Montana FWP makes seismic shift in elk permits

[Ben Lamb]

They already exist. All you can try to do is determine the parameters around which they are issued.

It's a good point. There are already landowner set asides for deer, there's the 454 program that got hijacked by the billionaires & their lobbyists, there's the landowner preference, etc. What does MT get out of those? PLPW has a great role in finding a better balance with the 454 program and eliminate the corruption we've seen relative to the new law change in the last year.

There should be a report out in the next month or so relative to western states landowner voucher programs that looks at hunter satisfaction with those programs. Nevada is routinely held up as a good model for landowner vouchers, while UT and CO are held up as the worst examples (including from former managers of those programs).

 

[Nameless Range]

Zero landowner tags. ZERO

I wish we held sacred the principle of equal opportunity in the drawing process. If we had all along, if to us it were an immutable principle of the NAM that for any degradation would be a nonstarter in terms of conversation, we would not be dealing with so much of the BS we see today.

I believe more in slippery slopes now than ever before in my life. If, in good faith, we were to come up with a solution that involved an expansion of landowner tags in Montana, even if in exchange for something more amenable, I think I would be opposed. For only a few years down the road it doesn't seem unreasonable to suspect the take would be come larger, and likely one sided - forever.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I wish we held sacred the principle of equal opportunity in the drawing process. If we had all along, if to us it were an immutable principle of the NAM that for any degradation would be a nonstarter in terms of conversation, we would not be dealing with so much of the BS we see today.

I believe more in slippery slopes now than ever before in my life. If, in good faith, we were to come up with a solution that involved an expansion of landowner tags in Montana, even if in exchange for something more amenable, I think I would be opposed. For only a few years down the road it doesn't seem unreasonable to suspect the take would be come larger, and likely one sided - forever.

I don't think you can ever engage in this discussion while ignoring the past or expecting the past to repeat itself. However, I also think that if you engage in the discussion with honest intent, you can help assuage a lot of this back & forth. There will always be people looking to exploit the divide. This whole issue has been exploited by a few for their own gain, and now it's created such hard feelings between sportsmen, landowners and outfitters that a hard reset is really needed. We don't get that when the pendulum is swung so far to the right by the director & commission. We just get more entrenched opposition to even talking to each other.

 

[SAJ-99]

Equity does not figure into the equation. Finding LO tolerance of the public is what this is about, if the public wants access.

Thinking "the public wants access" might put you into a box where there is no solution. The access issues have been beat to death. The only real solution is $$$ because we know it all boils down to that for the rancher. Making it about money gets MOGA's undies in a bunch because any $ solution might be competitive to those leases thereby jeopardizing their businesses. Hunters have to bite the bullet and take one for the resource - Pick your weapon-area-date. This keeps the same aggregate opportunity but disburses pressure. No reason for MOGA to oppose and doesn't affect ranchers at all.

The discussion seems to show three groups
Ranchers that have zero tolerance for elk
Ranchers that have zero tolerance for public hunters
Ranchers that have zero tolerance for both
Ranchers that tolerate both are as common as unicorns

More LEOs in the field enforcing rules seems to be a no-brainer solution to improving relations between the groups.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Thinking "the public wants access" might put you into a box where there is no solution. The access issues have been beat to death. The only real solution is $$$ because we know it all boils down to that for the rancher. Making it about money gets MOGA's undies in a bunch because any $ solution might be competitive to those leases thereby jeopardizing their businesses. Hunters have to bite the bullet and take one for the resource - Pick your weapon-area-date. This keeps the same aggregate opportunity but disburses pressure. No reason for MOGA to oppose and doesn't affect ranchers at all.

The discussion seems to show three groups
Ranchers that have zero tolerance for elk
Ranchers that have zero tolerance for public hunters
Ranchers that have zero tolerance for both
Ranchers that tolerate both are as common as unicorns

More LEOs in the field enforcing rules seems to be a no-brainer solution to improving relations between the groups.

