Non-resident outfitter license (MT) Bill is up for hearing 2/2/2021 (SB 143)

[JLS]

Maybe if this passed those elk will jump back over the fence on public and I won’t run into a guy from the Midwest on the county rd disgruntled because he had no idea there would be that many people at a trailhead in Montana.

This is truly one of the dumbest things I’ve read on Hunt Talk.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

This is truly amazing. Sounds like most of you want to run our public lands into the ground and you don’t even pay taxes here. Double maskers if you will. “I’m a public landowner” lol maybe in your state. Elk are on private land now more then ever, for a reason. It’s not even comparable to when there were guaranteed outfitter tags over a decade ago. Huh I wonder why? Human pressure with the help of predators that had the help of humans. Some people have gained monetarily as well as built notoriety by publicizing our public lands as well. Seems slimy to me. Our public lands have become inundated with people. Non residents, old residents, new residents but no new guides? Really the same allotments and usage for guides on BLM, state and forest going back decades. It’s people. Masses of people being sold the public land dream. Why are outfitters that take clients on private hunt miles from public painted with this broad brush as villains. Those clients that have one week and save all year to hunt instead of going on a cruise are now rich elites? When is the last time any of you talked to a outfitters or guides from a neutral position??? How about the guide who lost 10-15% of client draw the past few years pre COVID due to an excess of the diy non residents that show up with no plan? Thaycall an outfitter while there here poking for information because they seen more hunters and kennetrek tacks than elk or elk tracks. Or the outfitter who lost multiple groups last year to COVID. What about him? Meanwhile his yearly loyal clients spend a pile of money in those communities. Most of which being processing and taxidermy. Two things most nr diy hunters do not invest in Montana by and large. Never Mind guide employment and those clients spending money in town during the week at motels, cafes and sporting stores. That money does stay in those areas. I think loyalty to our wildlife and residents should take precedence over diy non residents. It’s a privledge to hunt here as a non resident. Give the guide industry some better footing, allow our clogged public ground some room to breath for our tax paying locals, wildlife and those lucky 40% diy non residents. The numbers also don’t indicate that nr diy are going to be losing out on the draw like some are propagating. How many already go to outfitters? Now your guaranteeing you have a 40% chance of coming here as a nr diy hunter. Every other year most likely. That’s not good enough? There are other states you can hunt. You don’t just have to hammer Montana. If you want to hunt here every year, then move here and participate in our year round economy, instead of taking a natural resource from us for a fraction of the cost and head back home. Maybe if this passed those elk will jump back over the fence on public and I won’t run into a guy from the Midwest on the county rd disgruntled because he had no idea there would be that many people at a trailhead in Montana. “Seems like Colorado up here” he says. There is something for all of us in this bill. I hope it passes

Welcome to HT...I think

 

[WIbiggame]

Welcome to HT...I think

I was waiting for @JohnCushman to come and welcome him One of the more interesting first posts I have seen.

 

[Jb89]

Some of the dumber things i have read lately is all this miss-information surrounding this bill on all these sites. Or resident public land hunters against this? This bill is what’s best for Montanans, period.
I’m sick of unprepared nonresidents sold this public land package. They shoot a bull in 80 degrees not even knowing where to start when it gets real. Then ask me or many other friends I have how much would it cost for a pack out as we pass on the trail. Meanwhile elk is spoiling and I couldn’t even get horses there if I wanted. Is that ethics? They must have missed that memo on an episode of fresh tracks.
Outfitter or not, whatever. I can see you guys don’t like em and thats fine. What’s not fine is people piling in here because the tag is easy to acquire making the hunting tougher on everyone and folks not taking their trip and preparation serious. Not all, but entirely too many. The elk numbers are good in most units. They have been displaced to lower country the past 10 years. The first 5 miles of public gets pounded. Elk moved down to structured private land where there is less pressure and ag ground. Outfitter camps are typically a day ride in on public from what I have found. This makes it tough for a foot hunter to overlap with a guide service that far in. The problem is In the middle ground. My friends and I in high school would get into elk regularly after school in this middle ground. You cant even park at some of those trailheads on a Tuesday these days. If that works for you guys good luck. Maybe you guys get scared in the backcountry and it comforting to know you have friends that dress just like you around every corner

 

[hogcarpy]

Emailed everyone on the committee today. Hope my 2 cents helps.

