Montana - Time to Shake it Up?

[Pagosa]

Here's who I have as being interested:
DIY Public Hunting Side:
R1: no one identified.
R2: @Randy11
R3: No one identified yet
R4: No one identified yet
R5: @cgasner1
R6: @Schaaf
R7: @antlerradar

Expressed interest: @stoep, @bigsky2, @sclancy27

Who did I miss, and especially folks from R1,3,4. Regions 3 & 4 are arguably some of the most important for this species given the historical range and hunting history. R1 has a host of issues, but those folks need to be at the table as well since they're the largest group of displaced MT resident hunters and considering what the MD resource used to be like in the region.

For outfitters:

@Eric Albus, @Big Shooter. I think having a few outfitters who work in the western part of the state are needed as well.

I am also suggesting that Rob Arnaud and I be the moderators. Rob is well known and trusted in the outfitter circles, and I'm moderately known in the hunting circles.

The idea is to not have organizations represented at the table. They have the capacity to do this on their own and they already make their suggestions known. This is about putting Montanans together in room to discuss what they'd like to see in terms of overall mule deer management, address some shared concerns about season structure and possibly walk out with a better collaborative framework for which we can bring hunters, outfitters and landowners together to find better outcomes for mule deer.

Once we have a line up set, we can start a new thread that has ground rules, and we can refine the agenda down to what we feel we can reasonably accomplish in 1 day.

As far as being open to the public, I think the group needs to decide. If it is, then there needs to be a way to ensure that the conversation doesn't go sideways as people want to participate and lead the discussion away from a structured process. I do think that having some folks attend isn't a bad idea, and if we provide time for public comment at the end, as well as give folks a place to send their suggestions to us, then a public facing effort makes sense.

I’m definitely not qualified, but could sit in for region 1. I’ve only lived in Montana since 2013, but have hunted regions 1, 3, and 5 since 1995 as a non-resident. I can tell you I haven’t hunted region 1 since 2014, if that tells you something, other than whitetail behind my house, turkeys, hounds hunting. I do work on restoration projects in WY and eastern MT and can say they difference between Crook/Weston Counties, WY and Carter/Powder River Counties, MT is night and day different.
Someone like Gerald Martin or Sioux33 could likely provide a lot of information about region 1, even though they don’t currently live here.
Since Pat Tabor is an outfitter in Region 1, could he represent outfitter’s in Region 1, or is that conflict of interest?.. Preston

 

[Ben Lamb]

@bigsky2 - got you in for R4

@Pagosa - I'd say that leaving Commissioner Tabor out is warranted at the moment. Nothing against Pat, but we need to keep gov't out of the discussion and as vice-chair of the commission, he's a representative of gov't. As far as R1 goes, You're in, unless anyone wants to Rochambeau you for it.

And that's a rule: If anyone wants to take someone else's spot - Rochambeau for it.

 

[cgasner1]

I’d think it would be better set at a semi private type of setting due to the stuff I have seen people bring up. The rambling on that took place in our region 5 meeting was ridiculous. Some guy from 4 showed up and went on a tangent for a hour about stuff in 4. I never got to say anything about issue I had in 5. It would be nice to avoid that and stick to a a game plan and not argue over petty chit.

 

[mtmuley]

This is going to be good. Glad Randy11 is in on R2. mtmuley

 

[Deleted member 48080]

@theat
@Mtnhunter1
@MTTW
@Carnage2011

 

[Pagosa]

Understand on Commissioner Tabor, yes, if anyone wants my spot please proceed. There has to be a lifelong resident hunter that can see the loss in Region 1. Otherwise I can make Feb or early March work.

 

[TrumpkinTheDwarf]

Travel permitting, I'd love to be a fly on the wall for something like this, but I would definitely think it's better to avoid a public free for all. And as I am no longer a MT resident, I have no voice worth hearing anyways. I really am thankful these types of discussions are beginning to take place though! Fact of the matter is that grassroots movements tend to be where the really hard victories are won.

And if you need some inspiration, I'd like to point out the Pebble Mine fight that was some 15 years in the winning (or losing if you were an investor). End of the day, passionate and well informed local voices are essential.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Still interested - have hunted region 3 and 4 a lot and would love to contribute.

 

[Carnage2011]

@theat
@Mtnhunter1
@MTTW
@Carnage2011

I’m definitely not opposed. I have a lot of time and willing to weigh out some ideas.

 

[SAJ-99]

I'd say that leaving Commissioner Tabor out is warranted at the moment. Nothing against Pat, but we need to keep gov't out of the discussion and as vice-chair of the commission, he's a representative of gov't.

100%. You insert a person of real or perceived position of authority and it taints the goal. People end up talking to him rather than each other. It was exasperating to see Hank in PLPW committee discussion a few years back. Simply a poor leadership decision to do that. Also, those are public meetings. What you are discussing here isn't. You can say and discuss things without it being a part of public record. Mostly, the primary goal is to open the lines of communication. Hopefully it will mitigate the "surprise" effect of the 2025 legislative session when everyone spends an enormous amount of energy trying to rally against a bad idea. That is probably just a dream of mine, but hell, dream big.

 

[Big Fin]

If I’m not on the road with a commitment for whatever days this is scheduled, I’d make a point to be there, if helpful.

 

[Ben Lamb]

@Big Fin gets the R3 spot. We argue on his dime, so it seems appropriate.

I'm out to start the Christmas gorging.

If anyone didn't get in, shoot me a pm and we will start an alternates list.

 

[cgasner1]

Thanks Ben for bringing all this together

 

[cgasner1]

I wonder what percentage of people that book with a outfitter book with the intention of fill a buck and bull tag?

 

[8andcounting]

I wonder what percentage of people that book with an outfitter book with the intention of fill a buck and bull tag?

Over 50%

 

[cowboy]

(This is about putting Montanans together in room to discuss what they'd like to see in terms of overall mule deer management, address some shared concerns about season structure and possibly walk out with a better collaborative framework for which we can bring hunters, outfitters and landowners together to find better outcomes for mule deer.)

Would it be prudent to have representation from land owners that are not outfitters?

 

[cgasner1]

Over 50%

Was just wondering about how splitting the deer elk combo would affect them. One negative to splitting that is when you sell a guy a combo tag he may shoot a deer while hunting on just happening onto one. When you sell him just a deer tag he is coming here to kill a deer

 

[bigsky2]

(This is about putting Montanans together in room to discuss what they'd like to see in terms of overall mule deer management, address some shared concerns about season structure and possibly walk out with a better collaborative framework for which we can bring hunters, outfitters and landowners together to find better outcomes for mule deer.)

Would it be prudent to have representation from land owners that are not outfitters?

That’s where @antlerradar comes in.

 

[cowboy]

That’s where @antlerradar comes in.

 

[cgasner1]

That’s where @antlerradar comes in.

I think there is a few other guys that we have saw on the miss management thread that would also be a good fit