Non resident Landowner incentive.

[cgasner1]

Honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of residents wouldn’t be against it. Knowing if they did that to non residents my rutting mule deer hunt could be in jeopardy next

 

[brockel]

Change season structure. Anything else is lipstick on a pig.

Agreed. Now convince residents to buy into that. Because again fwp will not do anything that’s going to piss of residents

 

[Elky Welky]

Ya I think it’s a start. Take 17000 divided by 6 and you are at 2,833. Now I don’t know this for sure but I’m betting there are more than 2,833 deer/elk combos walking the hills opening weekend of rifle but maybe not. Have to start somewhere.

FWP reported over 59,000 nonresident deer and elk hunters in Montana last year. That 17,000 cap only applies to the combo license, and doesn't touch all the B-tags, extra doe tags, etc. that are available. There was a bill heard in the same hearing as 533 that asked FWP to cap those unlimited tags as well to help stop the bleeding. It was tabled.

 

[xcskier_hunter]

Would this apply to non resident landowners too? Seems odd to create legislation that would prevent someone from hunting land they own after they've reached some arbitrary day limit set by the Montana legislature when that landowner still possesses a valid tag. I can't imagine the uproar that would occur if this was proposed in a midwestern state. If anything this will increase wildlife harboring on private land.

As others have stated, it seems like it makes much more sense for season structures to be adjusted rather than creating this arbitrary 14 day limit which is the same for someone that has just a deer tag or the lucky person that might draw deer, elk, and antelope tags. At least separating antelope from deer and elk in the bill would help.

 

[BuzzH]

I don’t care if they hunt 1 day or 14 days of their two week window. You are spreading the pressure out if you make two week windows that have to be applied for. Instead of 10,000 hunters in the field opening day you have a quarter of that if you split the 17,000 tags evenly between 2 weeks chunks of our ridiculous 12 week long season and make non residents apply for the two week chunk they intend to hunt. I’m not saying let the hunters pick their dates. I’m saying a hard number in the regulations like October 28-November 11

What's the real problem?

17,000 NR's...or 197,610 Residents?

Take away from the 17,000 NR's who go guided which is a significant number VS hardly any of the 197,610 who go guided. Take out another bunch that may have leases, hunt strictly private of friends.

You're down to maybe what, 10-11 thousand, at most, NR's spread out over 12 weeks...

I think its a start and I'm not trying to discourage R's from taking that step, at all...go for it.

It's just not going to come close so solving the real issue, the issue is 197,000 (not counting deer b and elk b) tags and Montana's resident population growing significantly from the Resident side.

 

[TheJason]

Agreed. Now convince residents to buy into that. Because again fwp will not do anything that’s going to piss of residents

I’m not convincing you guys of anything.

And like Buzz, if you want to pass it have at it. But, don’t be surprised when it’s a massive amount of energy for little to no gain.

 

[Elky Welky]

What's the real problem?

17,000 NR's...or 197,610 Residents?

Take away from the 17,000 NR's who go guided which is a significant number VS hardly any of the 197,610 who go guided. Take out another bunch that may have leases, hunt strictly private of friends.

You're down to maybe what, 10-11 thousand, at most, NR's spread out over 12 weeks...

I think its a start and I'm not trying to discourage R's from taking that step, at all...go for it.

It's just not going to come close so solving the real issue, the issue is 197,000 (not counting deer b and elk b) tags and Montana's resident population growing significantly from the Resident side.

This is inaccurate. Nearly 1/3 hunters in Montana last year was a nonresident, and resident numbers are actually decreasing. These numbers come from FWP. Further, wildlife is a resource held in public trust for the citizens of the state, first and foremost. I suggest reading Don Thomas's article on the subject in Outside Bozeman. https://outsidebozeman.com/activities/hunting/resident-rights

 

[brockel]

I’m not convincing you guys of anything.

And like Buzz, if you want to pass it have at it. But, don’t be surprised when it’s a massive amount of energy for little to no gain.

I understand it does nothing and residents are the real problem. Look back on everything I’ve ever posted on this forum. I continue to say residents are the problem. But resident opportunity is going to be the last thing that goes

 

[brockel]

What's the real problem?

17,000 NR's...or 197,610 Residents?

