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

[TOGIE]

quite frankly, i can't take ANYONE seriously who is complaining about NR DIY crowding unless their state has UNLIMITED OVER THE COUNTER tags

and even if a person's state did have unlimited over the counter tags and they want to complain about NR crowding they'd have to recognize their states own population explosion and realize much of that crowding is also due to RESIDENTS

anyway...

 

[Ben Lamb]

quite frankly, i can't take ANYONE seriously who is complaining about NR DIY crowding unless their state has UNLIMITED OVER THE COUNTER tags

and even if a person's state did have unlimited over the counter tags and want to complain about NR crowding they'd have to recognize their states own population explosion and realize much of that crowding is also due to RESIDENTS

anyway...

Those 2200 DIY NR deer hunters are just ruining everything in MT, don't ya know. #biggesteyerollever

 

[Gerald Martin]

Those 2200 DIY NR deer hunters are just ruining everything in MT, don't ya know. #biggesteyerollever

They kill way more deer than 140,000 residents.... they’re non-native killers imported from all parts of the world. They live to wear flat brims and wound deer with thousand yard shots from 6.5 Creedmors.
And they don’t leave gates the way they found them. Always closing the open and opening the closed.

 

[mtmuley]

Region one and two are basically only a good place to take a nature walk when it comes to elk hunting.

I would like all hunters, residents and non residents to keep this in mind. mtmuley

 

[Brad W]

The real issue facing the outfitting industry in MT now isn’t the tag allocation. The problem is that their traditional value proposition has been undercut by the rise of the hunting media that shows how attainable a DIY western hunt can be for the average hunter. Randy and those who have followed in his footsteps have demystified western hunting. Prior to their video’s, podcasts and articles, and the emergence of goHunt, hunting in the west was very intimidating. Outfitters made those dream hunts available to everyone but that mystique has vanished for a good portion of the population.

I think that MT outfitters still have a strong value proposition for a lot of people, but they are not doing a good job promoting. This was highlighted in the meeting by one of the female outfitters who spoke out. She said “We are a second generation outfitter...we take six hunters at a time and we don’t advertise or do anything like that.” I was honestly sad to see that. I am not a 2nd generation outfitter but I am pretty confident that advertising to build a broader customer base is an important part of passing on your business to a third generation. Posting pictures of big bucks your clients have shot on instagram is not enough. Arizona has a much tougher business climate for outfitters but I would argue they have the most vibrant outfitting businesses in the west. They don’t receive any special consideration, competition is fierce, tag numbers are tiny compared to MT, and draw odds for NR are grim, plus almost all of the best hunting is on public ground. Despite these challenges, outfitters like Steve Chappell, Duwane Adams, Jay Scott, etc, etc, etc have created very successful businesses. The only Montana outfitter I can name is Remi Warren and he isn’t even a resident. Do you think he has any trouble booking hunts?

Montana is an absolutely incredible state with phenomenal hunting opportunity’s. If MOGA spent more time pushing that narrative and highlighting the value that outfitters have for their clients the schedules would take care of themselves. Other than Remi Warren I have never heard a Montana outfitter on a podcast. I consume a lot of hunting media.

The last thing I will say is that everyone, including MOGA, should be focused on making the pie bigger. Issues like predator management and forest management (fire management in particular) are huge issues we should be tackling together.

 

[Brad W]

The Ruby Mountains provide the perfect example for the problems facing public land. Most of the northern half of the Rubies is a dense, homogenous Douglas fir forest now that provides very poor habitat for deer and elk. Most of the Ruby elk herd (roughly 500 elk) sits in the timber on the north end of the range at the base of the mountains and then walks out onto the Morse land at night to graze in the fields and drink from the canal. That situation has nothing to do with DIY hunters, resident or non-resident, and it is a common problem across the state.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I would like all hunters, residents and non residents to keep this in mind. mtmuley

I hope I didn’t let the cat out of the bag. At least I didn’t name any specific region that general elk hunters head to in vast numbers. I hate it when computer jockeys divulge hard to learn info.

