MT fwp License increase?

[shoots-straight]

I totally get it, that we need the increase to fund our programs to manage our wildlife, and protect those animals with good wardens that get competitive pay, but I still can't shake that feeling that makes me want me to cut my nose off to spite my face and teach those in the highest positions in the Department where their bread gets its butter.

I come back to reality shortly thereafter and I know deep down all that would happen is our wildlife management, and protection would take it in the shorts.

So for the kids, (myself included) I support the increase's.

 

[1_pointer]

This type of information just makes in crystal clear to me that I need to quit being a NR in all states that have elk. I get what ishoot is saying, but that's a bit easier to say living in state with affordable, OTC resident tags. I'm upset with his sentiment, just my own decisions...

Being an NR just means we, for the most part, only get the play the hand were dealt and it's often from a stacked deck.

 

[brownbear932008]

Well I just paid $1,025 for the big game combo and elk permit and bonus point . Ouch

Ouch I could have done without reading this one 8andcounting knowing I have to send those fees soon. I sure hope I burn those 10 elk points this year is all I can say. Too far in the game to quit now kinda deal.
I really love hunting in MT. but I really am finally looking at other options hit ID. last year and really got into some animals and the cost was much less also looking at NM quite hard. The license cost in MT. has got me to that point were I'm being priced out and I really hate that I have spent thousands in the state over the last 15 years. I hope things turn around in some way so I can continue doing what I love were I love it. My license cost more than double any other portion of my trip to MT. which is really sad and I don't see an end to it in sight right now.

 

[JohnCushman]

I never understood why the funding for state wildlife agencies is largely put on the backs of NR hunters.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I totally get it, that we need the increase to fund our programs to manage our wildlife, and protect those animals with good wardens that get competitive pay, but I still can't shake that feeling that makes me want me to cut my nose off to spite my face and teach those in the highest positions in the Department where their bread gets its butter.

I come back to reality shortly thereafter and I know deep down all that would happen is our wildlife management, and protection would take it in the shorts.

So for the kids, (myself included) I support the increase's.

This is why I love you.

If you want to be able to have the same kind of opportunity you have today, you better get your comments in. We need to impress upon the Legislature that residents want this.

Yes,politics will be played with this bill yes it won't be perfect, but as Randy said, it's a start and the only way it stays a good bill is by a massive showing of force from hunters and anglers.

 

[DreaminofMT6X6s]

I think the cost increase is a huge advantage for the serious elk hunters. Didn't the big game combo used to take a point to draw? Now you can get it every year. So what it cost you a couple hundred bucks more. You have all year to save for it. Make all your meals at home, drive vehicles that are paid for. What's you weekly booze allowance? $30? That's $1560 a year, enough for tags and fuel out there....Point I'm trying to make is the guys who really want to hunt elk every year will go.

Really? Seriously? Spoken like a guy who pays resident fees! Of course FWP needs the money and it's always for the right reasons, but when residents are paying the same price they did roughly 15 years ago and NR fees are going through the roof there's a clear disconnect.

And don't talk to me about financial management! Zero debt and plenty in savings still don't take the sting out of hunting fees.

And thanks Fin for the info. I have seen you post on this in the past. MT will always be special to my and I as our family is there and I'll continue to apply for sheep and goat, but with Wyoming in the windshield my days of hunting Wapiti in MT are pretty well over.

 

[Flatrock]

I skimmed through it quick and didn't see any resident price increases. Is that correct? I noticed sheep, moose and goat tags going to $1,250. Although that is more inline with other states.

 

[1_pointer]

I never understood why the funding for state wildlife agencies is largely put on the backs of NR hunters.

It's really a pretty good, and simple, 'business' model. Elected folks set the price for folks who can't vote against them. That makes it pretty easy to continually add increases to the NR tag price. Pretty easy to set the numbers for both to generate the money you need. If you need more, you know who's going to pay the difference as they can't vote you in or out of office.

Note I did not say anywhere that the prices should be equal for Rs and NRs. I'm more than fine with a price discrepancy. It's the regular lopsidedness of the increases that I find bothersome. But, I'll pay it as that's all I can do if I want to hunt elsewhere.

 

[DreaminofMT6X6s]

Good explanation 1_pointer.

 

[antlerradar]

Some thought on tying license fees to the CPI.
It would take power away from the legislature. I can see how this would be a good thing but it would have little chance of passing. The LFAC was very careful not recommend anything that would hurt the chances of the bill passing.
It would act and a guaranteed pay increase for FWP. A pay increase should be earned not guaranteed. Pay increase are a powerful motivator to do the best job you can. With fees tied to The CPI you could lose some accountability.
I see some DIY hunters posting that they are concerned about the price of the NR license and that you are looking at other states. Thank you for posting. You are why I supported capping the NR price at 1000. Montana needs hunters like you.

