More Discounted Non-residents licenses for Montana

[Elktrack]

It should be mandatory that before any of us (me included) are allowed to post on HT that we read @Big Fin post explaining Public Trust doctrine and the role of the trustees. I for one gained a better understanding and a different viewpoint.

Doesn’t mean I have to like the way other states run their programs but at least I understand some of it better. The fact that NR don’t factor into the equation with any “rights “ kinda sucks.

Most states grant us the privilege to hunt or have an “opportunity “ to hunt by making us pay more which is fair. I hate it but it’s fair. Residents of every state should have the lowest cost to use their own resources.

Believe me, I’d love to see cheap NR tags everywhere and I think some of the systems are taking advantage of NR knowing full well that they are selling points that will never be realized in an opportunity to hunt. Is that right thing to do???? I dunno? Do I have to keep participating with my money? Nope. My choice.

 

[Big Fin]

Of course, why wouldn't they want to freeload off of non residents? I personally don't care for price gouging no matter who is getting gouged, guess Montana residents in your opinion feel differently.

Did you read what I wrote? Most folks here are advocates for the same thing you seem to be complaining about; disparity in resident/non-resident fees.

And what you and I think or want is irrelevant in the discussion about fees in states where we are non-residents. The Trustees don't have to grant a single tag of hunting opportunity to us as non-residents, as we non-residents are not Trust beneficiaries by the mere fact that we are not citizens of that state. Any tag granted to us non-residents is more than is required.

When that opportunity is granted, at whatever generosity of the state citizens who are beneficiaries, they are under no compulsion to discount that limited opportunity. We can complain about it. Those high non-resident fees can help fund a disproportion of wildlife agencies. But, the Baldwin v. Commissioner case makes our complaints moot. And, given the non-residents lined to buy those limited opportunities at these prices is currently out the door, around the corner, and down the street, makes it irresponsible for the Trustees to discount those fees.

So, keep complaining all you want. Keep ignoring the fact that many on this forum have pushed for higher resident fees in Montana. Makes no matter to me. Your complaining here, especially among people who have advocated for what you are complaining about, will get the same results as if you walked out on the street and yelled to the heavens.

 

[brockel]

Of course, why wouldn't they want to freeload off of non residents? I personally don't care for price gouging no matter who is getting gouged, guess Montana residents in your opinion feel differently.

Ricky is that you?

 

[Oak]

Of course, why wouldn't they want to freeload off of non residents? I personally don't care for price gouging no matter who is getting gouged, guess Montana residents in your opinion feel differently.

You need to go back and read more closely, my dude.

 

[Nameless Range]

I thought this was a well written article approaching the subject

Sportsmen worry nonresident hunting license sales misrepresented

In 2021, the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks sold more than 66,600 nonresident deer and elk licenses.

billingsgazette.com

 

[Mtnhunter1]

I thought this was a well written article approaching the subject

Sportsmen worry nonresident hunting license sales misrepresented

In 2021, the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks sold more than 66,600 nonresident deer and elk licenses.

billingsgazette.com

Thanks for sharing NR. That article sums up the history, backed up by the numbers, of what has happened to our state. The whole system needs to be scrapped and redone to accommodate actually managing our game populations.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I do think that MT FWP gets the better end of the bargain when it comes to cost of goods/quality provided.

Montana over sales licenses at a rate that ensures quality is seldom found on publicly accessible lands. “Opportunity” is the buzzword for Montana FWP’s sales team but the success of their sales program over pressures the areas “opportunity” can be experienced.

Cheaper licenses are not the answer. The answer to better quality is for FWP to recognize they are dealing with a limited resource and exploitation of that resource must be proportional to what the resource can handle.

There’s a dichotomy of values between the masses who prioritize “opportunity” without understanding the needs of the resource and those who understand that Montana’s public land elk and deer populations have been on a downward trajectory for years and want to change that trajectory.

 

[The Hedgehog]

I thought this was a well written article approaching the subject

Sportsmen worry nonresident hunting license sales misrepresented

In 2021, the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks sold more than 66,600 nonresident deer and elk licenses.

billingsgazette.com

That’s enough to piss a guy off and sheds some light on why such a high percentage of license plates are NR when I’m out in the fall.

 

[The Hedgehog]

We need to recruit a Montana Rob Schaul. Seriously.

 

[Nameless Range]

That’s enough to piss a guy off and sheds some light on why such a high percentage of license plates are NR when I’m out in the fall.

"Forty-eight years ago, out of concern regarding the growing number of out-of-state hunters, the Montana Legislature approved a cap on the number of nonresident big game combination licenses.
The limit was set at 17,000 licenses a year.
In 2021, the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks sold more than 66,600 nonresident deer and elk licenses, according to information the Butte Skyline Sportsmen’s Association received through a public records' request."


That's damn crazy.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

"Forty-eight years ago, out of concern regarding the growing number of out-of-state hunters, the Montana Legislature approved a cap on the number of nonresident big game combination licenses.
The limit was set at 17,000 licenses a year.
In 2021, the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks sold more than 66,600 nonresident deer and elk licenses, according to information the Butte Skyline Sportsmen’s Association received through a public records' request."


That's damn crazy.