Just for context, there are somewhere around 30 openings at MT FWP for wardens & biologists. Apparently folks aren't eager to work for this administration.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Okay I’ve changed my mind on landowner permits. They are good by me so long as they are cow only.

 

[Treeshark]

Who’s gonna want to buy those?

 

[TheTone]

It’s interesting to see Colorado RFW properties where the paying clients kill giant bulls while the public guys shoot cows and management bulls. What a great system

 

[YoungGun]

More LEOs in the field enforcing rules seems to be a no-brainer solution to improving relations between the groups.

When FWP shifted the priorities of enforcement/education/etc. for their Game Wardens, they tied the hands of their Law Enforcement to really enact meaningful change. There is a local warden here who has stated that once he has hit his 30% enforcement time allotment for the shift, he would be reprimanded if he conducted anymore enforcement, even if he watched someone poach in front of him. Until FWP straightens out the fact that Game Wardens are Law Enforcement first and Biologists need to follow science not agendas, I don't see them correcting their hiring shortages, let alone having the man power to make meaningful impact.

 

[YoungGun]

tags for LO should only be good on their ranch, not on neighbors.

Or on public land, even if it is part of the landowner lease.

 

[Ben Lamb]

When FWP shifted the priorities of enforcement/education/etc. for their Game Wardens, they tied the hands of their Law Enforcement to really enact meaningful change. There is a local warden here who has stated that once he has hit his 30% enforcement time allotment for the shift, he would be reprimanded if he conducted anymore enforcement, even if he watched someone poach in front of him. Until FWP straightens out the fact that Game Wardens are Law Enforcement first and Biologists need to follow science not agendas, I don't see them correcting their hiring shortages, let alone having the man power to make meaningful impact.

I think that got fixed in the last budget. but it really put a hurt on enforcement. The legislature had a bright idea, however, and didn't want to listen to anyone who knew what they were talking about.

 

[SAJ-99]

When FWP shifted the priorities of enforcement/education/etc. for their Game Wardens, they tied the hands of their Law Enforcement to really enact meaningful change. There is a local warden here who has stated that once he has hit his 30% enforcement time allotment for the shift, he would be reprimanded if he conducted anymore enforcement, even if he watched someone poach in front of him. Until FWP straightens out the fact that Game Wardens are Law Enforcement first and Biologists need to follow science not agendas, I don't see them correcting their hiring shortages, let alone having the man power to make meaningful impact.

Not saying I have the solution to the hiring problem, just that both sides complain about people not following rules. Bow hunting BM a couple of years ago there was a truck parked right in front of a sign that said "Do not park here". The landowner had to call the warden to enforce the rule. Over the last 3 yrs or so I think there has been an improvement on signage and clarity on rules, but not so much on following them.

 

[rogerthat]

Last year when I had FWP print and mail me my tags I received double the amount just as a few people I know did. How many more received the same and filled both tags?

Huh…maybe you got my order. I did the same and nothing showed up. I kept calling them like 5 times and each time they told me “be patient they are still coming”. Haha. August came and I figured since it had been since March, they probably weren’t coming.

 

[rogerthat]

Everyone says “that’s like rfw in CO” “we don’t want to be like CO”. Am I the only one sitting here thinking certain things about CO system are working better than in MT? I have been to CO 3 times. I have killed 3 of my 4 biggest mule deer bucks and could have easily shot a branch bull elk each week if I wanted to all in a week of hunting on public land on easy to draw units. Do that in Montana. Dare ya. And these weren’t small bucks. I have hunted MT my whole life. We are getting so far down the toilet bowl in MT we can’t keep doing the same things. We need change but it ain’t what worsech is peddling but I think saying ZERO landowner tags or cows only isn’t going to be part of a sustainable robust plan that can withstand the partisanship infecting Montana hunting

 

[TrumpkinTheDwarf]