Take away from the 17,000 NR's who go guided which is a significant number VS hardly any of the 197,610 who go guided. Take out another bunch that may have leases, hunt strictly private of friends.

You're down to maybe what, 10-11 thousand, at most, NR's spread out over 12 weeks...

I think its a start and I'm not trying to discourage R's from taking that step, at all...go for it.

It's just not going to come close so solving the real issue, the issue is 197,000 (not counting deer b and elk b) tags and Montana's resident population growing significantly from the Resident side.

See above comment

 

[BuzzH]

See above comment

Hang tight, I believe you posted the numbers...

 

[rogerthat]

I think we are all in agreement that the season structure change is the end solution . I think we aren’t all in agreement that many be even just the slightest change in disposition and attitudes as indicated by some of these bills is anything to be optimistic about. I’m feeling a little more optimistic…not much but maybe a little.

 

[Mountain Man]

So I grew up in Colorado and it is very interesting to me watching so many MT residents have a hard time wrapping their brains around how to limit NRs to 14 days. It is quite easy…they are called separate seasons with specific dates that a certain quantity of tags are valid for. It’s not as hard as many people are making it out to be.

 

[SAJ-99]

I think we are all in agreement that the season structure change is the end solution . I think we aren’t all in agreement that many be even just the slightest change in disposition and attitudes as indicated by some of these bills is anything to be optimistic about. I’m feeling a little more optimistic…not much but maybe a little.

Minus Doug's reading comprehension problem, every NR on this thread has suggested doing things that are MORE restrictive to them, and Rs (minus one or two) have admitted the real problem. If it passes, fine. It doesn't affect me or the vast majority of NRs. Even with Deer/Elk and an Antelope tag, I wouldn't hunt more than 14 days. I just don't like the random choosing of days. That would make opening day a shitshow when elk, deer, and antelope all overlap. I would rather they follow what Ben suggested and split the seasons into one or two week blocks and the NR hunter has to chose the block. Of course, not the privileged Rs of course. They still get their 11wks to try to kill something.

What annoys me a little is that people go to the meetings (and later HT) and say the resource is getting hammered and something needs to be done and FWP isn't listening. Then there is this optimism around something that isn't going to do anything for the resource. All you have done is agree on who to kick in the balls in 2024, and you're happy it isn't you. Fine, but it sure doesn't help the resource. Just be honest about it.

 

[DFS]

So I grew up in Colorado and it is very interesting to me watching so many MT residents have a hard time wrapping their brains around how to limit NRs to 14 days. It is quite easy…they are called separate seasons with specific dates that a certain quantity of tags are valid for. It’s not as hard as many people are making it out to be.

It’s not hard to wrap your brain around. It is hard to get mtfwp to acknowledge anything needs to change, it gets even harder when any changes have to be legislated. The whole system is broke and I don’t see a way to fix it.

 

[brockel]

Hang tight, I believe you posted the numbers...

These ones?

 

[SAJ-99]

This is inaccurate. Nearly 1/3 hunters in Montana last year was a nonresident, and resident numbers are actually decreasing. These numbers come from FWP. Further, wildlife is a resource held in public trust for the citizens of the state, first and foremost. I suggest reading Don Thomas's article on the subject in Outside Bozeman. https://outsidebozeman.com/activities/hunting/resident-rights

View attachment 271020

Exactly. Cut the tags!!! Take the Native licenses out of that total, take out the student licenses, take out the youth licenses, and don't allow NRs to buy B licenses. All good.
You and I know why they don't...$$$. FWP is forced to rely on the NRs because Rs are too cheap to pay a reasonable price for a tag.

 

[rogerthat]

Minus Doug's reading comprehension problem, every NR on this thread has suggested doing things that are MORE restrictive to them, and Rs (minus one or two) have admitted the real problem. If it passes, fine. It doesn't affect me or the vast majority of NRs. Even with Deer/Elk and an Antelope tag, I wouldn't hunt more than 14 days. I just don't like the random choosing of days. That would make opening day a shitshow when elk, deer, and antelope all overlap. I would rather they follow what Ben suggested and split the seasons into one or two week blocks and the NR hunter has to chose the block. Of course, not the privileged Rs of course. They still get their 11wks to try to kill something.