That’s pretty shocking to see on paper.

 

[The Hedgehog]

I thought this was a well written article approaching the subject

Sportsmen worry nonresident hunting license sales misrepresented

In 2021, the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks sold more than 66,600 nonresident deer and elk licenses.

billingsgazette.com

@Eric Albus @Big Shooter curious to both your thoughts on these numbers, the trends toward nonresidents licenses, etc. and appreciate your input always with respect even though we disagree on many things I’m sure.

 

[DFS]

I would be more than happy to pay more for a tag and seeing less out of state plates. People got used to coming here almost every year. Demand got spiked and unfortunately in Montana the influencers congregated hunters. Perfect storm of mismanagement from fwp and social medias impact on hunting. Certainly not good for wildlife. I’m not sure how you would fix it with mtfwp doubling down with their opportunity at all cost management. The real fix would be a season structure change and cap on tags per unit/district and a hard stop at 17k nonresident tags which we need to have regardless of price. It’s ok to have wildlife on the landscape living. If nothing changes Montana should keep increasing nonresident licenses until they don’t sell out.

 

[warmer]

So, how does a cap of 17,000 turn into 66,600? not trying to be a smart a$$, honest question.

 

[Nameless Range]

So, how does a cap of 17,000 turn into 66,600? not trying to be a smart a$$, honest question.

From the article:


“Licenses created that avoid the cap include the Coming Home to Hunt (quota 500 elk, 500 deer and 500 big game combo licenses) for residents who have moved out of state, nonresident deer combination licenses (quota 4,600) and nonresident native licenses (no cap), nonresident student hunting licenses for college attendees (unlimited) and landowner sponsored deer combination licenses (quota 2,000).”

 

[Gerald Martin]

To be clear, most of those 66,600 tags over the 17,500 cap are antlerless only.

In 2021 there were approximately 22,000 either sex tags sold when all the programs and preferences are taken into account.

However, when it comes to boots on the ground and competition for space among hunters it really doesn’t matter whether the person who is afield has an antlerless or either sex tag.

 

[Ben Lamb]

There are a few ways to reduce the NR licenses w/o having a huge hit to the budget, and given that FWP has a fairly good forecast on revenue, this provides a bit more wiggle room in reducing the OTCC sales relative to antlerless sales.

It is also important to compare the base hunting license numbers. In that regard, Montana hosts around 86,000 individual non-resident hunters, compared to the 175,000 or so resident hunters who buy base hunting licenses. THat includes all species & license types including stand alone lion, bear, turkey, upland and waterfowl as well as the combos & antlerless.

This means that MT essentially has a 40-45% NR to R rate of subscription. They also contribute 73% or so of the license revenue, which is about $58,000,000 in total, IIRC.

If you want to decrease that number of NR's, you have to find the sweet spot between killing the subsidy that resident hunters have, The reduced price licenses and the antlerless are the easiest ones to go after regarding not impacting the revenue source too much, but would still create a large reduction in NR pressure while keeping a lot of opportunity. Going after the B8's would be the best approach as there are almost 12K antlerless deer licenses sold under just that piece alone to NR's.

 

[Elktrack]

To be clear, most of those 66,600 tags over the 17,500 cap are antlerless only.

In 2021 there were approximately 22,000 either sex tags sold when all the programs and preferences are taken into account.

However, when it comes to boots on the ground and competition for space among hunters it really doesn’t matter whether the person who is afield has an antlerless or either sex tag.

That changes the perspective on the issue a bit. Antlerless tags aren’t nearly as precious to the Montana residents I know unless it’s an extra they pick up along with antlered tags. Most antlerless tags aren’t the primary attraction. Betcha the majority of them are sold only when there’s an antlered tag to go with it.
So it’s really not 66,000 individual NR hunters infiltrating Montana???

 

[Nameless Range]

That changes the perspective on the issue a bit. Antlerless tags aren’t nearly as precious to the Montana residents I know unless it’s an extra they pick up along with antlered tags. Most antlerless tags aren’t the primary attraction. Betcha the majority of them are sold only when there’s an antlered tag to go with it.
So it’s really not 66,000 individual NR hunters infiltrating Montana???

For me, it does and it doesn't. When it comes to that which most Montanans, myself included, bellyache most about - crowding - it isn't clear to me that the fact that most of these tags are antlerless diminishes that. When it comes to the effect on the resource, it doesn't seem to either.

Even if not necessarily 66k individuals, it for sure is increasing hunter-days on the landscape, and bigly, which truly is the best proxy for measuring crowding.

Ultimately, nearly 50 years ago Montanans determined that too many NR were on the landscape. Politicians, injecting the sausage with botulism, have generated a myriad of ways to shove more down our throats.

 

[Ben Lamb]

That changes the perspective on the issue a bit. Antlerless tags aren’t nearly as precious to the Montana residents I know unless it’s an extra they pick up along with antlered tags. Most antlerless tags aren’t the primary attraction. Betcha the majority of them are sold only when there’s an antlered tag to go with it.
So it’s really not 66,000 individual NR hunters infiltrating Montana???

It's around 86K individual NR hunters, by looking at the NR Base Hunting License. That includes all NR hunting including birds & other critters.