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

[Big Shooter]

How do you know they will go to DIY hunters and not hunters who want to hire a guide?

Some will.....but most of the people that are going to go with an outfitter have that set up in advance.

 

[Eric Albus]

How do you know they will go to DIY hunters and not hunters who want to hire a guide?

History. Those who wish to hunt with an outfitter generally book ahead of application time. In 20 yrs. I can pretty much count on both hands the number of ppl who have booked a hunt as an afterthought.

 

[Eric Albus]

I assume both Eric and Rod offer a bunch of cheap antlerless hunts to help control all these awful critters being forced upon the landowners?

I have never charged anyone to hunt antlerless. I have also never charged anyone to hunt elk and have pretty much allowed anyone who pulled an antelope tag to hunt free of charge. Sorry to destroy your preconceived notions.

 

[Derek44]

The extra cash spent on "the outfitters" is kept in coffee cans buried in each and every outfitters backyard.

And how mind you.... does money buried in a coffee can contribute to the economy. That is effectively keeping it out of the economy

 

[Eric Albus]

You forget the microcosm I’m in. The nightcrawlers launder the cash for a nominal fee.

 

[Derek44]

You forget the microcosm I’m in. The nightcrawlers launder the cash for a nominal fee.

That’s funny!! Genuinely made me chuckle. While I don’t necessarily agree with all you (and others) bring to the table, I definitely appreciate you’re input. I definitely think on the hunter vs. hunter aspect of this whole deal though, painting a bad picture of the DIY NR on such a broad scale only hurts your arguments. I myself am a DIY NR, however I used to be a DIY R of Montana. Life, work, family, etc. made me move and lose my residency. I have great respect for the land and the heritage in yours and all states. As do LOTS of DIY hunters. Are there bad apples?? ABSOLUTELY. But to treat us all with disrespect by saying basically we all need babysat, just doesn’t sit well with many and in all reality, makes many not even want to hear any of the legitimate argument points you’ve got. I hope all outfitters succeed, and absolutely know that for the most part, you guys provide an amazing service for those interested and wanting to go that avenue. I myself prefer the ability to do it on my own. I like to challenge myself and I just kind of like the serenity of being there and doing it on my own. Or with a real close friend or family. Again, I’m glad you’re willing to provide your insight to the other side of the coin. Especially in a forum that is predominantly going to disagree with you.
And just to clarify, I can’t quote you as saying we need babysat, that was more in reference to the video that was posted pretty early on in this thread. It just seems to be the general consensus of the outfitter community against the DIY community

 

[Eric Albus]

That’s funny!! Genuinely made me chuckle. While I don’t necessarily agree with all you (and others) bring to the table, I definitely appreciate you’re input. I definitely think on the hunter vs. hunter aspect of this whole deal though, painting a bad picture of the DIY NR on such a broad scale only hurts your arguments. I myself am a DIY NR, however I used to be a DIY R of Montana. Life, work, family, etc. made me move and lose my residency. I have great respect for the land and the heritage in yours and all states. As do LOTS of DIY hunters. Are there bad apples?? ABSOLUTELY. But to treat us all with disrespect by saying basically we all need babysat, just doesn’t sit well with many and in all reality, makes many not even want to hear any of the legitimate argument points you’ve got. I hope all outfitters succeed, and absolutely know that for the most part, you guys provide an amazing service for those interested and wanting to go that avenue. I myself prefer the ability to do it on my own. I like to challenge myself and I just kind of like the serenity of being there and doing it on my own. Or with a real close friend or family. Again, I’m glad you’re willing to provide your insight to the other side of the coin. Especially in a forum that is predominantly going to disagree with you.
And just to clarify, I can’t quote you as saying we need babysat, that was more in reference to the video that was posted pretty early on in this thread. It just seems to be the general consensus of the outfitter community against the DIY community

I have no problem with a DIY hunter, R or NR. I grew up hunting public land, and understand the DIY Public Land attitude. I don't think any of us in the outfitting world think that all NR's need "babysat", I certainly hope nothing I have ever said insinuated that.

 

[Big Shooter]

That’s funny!! Genuinely made me chuckle. While I don’t necessarily agree with all you (and others) bring to the table, I definitely appreciate you’re input. I definitely think on the hunter vs. hunter aspect of this whole deal though, painting a bad picture of the DIY NR on such a broad scale only hurts your arguments. I myself am a DIY NR, however I used to be a DIY R of Montana. Life, work, family, etc. made me move and lose my residency. I have great respect for the land and the heritage in yours and all states. As do LOTS of DIY hunters. Are there bad apples?? ABSOLUTELY. But to treat us all with disrespect by saying basically we all need babysat, just doesn’t sit well with many and in all reality, makes many not even want to hear any of the legitimate argument points you’ve got. I hope all outfitters succeed, and absolutely know that for the most part, you guys provide an amazing service for those interested and wanting to go that avenue. I myself prefer the ability to do it on my own. I like to challenge myself and I just kind of like the serenity of being there and doing it on my own. Or with a real close friend or family. Again, I’m glad you’re willing to provide your insight to the other side of the coin. Especially in a forum that is predominantly going to disagree with you.
And just to clarify, I can’t quote you as saying we need babysat, that was more in reference to the video that was posted pretty early on in this thread. It just seems to be the general consensus of the outfitter community against the DIY community

I would wholeheartedly agree with Eric’s response to you on this, if I said something that would make you believe that then I owe you a huge apology. ZREO PERCENT of 143 was intentionally designed to hurt the resident or nonresident DIY hunter, it is a bill to offer sustainability to an industry, nothing more..nothing less. Do some DIY hunters need babysat.......I think we would all agree, that yes they do and we have all witnessed that. I‘m still very curious on this video though because I know that neither Eric or I are tech savvy enough to put one on here!! Just saying.....(sorry Albus)!

