend another $260 or so to make up the lost revenue.

I don't see that passing.

Even if you cut that in half, and cut the number of NR's, you're still looking at some big numbers for each license holder that would prove to be politically unpopular and unable to pass.

Thanks for the numbers!!
if none residents are contributing 30% of the budget for the wildlife trust , on federal and BLM land its only proof that 30% of permits on public land should go NR , on private property those permits should go to the owners and be used, leased or sold . if a biological survey says a property has X amount of cow permits then those need to be harvested or the next years bull permits will be held till the cow harvest is complete.
I deal with two different state trust and those are the rules Colorado and Texas sets for land owners, nr in Colorado and land owners in Texas .
the welfare state attitude of licensing could change the balance to residents and destroy the tourism industry in one feld swing (Montana Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research. Travel spending by out-of-staters directly supported $2.60 billion in economic activity in the state, with a combined industry output of $4.4 billion.”)

http://opportunitylinkmt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TourismFASTFACTS_May13.pdf

 

[rogerthat]

Thanks for the numbers!!
if none residents are contributing 30% of the budget for the wildlife trust , on federal and BLM land its only proof that 30% of permits on public land should go NR , on private property those permits should go to the owners and be used, leased or sold . if a biological survey says a property has X amount of cow permits then those need to be harvested or the next years bull permits will be held till the cow harvest is complete.
I deal with two different state trust and those are the rules Colorado and Texas sets for land owners, nr in Colorado and land owners in Texas .
the welfare state attitude of licensing could change the balance to residents and destroy the tourism industry in one feld swing (Montana Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research. Travel spending by out-of-staters directly supported $2.60 billion in economic activity in the state, with a combined industry output of $4.4 billion.”)

http://opportunitylinkmt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TourismFASTFACTS_May13.pdf

Spray that troll spray in the mirror for me and go hunt some exotics. Your mindset and way of thinking is already infecting enough “new” Montanans. You must have been neighbors with Farris in Texas. Maybe we should just high fence all the ranches too while we are at it

 

[DFS]

Thanks for the numbers!!
if none residents are contributing 30% of the budget for the wildlife trust , on federal and BLM land its only proof that 30% of permits on public land should go NR , on private property those permits should go to the owners and be used, leased or sold . if a biological survey says a property has X amount of cow permits then those need to be harvested or the next years bull permits will be held till the cow harvest is complete.
I deal with two different state trust and those are the rules Colorado and Texas sets for land owners, nr in Colorado and land owners in Texas .
the welfare state attitude of licensing could change the balance to residents and destroy the tourism industry in one feld swing (Montana Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research. Travel spending by out-of-staters directly supported $2.60 billion in economic activity in the state, with a combined industry output of $4.4 billion.”)

http://opportunitylinkmt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TourismFASTFACTS_May13.pdf

Don’t mess with Texas!

 

[The Hedgehog]

I know there’s some redeeming quality about Texas. Can somebody help me remember

 

[TheTone]

I know there’s some redeeming quality about Texas. Can somebody help me remember

It’s big?!?

 

[Irrelevant]

I know there’s some redeeming quality about Texas. Can somebody help me remember

Keeps them out of MT... sometimes

 

[Gerald Martin]

Thanks for the numbers!!
if none residents are contributing 30% of the budget for the wildlife trust , on federal and BLM land its only proof that 30% of permits on public land should go NR , on private property those permits should go to the owners and be used, leased or sold . if a biological survey says a property has X amount of cow permits then those need to be harvested or the next years bull permits will be held till the cow harvest is complete.
I deal with two different state trust and those are the rules Colorado and Texas sets for land owners, nr in Colorado and land owners in Texas .
the welfare state attitude of licensing could change the balance to residents and destroy the tourism industry in one feld swing (Montana Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research. Travel spending by out-of-staters directly supported $2.60 billion in economic activity in the state, with a combined industry output of $4.4 billion.”)

http://opportunitylinkmt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TourismFASTFACTS_May13.pdf

Please stay in Texas.

We have too many of those “I contribute this much to the economy so I deserve this much of the natural resource” attitudes in this state as it is.

 

[rogerthat]

Fricken got it!!! Texas style barbeque! Damn that took me a minute

 

[Straight Arrow]

I know there’s some redeeming quality about Texas. Can somebody help me remember

"All hat; no cattle!" But really great BBQ sauce recipes.

 

[DFS]

All jokes aside. I still am curious if @Eric Albus thinks the director has done a good job so far?

 

[S-3 Ranch]

Y’all just mad that Texas and California said hey Montana bend over we take over !
JK !
But seriously Montana residents dont want to pull its weight financially ! So it’s time to put up or shut up when a financial source is supporting your wildlife trust , and federal land is 70% of the hunting units. I support land owners rights, and if Montanans owned the land I would be in full support for y’all .

mi dos centavos

 

[Buffs35]

MOGA having politicians in their pockets for preferential treatment
v.
Landowners (some NR, but not all ... don't tell anyone on here) demanding tags because cash is king
v.
Residents blaming NR for declining opportunity when they happily shoot pregnant cows during shoulder season
v.
Ranchers that apparently grow diamond encrusted wheat and don't know how to build a fence
v.
NR that incorrectly believe because Montana has federal lands they have a say in the proceedings

Sort of like watching the Yankees versus the Dodgers, or Patriots against the Cowboys - just wish they all could lose.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Y’all just mad that Texas and California said hey Montana bend over we take over !
JK !
But seriously Montana residents dont want to pull its weight financially ! So it’s time to put up or shut up when a financial source is supporting your wildlife trust , and federal land is 70% of the hunting units. I support land owners rights, and if Montanans owned the land I would be in full support for y’all .

mi dos centavos

A couple of points.
1. The residents of MT own the wildlife. Land owner whether federal, state, or private is irrelevant for the legal consideration of who gets what license. All states have the discretion to give whatever nonresident access to the state’s wildlife they deem appropriate. That might be all or it might be none.
2. The percentage of FWP income generated by NR doesn’t grant diddly squat in terms of what NR’s deserve. If Montana grants NRs consideration in wildlife management policies it’s because MT wants to, not because it needs to or is legally required.
3. Nonresident land ownership does not grant the landowner the status of being an owner of the state’s wildlife. That status is conferred at the time a nonresident becomes a resident. If a nonresident landowner doesn’t like Montana’s state constitution they can either move here to gain Montana’s benefits or accept what Montana grants to nonresidents.

 

[brockel]

I support land owners rights

I keep seeing this used as an argument. Who is saying to take away land owner rights or force trespassing? The tools are already there to manage the elk herds. If the landowner chooses not to use those tools then that is on them.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I keep seeing this used as an argument. Who is saying to take away land owner rights or force trespassing?

It's usually the people who either aren't as well versed about elk mgt, or who won't honestly discuss the issue who talk like this.