 

[mtmuley]

I hope I didn’t let the cat out of the bag. At least I didn’t name any specific region that general elk hunters head to in vast numbers. I hate it when computer jockeys divulge hard to learn info.

Gonna be over run with outfitters now I bet. mtmuley

 

[tjones]

Your wrong on one point. I hope it does hurt DYI NR.

Ben, I have been hunting Montana since 1991. Quality has dropped precipitously. Crowding on public land has increased precipitously. Something really should be done.

About 1990 I started seeing an increase in NR in Montana. Good thing I didn't feel then like you do now.

This bill is garbage and has been from the beginning. Ellsworth admittedly did not reach out to any sportsmen groups before submitting it. It shows.

 

[Ben Lamb]

About 1990 I started seeing an increase in NR in Montana. Good thing I didn't feel then like you do now.

This bill is garbage and has been from the beginning. Ellsworth admittedly did not reach out to any sportsmen groups before submitting it. It shows.

We've added a ton of opportunity for NR's in that time.

1500 tags for Come Home to Hunt, effectively raising the cap on both the B10 & B11

Unlimited NR Student Licenses. Not sure how many of those have sold.

Unlimited MT Native Licenses. Not sure how many of those have sold either.


Those were all pushed by outfitters who wanted to increase the cap on NR licenses sold, while not actually increasing the statutorily approved 17K & 4600 B10 & B11's.

Now we're adding another 2,000 in to the direct pool of B11's by increasing it from 4600 to 6600, increasing the outfitted set-aside portion of the B11 to 90% once you factor in the Landowner sponsored tag.

meanwhile, you have more and more people leasing to outfitters, hunt clubs, etc and fewer and fewer landowners willing to deal with issues about wildlife until they decide they want to gov't to pay them for having wildlife, which exist as a condition to the land, according to the MT Supreme Court.

If outfitters aren't competitive after getting thousands of more licenses put into the NR license pool, I'm not sure gov't handouts are going to help your business model.

 

[TheJason]

Therefore forcing NR into guided private is a way to limit impact on public.

If this is your avenue to improving quality of hunting on public land, then I would postulate the depth of thought here is consistent with the depth of thought that has put MT where it is currently at over the last 25 years.

Interpretation: The folly in your statement is consistent with the level of stupidity that has created the current situation.

It's not even a fix to the problem. It's just doing something in hopes it makes things better, and will likely come with some very adverse consequences.

Thankfully, there are people involved with more vision and foresight who realize band aids on the femoral cut aren't going to help.

 

[Hunt West]

Anyone know if this is on any agenda for the commission meeting today?

 

[Bullbrl]

Lots of comments about the crowding on public lands, quality of hunting is going down, and the amount of game is decreasing as well. To me, shortening seasons is only going to make crowding worse with all else being equal. This bill does nothing to improve management for the animals as far as I can tell.

With those two things in mind the only thing I can see that will address the crowding is to either open up more private land or to cut tags. To help the animals a reduction in tags across the board has to be looked at. I know people don't want a reduction in opportunity but this will have to be something that is looked at. The problem is states, once they have all that money coming in, it's tough for them to see that revenue decrease.

I don't know what the answer is but I don't see this bill addressing any of the real problems facing Montana's problems.

 

[winmag]

Anyone know if this is on any agenda for the commission meeting today?

No updates since the 2/2/2021 hearing.

LAWS Detailed Bill Information Page

 

[Big Shooter]

I am not shocked and it was truly a good experiment when I brought out the fact that one of the “opponents” to this bill runs a Hunt Club in YOUR state, taking in hunters and charging for it.......but it appears you all turned a blind eye to it which did NOT shock me in the least bit. There are bigger demons out there that some of you fail to recognize and those are Hunt Clubs and illegal outfitters. if you think they don’t exist your could not be more wrong. When we kicked the door open and walked into the room naked and asked for 60%, that was quite bold on our part, but open your eyes to the fact that there are PLENTY of other things going on out there that affect you as much or more than this bill.

 

[tjones]

Anyone know if this is on any agenda for the commission meeting today?

This is in the legislature. The FWP commission, at this point, has nothing to do with it.