Everyone says “that’s like rfw in CO” “we don’t want to be like CO”. Am I the only one sitting here thinking certain things about CO system are working better than in MT? I have been to CO 3 times. I have killed 3 of my 4 biggest mule deer bucks and could have easily shot a branch bull elk each week if I wanted to all in a week of hunting on public land on easy to draw units. Do that in Montana. Dare ya. And these weren’t small bucks. I have hunted MT my whole life. We are getting so far down the toilet bowl in MT we can’t keep doing the same things. We need change but it ain’t what worsech is peddling but I think saying ZERO landowner tags or cows only isn’t going to be part of a sustainable robust plan that can withstand the partisanship infecting Montana hunting

CO has the mule deer piece down. I know some guys are gonna complain about the early rifle tags they just implemented, but CO gets it with deer.

I see no reason why Montana can't do two 2 week archery seasons, three 1 week long rifle seasons, a muzzy season thanksgiving week, and make guys pick their poison. Hell, let guys pick two of the time periods, but one has to be archery! It would dramatically change the hunting pressure problem.

 

[Ben Lamb]

CO has the mule deer piece down. I know some guys are gonna complain about the early rifle tags they just implemented, but CO gets it with deer.

I see no reason why Montana can't do two 2 week archery seasons, three 1 week long rifle seasons, a muzzy season thanksgiving week, and make guys pick their poison. Hell, let guys pick two of the time periods, but one has to be archery! It would dramatically change the hunting pressure problem.

CO is also pretty restrictive in choose your season, choose your weapon, so they spread that pressure out. The RFW program isn't what's creating public land success. It's actual hunter management.

 

[Irrelevant]

Everyone says “that’s like rfw in CO” “we don’t want to be like CO”. Am I the only one sitting here thinking certain things about CO system are working better than in MT? I have been to CO 3 times. I have killed 3 of my 4 biggest mule deer bucks and could have easily shot a branch bull elk each week if I wanted to all in a week of hunting on public land on easy to draw units. Do that in Montana. Dare ya. And these weren’t small bucks. I have hunted MT my whole life. We are getting so far down the toilet bowl in MT we can’t keep doing the same things. We need change but it ain’t what worsech is peddling but I think saying ZERO landowner tags or cows only isn’t going to be part of a sustainable robust plan that can withstand the partisanship infecting Montana hunting

Apples and oranges. RFW has nothing do it with why CO has better deer. CO doesn't allow everyone and their puppy dog to shoot bucks with a rifle the entire month of Nov.

edit: Lamb beat me by fractions of a sec.

 

[The Hedgehog]

We need change but it ain’t what worsech is peddling but I think saying ZERO landowner tags or cows only isn’t going to be part of a sustainable robust plan that can withstand the partisanship infecting Montana hunting

Huh? They are trying to find solutions to the elk "over objective problem." Are you saying landowners really need to have bull elk permits to achieve that?

Weird. I'd think that option would be an incentive for more harboring, and result in higher objectives over time. And with the increased permit numbers, but archery and rifle, I'd say the public will be pounded so hard, almost all the animals will be on private..

Still waiting to see some landowner testimony on how the elk are "conflicting with their livelihoods"

 

[rogerthat]

Huh? They are trying to find solutions to the elk "over objective problem." Are you saying landowners really need to have bull elk permits to achieve that?

Weird. I'd think that option would be an incentive for more harboring, and result in higher objectives over time. And with the increased permit numbers, but archery and rifle, I'd say the public will be pounded so hard, almost all the animals will be on private..

Still waiting to see some landowner testimony on how the elk are "conflicting with their livelihoods"

What I am saying is that we got to get hunters more distributed on the landscape. Landowner tags are a way of doing that. Obviously not the only way but we only get hunters on private with private land permission from guys like Eric.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Apples and oranges. RFW has nothing do it with why CO has better deer. CO doesn't allow everyone and their puppy dog to shoot bucks with a rifle the entire month of Nov.

edit: Lamb beat me by fractions of a sec.