 

[Kiwi]

I also emailed everyone on the committee. Not sure it will make a difference, or if it’s even my place to get involved, but I sure want to plan more DIY hunting in the great state of MT.

 

[WIbiggame]

Or resident public land hunters against this?

Limited sample size but the 8 I have called and spoken to about this are more pist about this than I am. So I would say you are probably the miss informed one on that part of this topic.

Also in your first post you said why is everyone painting all outfitters with a broad brush? That is exactly what your above post just did to all DIY guys.

Clearly you don't like the DIY NR guys that is fine but call it what it is and don't try to spin it to something else to make it sound better.

I don't think anyone on here has anything against the outfitters in general. What it seems like everyone has against them (if you read through the comments) is the outfitters looking for this government subsidy or welfare whichever term you want to use is order to help them survive.

Maybe you guys get scared in the backcountry and it comforting to know you have friends that dress just like you around every corner

Your credibility has all but been lost after this. Mr Albus although not overly popular in this thread atleast talked with some respect to the members.

 

[WIbiggame]

What’s not fine is people piling in here because the tag is easy to acquire

Isn't that what the outfitters are looking to to do? Make "the tag even easier" for their clients to acquire?

 

[Ben Lamb]

To whomever asked about being able to figure out how to use the system we have and be successful;

There are many of us that use the current system and are surviving. Those of us who its working for are older and established outfitters. I have a large client base and had to essentially double my client numbers to make up for the draw. I have people who come every 2nd and 3rd year and are on a rotation. This does not work for younger less established business'.

Unfortunately I must be gone from computer for a few days, duty calls an I must go to the other ranch and take care of some business, so if you ask a question and get no response that is why.

Eric, do you realize that you've essentially just outlined every new business owner's dilemma? Young business owners should have to be in competition with the more established businesses. It's the economic system that made America the world's richest nation.

 

[Ben Lamb]

This is truly amazing. Sounds like most of you want to run our public lands into the ground and you don’t even pay taxes here. Double maskers if you will. “I’m a public landowner” lol maybe in your state. Elk are on private land now more then ever, for a reason. It’s not even comparable to when there were guaranteed outfitter tags over a decade ago. Huh I wonder why? Human pressure with the help of predators that had the help of humans. Some people have gained monetarily as well as built notoriety by publicizing our public lands as well. Seems slimy to me. Our public lands have become inundated with people. Non residents, old residents, new residents but no new guides? Really the same allotments and usage for guides on BLM, state and forest going back decades. It’s people. Masses of people being sold the public land dream. Why are outfitters that take clients on private hunt miles from public painted with this broad brush as villains. Those clients that have one week and save all year to hunt instead of going on a cruise are now rich elites? When is the last time any of you talked to a outfitters or guides from a neutral position??? How about the guide who lost 10-15% of client draw the past few years pre COVID due to an excess of the diy non residents that show up with no plan? Thaycall an outfitter while there here poking for information because they seen more hunters and kennetrek tacks than elk or elk tracks. Or the outfitter who lost multiple groups last year to COVID. What about him? Meanwhile his yearly loyal clients spend a pile of money in those communities. Most of which being processing and taxidermy. Two things most nr diy hunters do not invest in Montana by and large. Never Mind guide employment and those clients spending money in town during the week at motels, cafes and sporting stores. That money does stay in those areas. I think loyalty to our wildlife and residents should take precedence over diy non residents. It’s a privledge to hunt here as a non resident. Give the guide industry some better footing, allow our clogged public ground some room to breath for our tax paying locals, wildlife and those lucky 40% diy non residents. The numbers also don’t indicate that nr diy are going to be losing out on the draw like some are propagating. How many already go to outfitters? Now your guaranteeing you have a 40% chance of coming here as a nr diy hunter. Every other year most likely. That’s not good enough? There are other states you can hunt. You don’t just have to hammer Montana. If you want to hunt here every year, then move here and participate in our year round economy, instead of taking a natural resource from us for a fraction of the cost and head back home. Maybe if this passed those elk will jump back over the fence on public and I won’t run into a guy from the Midwest on the county rd disgruntled because he had no idea there would be that many people at a trailhead in Montana. “Seems like Colorado up here” he says. There is something for all of us in this bill. I hope it passes

You had the same opportunities as every other business owner: stabilization grants, PPE grants, loans from CARES Act, etc, to help ensure you remained afloat. If you didn't take advantage of that, then you shouldn't be calling for more handouts from the gov't.