 

[MTGomer]

I am not shocked and it was truly a good experiment when I brought out the fact that one of the “opponents” to this bill runs a Hunt Club in YOUR state, taking in hunters and charging for it.......but it appears you all turned a blind eye to it which did NOT shock me in the least bit. There are bigger demons out there that some of you fail to recognize and those are Hunt Clubs and illegal outfitters. if you think they don’t exist your could not be more wrong. When we kicked the door open and walked into the room naked and asked for 60%, that was quite bold on our part, but open your eyes to the fact that there are PLENTY of other things going on out there that affect you as much or more than this bill.

What exactly do you mean by hunt club?

Someone charging trespass fees or is there more to it than that?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Anyone know if this is on any agenda for the commission meeting today?

it isn't.

Lots of comments about the crowding on public lands, quality of hunting is going down, and the amount of game is decreasing as well. To me, shortening seasons is only going to make crowding worse with all else being equal. This bill does nothing to improve management for the animals as far as I can tell.

With those two things in mind the only thing I can see that will address the crowding is to either open up more private land or to cut tags. To help the animals a reduction in tags across the board has to be looked at. I know people don't want a reduction in opportunity but this will have to be something that is looked at. The problem is states, once they have all that money coming in, it's tough for them to see that revenue decrease.

I don't know what the answer is but I don't see this bill addressing any of the real problems facing Montana's problems.

You can increase the amount of game on public lands through a variety of means, including habitat management, hunter dispersal and season structure/staggering.

MT is one of the few states left that doesn't have their Game agency helping fund habitat improvement projects on public land outside of the WHIP program. We also refuse to find a sustainable path to herd movement between private land & public land in order to maximize hunter harvest for herd management.

Staggering seasons like CO may work, but then you end up hitting the brick wall of opportunity, so if you go to that staggered season, you have to make it long enough that people feel they are not being forced into smaller and smaller time frames to hunt.

We often forget that it's not just about killing a critter, but that it's about being out in the open, experiencing the chase.

 

[406dn]

I am not shocked and it was truly a good experiment when I brought out the fact that one of the “opponents” to this bill runs a Hunt Club in YOUR state, taking in hunters and charging for it.......but it appears you all turned a blind eye to it which did NOT shock me in the least bit. There are bigger demons out there that some of you fail to recognize and those are Hunt Clubs and illegal outfitters.

At least he doesn't ask for guaranteed tags, so there is that.

Yes, there are many problems facing Montana's sportsmen and our wildlife resources.

How can we legally shut down a hunt club? If a rancher can lease hunting rights, and they can,, they can lease the rights to anyone or any group. That group can then apply for tags and hunt when they are able to draw a tag. It takes deep pockets to pay for a lease, and then only hunt when the draw comes thru for you. There are people willing and able to do that.

All of these problems revolve around the undeniable reality that the demand for good big game hunting, far exceeds the supply. That will never change in today's world.

Nothing in SB143 tries to solve any problem other than "stabilizing" outfitters. So it seems to me, the outfitters want theirs' and everyone else can figure out how to deal with the mess.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I am not shocked and it was truly a good experiment when I brought out the fact that one of the “opponents” to this bill runs a Hunt Club in YOUR state, taking in hunters and charging for it.......but it appears you all turned a blind eye to it which did NOT shock me in the least bit. There are bigger demons out there that some of you fail to recognize and those are Hunt Clubs and illegal outfitters. if you think they don’t exist your could not be more wrong. When we kicked the door open and walked into the room naked and asked for 60%, that was quite bold on our part, but open your eyes to the fact that there are PLENTY of other things going on out there that affect you as much or more than this bill.

How does the fact that an opponent of the bill runs a “Hunt Club” become relevant to this conversation? His clients compete for licenses on a completely level playing field.

If he wants to contract with willing landowners to lease that’s perfectly acceptable just like it’s acceptable for an outfitter to contract with a willing landowner.

What isn’t acceptable is outfitters or “Hunt Club” brokers to divert access to a limited public resource in their direction at the expense of other interested parties.