Antlerradar

 

[brownbear932008]

1_pointer hit the nail on the head. But the real question is. Is this a bad way to fund your state wildlife agency in the scope of things? I think it is bad all the way around well minus the political gains to not piss off voters, there are not as many NR's buying these license as Res which seems like bad business to me.
This is a western state trend I know both of the eastern states I have resided in would never make it on NR dollars not enough license sold. I think these western states need to totally revise the system's they have set up or it's only going to get worse with the rising cost of tags. Eventually you hit a point to where no matter how good the hunt is the average guy is gonna pass on it and do something else.

 

[brownbear932008]

Some of the bills this year IMO are a start like BIGFIN stated. Hopefully and I think you guys will give your politicians a call or email to get the ball a rolling in the right direction. Nobody wants to pay higher fees Res or NR no doubt. This applies to anything in life. Antlerradar I agree totally with you Montana needs all the tourism dollars they can bring in with the economy these days lots of local businesses depend on out of state hunter dollars to make it. Should be an interesting year to watch some of these bills. Keep up the fight guys!

 

[NoWiser]

I'm right at the tipping point as far as NR license costs are concerned. The price is the only reason I haven't hunted Montana elk yet, and have opted for cheaper states instead. It's almost to the point where I can not justify going at all.

Screwing the NR is really a shortsighted plan. When you price the average guy out of hunting, you are losing a lot of people who would otherwise support your state, whether it is through fighting anti hunters, joining conservation organizations, or just plain spending their money in your state. It's not good for anyone, including the residents, even though they think they are getting a pretty good deal right now.

It saddens me to come to the conclusion that when it is time to introduce my kids to hunting, I'll most likely not be able to afford to take them out of state. That's fine, but when that point comes, I doubt I'll be leaving Minnesota to do any hunting at all. We'll just hunt deer and grouse here. I'm guessing it's going to be hard to justify to my wife going elk hunting with a kid or two when, for the same price as the tags alone, the whole family could go to Disneyland.

 

[antlerradar]

I was far less concerned about the tourism dollars then that the DIYs that are choosing other states are quickly being replaced by pay to play nonresidents.

Antlerradar

 

[Straight Arrow]

Elected folks set the price for folks who can't vote against them.

1_pointer, actually the big increase in Montana NR licenses was due to a referendum promoted with the requisite number of signatures and then voted in by the voting public, not the legislature. Elected folks were not involved in that one.

 

[shoots-straight]

The FACTS are that the state of Montana makes more money now with less NR hunters.

Now considering the FACT that much of Western Montana Elk were in a tailspin downward on much of our public lands, less NR hunters paying more helped our game come back somewhat. We're not out of the woods yet, but better off.

There is no doubt that we need to have more skin in the game. The problem is with the department and it's attitude towards us the Montana resident hunter. We don't seem to matter much. I doubt an increase in tags will make much of a difference either.

Most of the bills dealing with tag increases are geared towards the resident hunter.

I too would embrace a NR fee cap for awhile. I would like to see a sun set on that in no more than 6 years. We need to keep it in line with other states.

 

[HighDesertSage]

Really? Seriously? Spoken like a guy who pays resident fees! Of course FWP needs the money and it's always for the right reasons, but when residents are paying the same price they did roughly 15 years ago and NR fees are going through the roof there's a clear disconnect.

And don't talk to me about financial management! Zero debt and plenty in savings still don't take the sting out of hunting fees.

And thanks Fin for the info. I have seen you post on this in the past. MT will always be special to my and I as our family is there and I'll continue to apply for sheep and goat, but with Wyoming in the windshield my days of hunting Wapiti in MT are pretty well over.

I hunt other states other than CO as a NR. Also, I have only been a resident of CO for one season now....Tags need to go up all the way around. The point I'm trying to make is the guys who want to hunt elk every year out west will find a way to do so.

 

[gwhunter]

The point I'm trying to make is the guys who want to hunt elk every year out west will find a way to do so.

I was just complaining about the fact that you have to buy a license in order to buy a preference point in AZ. Well, all that does is make it so I don't put in for points in multiple states. While yes, I would like everything to be super cheap and build points and buy licenses in multiple states, no matter how expensive things get I'm still going to find a way to go hunting. It may not be in multiple states, or for multiple species, but since getting bit by the elk hunting bug I'm going to be going every couple of years at the minimum. If it eventually came down to it where the only tags available for me to afford were in a unit filled with 100 guys and only 1 elk and those were the circumstances I was faced with I would still do it. In other words, I want to hunt elk and I will always find a way to do it.

 

[teamhoyt]

Nobody wants to pay higher fees Res or NR no doubt. This applies to anything in life. !

I believe there are plenty of guys that Want(support) higher RESIDENT fees. I am one of those guys. Its just high time we do our share and I would easily support Paying double what We currently do, However that isn't necessary. Point is we need to pay our own share. I posted a link a few months ago from the FWP website that was explaining the finance situation and funding for the future options. If my memory service me The FWP specifically said that raising NR fees is NOT and option, nor should it be.

 

[Beartooth83]

For those interested, here's the link if you want to listen to what was discussed in the hearing.

http://montanalegislature.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=17&clip_id=14926