What makes the outfitting industry more deserving of gov't handouts than the restaurant industry?

 

[Wildabeest]

Some of the dumber things i have read lately is all this miss-information surrounding this bill on all these sites. Or resident public land hunters against this? This bill is what’s best for Montanans, period.
I’m sick of unprepared nonresidents sold this public land package. They shoot a bull in 80 degrees not even knowing where to start when it gets real. Then ask me or many other friends I have how much would it cost for a pack out as we pass on the trail. Meanwhile elk is spoiling and I couldn’t even get horses there if I wanted. Is that ethics? They must have missed that memo on an episode of fresh tracks.
Outfitter or not, whatever. I can see you guys don’t like em and thats fine. What’s not fine is people piling in here because the tag is easy to acquire making the hunting tougher on everyone and folks not taking their trip and preparation serious. Not all, but entirely too many. The elk numbers are good in most units. They have been displaced to lower country the past 10 years. The first 5 miles of public gets pounded. Elk moved down to structured private land where there is less pressure and ag ground. Outfitter camps are typically a day ride in on public from what I have found. This makes it tough for a foot hunter to overlap with a guide service that far in. The problem is In the middle ground. My friends and I in high school would get into elk regularly after school in this middle ground. You cant even park at some of those trailheads on a Tuesday these days. If that works for you guys good luck. Maybe you guys get scared in the backcountry and it comforting to know you have friends that dress just like you around every corner

You aren’t wrong with many of the issues and challenges facing Mt big game hunting. But I fail to see how this bill would address any of them. Simply shifting tags from DIY NR to guided NR who can afford a guided hunt will do absolutely nothing to help. Yes, there are DIY hunters who get in over their heads. But I’d submit that proportionally there are just as many unethical guides / outfitters who are posting public land, intimidating and harassing DIY hunters on public land and illegally herding game off of public onto private.

Most folks here don’t have an issue with outfitting. It’s not how most of us choose to hunt, but if others choose that then more power to them. What we do have an issue with is outfitters acting like they are somehow entitled to a disprotionate share of a public resource for no other reason than it puts more $ in your pocket. None of the arguments (or slanders in your case) put forth would lead any rational person to believe otherwise. You want to bring up all the general issue with big game management in MT as if we should just assume that this bill would solve them all, but you don’t even attempt to address how this bill would solve those things. The folks opposed to this welfare money grab by your industry are committed to making sure our elected officials understand that. If they choose to go along with this scam for political reasons, they won’t do it because they didn’t know the truth.

 

[Pilgrim]

Here's an idea: let's come up with a way to provide fewer people with opportunities to enjoy our public land. With fewer people using it, fewer will care about preserving it. Then we can sell it off to the billionaires and developers and nobody will be able to hunt it. A win-win.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Some of the dumber things i have read lately is all this miss-information surrounding this bill on all these sites. Or resident public land hunters against this? This bill is what’s best for Montanans, period.
I’m sick of unprepared nonresidents sold this public land package. They shoot a bull in 80 degrees not even knowing where to start when it gets real. Then ask me or many other friends I have how much would it cost for a pack out as we pass on the trail. Meanwhile elk is spoiling and I couldn’t even get horses there if I wanted. Is that ethics? They must have missed that memo on an episode of fresh tracks.
Outfitter or not, whatever. I can see you guys don’t like em and thats fine. What’s not fine is people piling in here because the tag is easy to acquire making the hunting tougher on everyone and folks not taking their trip and preparation serious. Not all, but entirely too many. The elk numbers are good in most units. They have been displaced to lower country the past 10 years. The first 5 miles of public gets pounded. Elk moved down to structured private land where there is less pressure and ag ground. Outfitter camps are typically a day ride in on public from what I have found. This makes it tough for a foot hunter to overlap with a guide service that far in. The problem is In the middle ground. My friends and I in high school would get into elk regularly after school in this middle ground. You cant even park at some of those trailheads on a Tuesday these days. If that works for you guys good luck. Maybe you guys get scared in the backcountry and it comforting to know you have friends that dress just like you around every corner

“Some of the dumber things I have read lately”

Keep typing..