 

[LostinOregon1]

It's funny how things repeat. If you go back in time the thought was if they did away with outfitter sponsored tags in Montana, all the private land would open back up for the residents and all the outfitters would go out of business. How did that work out? Outfitters should be allowed tags, but for private only. If they want to hunt public, then they should be in the same draw as the public. You have to give value to the landowners to tolerate large herds of elk and deer on private property. If they are not worth anything, then they are not protected. A herd of elk eat a ton of food, tear down fences, ruin watering sources on private land. You may not be able to see it, but if the private property is managed properly, the wildlife that ends up on the nearby public also benefit. The problem with everything today is us versus them. Outfitter guaranteed tags on private property will only help overall management of Montana's big game herds. I am not an outfitter or private landowner either.

Rich

 

[Straight Arrow]

If you go back in time the thought was if they did away with outfitter sponsored tags in Montana, all the private land would open back up for the residents and all the outfitters would go out of business.

That is a falsely glowing generality which although may have been thought by a few, was not true for most who signed I-161. That is a false premise to begin the post, but some of what followed in above post is rational opinion.

 

[Big Shooter]

That is a falsely glowing generality which although may have been thought by a few, was not true for most who signed I-161. That is a false premise to begin the post, but some of what followed in above post is rational opinion.

No......that was exactly one of the ideas and statements used not only by the people gathering signatures, but was also written out in black and white on poster boards in many locations where there were unmanned signature gathering. Many of us witnessed both.

 

[BuzzH]

No......that was exactly one of the ideas and statements used not only by the people gathering signatures, but was also written out in black and white on poster boards in many locations where there were unmanned signature gathering. Many of us witnessed both.

Had nothing to do with shutting down outfitters or gaining access to private. It had to do with all NR's having an equal shot at the licenses rather than being controlled for the welfare of a business interest.

I have no problem with legitimate outfitters standing on their own 2 feet, hustling for clients and even leasing private property.

What I have a problem with is listening to outfitters whine about "free markets" then do everything they can to assure that no free market exists. Almost as ridiculous as it is for them to claim that any outfitter allocation of tags isnt welfare.

The icing on the cake is the fact that outfitters provide exactly ZERO funding to the MTFWP, WGF, etc. they take with both hands and give nothing back.

Based on those facts, there is no way I'll ever do anything but oppose outfitter sponsored licenses. Lace up your boots and go to work...quit asking sportsmen that fund 100% wildlife management to hand you a living.

 

[LostinOregon1]

Buzz,

Why are you opposing it in Montana if the decisions are up to the residents of each state? Also, why did so many Montana residents care about how many tags do it yourself non residents get? I agree that good outfitters will make it on their own, no doubt. I don't think public land should go to outfitters over do it yourself guys. But, the ranchers I know are not going to open up their property to the do it yourself crowd, they lease some and keep some for themselves.

Rich

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I thought it was pretty clear, allocating tags strictly to outfitters is not fair to the general hunting population. If you draw a tag and want to hire an outfitter please do! Many resident hunters travel and are non resident hunters in other states and some semblance of fairness is important to them. Quite simple. If ranchers want to lease their property or hunt it themselves, by all means please do. No one here is advocating the violation of private property rights. A variety of solutions to the problem of effective elk management is probably very wise.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,

Why are you opposing it in Montana if the decisions are up to the residents of each state? Also, why did so many Montana residents care about how many tags do it yourself non residents get? I agree that good outfitters will make it on their own, no doubt. I don't think public land should go to outfitters over do it yourself guys. But, the ranchers I know are not going to open up their property to the do it yourself crowd, they lease some and keep some for themselves.

Rich

I'm opposed to outfitter allocations in general and also transferable landowner tags. Specific to 161 that was the wishes of the majority of the residents of Montana. The outfitting industry is just trying an end run to reverse the wishes of the majority....I don't like that either.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Why are you opposing it in Montana if the decisions are up to the residents of each state?

Rich, FYI Buzz grew up in Montana, has continued to hunt in Montana with his relatives, and although now residing in Wyoming, he still is involved, engaged, and personally interested in Montana's hunting, wildlife, and public land issues.

 

[Big Shooter]

I think this LostinOregon1 guy gets it!! Just my opinion I guess.

 

[MTGomer]

Buzz,

Why are you opposing it in Montana if the decisions are up to the residents of each state? Also, why did so many Montana residents care about how many tags do it yourself non residents get? I agree that good outfitters will make it on their own, no doubt. I don't think public land should go to outfitters over do it yourself guys. But, the ranchers I know are not going to open up their property to the do it yourself crowd, they lease some and keep some for themselves.

Rich

This should be a bigger issue to residents than non residents. This is a commercialization of elk that residents own. This leads down the path of NM where every facet of wildlife management ignores biology (not that Montana uses it anyway but this will just make it harder to ever start) and goes back to what the landowners and outfitters want.

It’s the first step to Ranching for Wildlife, transferable landowner tags etc

 

[Big Shooter]

This should be a bigger issue to residents than non residents. This is a commercialization of elk that residents own. This leads down the path of NM where every facet of wildlife management ignores biology (not that Montana uses it anyway but this will just make it harder to ever start) and goes back to what the landowners and outfitters want.

It’s the first step to Ranching for Wildlife, transferable landowner tags etc

You might be referring to 505? Possibly.

 

[MTGomer]

You might be referring to 505? Possibly.

I’m not