What annoys me a little is that people go to the meetings (and later HT) and say the resource is getting hammered and something needs to be done and FWP isn't listening. Then there is this optimism around something that isn't going to do anything for the resource. All you have done is agree on who to kick in the balls in 2024, and you're happy it isn't you. Fine, but it sure doesn't help the resource. Just be honest about it.

Ok….I’m sorry they are kicking you in the rocks instead of me.(maybe not completely…see? Honesty) I am hopeful this is the tide turning in favor of the resource. You have to acknowledge that even just proposed legislation in my lifetime has always been an increase in opportunity, screw the resource, so these bills that are not increased opportunity is a new much welcomed deal…however I acknowledge they are most likely figurative nad smashers for the nr with minimal impacts to the resource. Also this has zero chance of passing imo. Rightly so

 

[Ben Lamb]

Exactly. Cut the tags!!! Take the Native licenses out of that total, take out the student licenses, take out the youth licenses, and don't allow NRs to buy B licenses. All good.
You and I know why they don't...$$$. FWP is forced to rely on the NRs because Rs are too cheap to pay a reasonable price for a tag.

The issue with just cutting/capping tags is you end up defunding core programs like Habitat MT, Block Management, UGHEP, Migratory Bird. Those are all earmarked with NR license dollars and changing those caps will hurt actual conservation and access programs. That was the problem with 3 of the 4 bills up when 533 was up.

Furthermore, we tried to simply cap the NR reduced licenses and remove the NR relative entirely this session and it made it through the hearing but then got summarily tabled because a committee member didn't want it to be harder for his son to come home to hunt.

While these decisions are easy to make on a forum, the real world application of these discussions runs into a Buzzsaw of fiscal reality that nobody seems to want to consider.

It's not a good trade to eliminate millions in access and conservation so that we can say we cut tags. We're working with the senate and house committees to get a study bill on this for the interim so we can all sit down and look at how to cut some NR tags, while also keeping an eye on the budget, and our core conservation and access programs.

In the meantime, there's going to be a solid effort from Ag, Outfitters and Hunters to find some common ground on the season setting proposals for the 24/25 seasons that look to restructure some opportunity, hopefully reduce the amount of time open for elk hunting, etc.

 

[BuzzH]

These ones?
View attachment 271023

And the Non Residents as well.

Looks like base license's have increased and I think a big part of the pressure problem is Residents (and in some cases NR's) having a pocket full of deer b and elk b tags.

It would do more good from a pressure standpoint to cap NR's to 10% of the deer b and elk b tags sold, AND reduce the over-all number of elk b and deer b tags across the board. I mean 62,000+ deer b and 26,000 elk b. Pretty close to 90K use days if everyone only hunted a day...450,000 use days if Residents hunt those tags even on average 5 days each.

It takes a while to fill 10 deer b tags, an A tag, a General elk, and an elk-b tag. Lots of days in the woods to get that done.

 

[rogerthat]

The issue with just cutting/capping tags is you end up defunding core programs like Habitat MT, Block Management, UGHEP, Migratory Bird. Those are all earmarked with NR license dollars and changing those caps will hurt actual conservation and access programs. That was the problem with 3 of the 4 bills up when 533 was up.

Furthermore, we tried to simply cap the NR reduced licenses and remove the NR relative entirely this session and it made it through the hearing but then got summarily tabled because a committee member didn't want it to be harder for his son to come home to hunt.

While these decisions are easy to make on a forum, the real world application of these discussions runs into a Buzzsaw of fiscal reality that nobody seems to want to consider.

It's not a good trade to eliminate millions in access and conservation so that we can say we cut tags. We're working with the senate and house committees to get a study bill on this for the interim so we can all sit down and look at how to cut some NR tags, while also keeping an eye on the budget, and our core conservation and access programs.

In the meantime, there's going to be a solid effort from Ag, Outfitters and Hunters to find some common ground on the season setting proposals for the 25/26 seasons that look to restructure some opportunity, hopefully reduce the amount of time open for elk hunting, etc.

Yup, The season structure changes are the solution. I could devise a system that sells a chit load of tags reduces demand on the resource, allows everyone to still hunt a lot and restores quality hunting on public land in Montana really easily. But no one wants to give up the current season structure. Hence round and round we go with band aids. But of course I know you know all this Ben.