 

[Ben Lamb]

An email from one of the people who leads the trade industry group pushing this bill.

The CPI adjusted to be rounded down in 2015 with Welborn's HB 140, which MOGA worked on and testified in support of.

I'm getting dizzy, turning in all these circles.

Edit: The B10 was added to the CPI pricing, and MOGA testified in support of the bill.

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2015/billpdf/HB0140.pdf

 

[Ben Lamb]

Here's the MOGA message when they falsely claimed that FWP was supporting their tag theft back in March of 2020: https://www.montanaoutfitters.org/gov-bullock-denies-request-to-issue-addl-non-resident-licenses/

Back then it was just a few more NR's coming to hunt, and that's a good thing! Now, it's "you don't need more NR's hunting on your lands, give us all the tags!"

A consistent message out of MOGA would be nice for once.

As far as the politics of this goes, I know a lot of Dems that are eager for this to land on the Governor's desk. Nothing says "FU" to working class Montanans like signing a wildly unpopular bill, or voting for it. If I were Governor Gianforte, I'd be pissed that we're 4 weeks into the session, and the majority party is already running headlong into a war with hunters.

 

[MTGomer]

Montana residents are the ones that should be most opposed to this. It’s THEIR ELK that would be privatized.

 

[Gerald Martin]

What makes the outfitting industry more deserving of gov't handouts than Gerald Martin?

Fixed it for you.. Pick me, pick me. I will take the money. Then I could afford to hunt way back there where the outfitters get them big bulls.

Oh wait. I already do.

Helping my NR buddy pack out his first DIY bull. Had a good conversation with the outfitter on the ridge as we were waiting to take up the blood trail. They were stalking the same herd but started two hours after us. Good dude. We run into each other every couple of years on the mountain. I have referred quite a few people his way who were wanting to have an outfitted hunt.

 

[peterk1234]

Please take this with a grain of salt because I know very little about this. Actually, nothing. But sometimes an uneducated view can provide an unbiased idea or two.

I guess the first question I have is what is best for the species and the public land being used? If it is for the health of the animal then I think it needs to be considered.

Is this just being limited to elk hunting? If so, why? That would not seem logical.

Second question I have is what is the rationale behind this? I mean what did the politician pushing this bill provide for a reason? I'm sure he provided one and it is buried in this thread. I just never stumbled on it.

Also, I am a strong believer in letting the market dictate things, as long as it not destructive to the resources it is using. If an outfitter is providing a valuable service it will thrive and be profitable. It should not require the protection of government. If it is run poorly then it should cease to exist.

Does this bill provide for some additional taxation to be paid by the outfitter? One would think it be only reasonable that such protections come with some form of payment to the state. These funds would go to further improve the resources from which the outfitter benefits.

And if this is truly just a play to provide guaranteed business to outfitters, than why not push the outfitters off of public lands and require them to only guide on private? This here would seem like a logical compromise if we insist on government intervention to protect an industry.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I guess the first question I have is what is best for the species and the public land being used? If it is for the health of the animal then I think it needs to be considered.

There is no less pressure on the resource with this bill. It just ensures that up to 60% of NR tags get funneled to outfitted hunters.

The effect in terms of public land crowding will be mixed. There may be less DIY NR’s dispersed across public lands. There will probably be more outfitted hunters in the area that an outfitted is permitted to camp.
It won’t affect how many people are in the woods, just where they spend their time.

 

[Gerald Martin]

And if this is truly just a play to provide guaranteed business to outfitters, than why not push the outfitters off of public lands and require them to only guide on private? This here would seem like a logical compromise if we insist on government intervention to protect an industry.

Outfitting falls under the multiple use mandate for public lands and is an appropriate industry. There are plenty of private land outfitters who would like nothing more than to see public land outfitters forced out of business because that would ensure less competition for clients.

Outfitters don’t deserve to be forced out of business.
Neither do they deserve priority for limited public trust resources.