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

[brocksw]

Do you want equitable access to wildlife or equitable access to licenses?

They're essentially one in the same as far as the hunter is concerned.

 

[Carnage2011]

Right, so why should they get their own pool of tags? That's exactly my point.


I know it has "some" access but I know for a fact some of the areas I've been in 704 and the areas around where family friends hunt it's leased up tight. I was just there this last fall on multiple occasions.

Anyone could get an outfitter too but we don't support them getting their own pool of tags either. How is this different?


No, that's not what I said. I said that in 704(the unit that was specifically mentioned) a lot of acreage is leased up and that creating a separate pool of tags for private land will lead to a similar result as 143. Where people who have access to that land will get better odds because a vast majority of hunters don't have access to it. Why should anyone have better odds of drawing a tag because they have exclusive access to land? Same concept as why no one should have better odds of drawing a tag because they're willing to pay for an outfitter.

I know a stretch in 704 where it's all locked up for miles. How many doors do I knock on before I give up and say eff it I'm going to hunt public? This goes beyond being told no a couple times.


I would agree. But it goes both ways. Landowners can't always answer the door with their hand out waiting for payment to hunt either. Especially when they're complaining about too many elk on their land and asking for 10 landowner tags that they can get thousands of dollars for.

They don’t get their own tags. They aren’t for landowners only....they are for anyone that wants to hunt private land. That could be BMA, or the old timer that allows anyone to hunt. It’s different because an outfitter tag has money tied to it and supports someone making money on a public resource. Private land only tags don’t provide profit to anyone as long as they are open for the public to apply.

704 has leased land, yep it sure does, but there is also private land to me hunted without a lease or outfitter. There is leased land in every unit of Montana. You were in 704 on multiple occasions last year? So was I. I met a guy by knocking on some doors and next thing I know my camper is plugged into his shop and I’m playing cribbage with his son. I had access to 4 different private ranches and didn’t pay a dime for access. But 704 is locked up tight!

There is nothing saying that drawing odds will be better with PLO tags. In some eastern Montana units where the private land is more abundant than the public id say it could be the opposite. It’s not like we are setting aside tags for each landowner. It’s a sum of tags for private land...it doesn’t matter whose land it is.

Well if you know those areas in 704 are locked up then maybe knock on doors in an area that may allow access. You’re lack of ambition to figure it out isn’t really our problem. I started with the same knowledge as you, or potentially less, and i worked my way through it. I’ve heard the same BS argument over and over. Somehow I’ve made some great friendships and have access to private in regions 3,4,5,6 and 7. I’ve never paid a dime, but my ability to fix fence is fair and my wife makes one hell of an apple pie.

 

[brockel]

I think this is a big part of it. There are a lot of ranchers and ranch hands that enjoy hunting. Typically they are swamped with fall cattle work in October and don’t have time to hunt until later in the season. I’ve brought up the idea of moving deer season forward or ending it early a few times and this is usually the rebuttal I get.
Obviously this is a small sample, but it is feedback from other hunters.

Montana the only state with ranchers and cow hands that like to hunt?

 

[Carnage2011]

Montana the only state with ranchers and cow hands that like to hunt?

Didn’t say that. But when it’s been that way forever it’s a tough change.

 

[brockel]

Didn’t say that. But when it’s been that way forever it’s a tough change.

Yep and that’s the problem. People want the quality to change but the people don’t want to change their habits

 

[brocksw]

They don’t get their own tags. They aren’t for landowners only....they are for anyone that wants to hunt private land. That could be BMA, or the old timer that allows anyone to hunt. It’s different because an outfitter tag has money tied to it and supports someone making money on a public resource. Private land only tags don’t provide profit to anyone as long as they are open for the public to apply.

Again, you're making shit up? I never said it was tags for landowners... who are you arguing with?

704 has leased land, yep it sure does,..... But 704 is locked up tight!

It is far more leased up than anywhere I hunt in ND. We have close family friends in Broadus. We're aware of where the leases are. There are plenty of them. This has been a growing trend, not a shrinking one.

There is nothing saying that drawing odds will be better with PLO tags. In some eastern Montana units where the private land is more abundant than the public id say it could be the opposite. It’s not like we are setting aside tags for each landowner. It’s a sum of tags for private land...it doesn’t matter whose land it is.

You're right, there isn't but a little logic can go a long way. Anything to do with private lands becomes about money. This won't be any different. You're setting aside tags for those with access to private land. A smaller group than those without that access. The longer that system is in play, the more concentrated those two groups will become.

Well if you know those areas in 704 are locked up then maybe knock on doors in an area that may allow access. You’re lack of ambition to figure it out isn’t really our problem. I started with the same knowledge as you, or potentially less, and i worked my way through it. I’ve heard the same BS argument over and over. Somehow I’ve made some great friendships and have access to private in regions 3,4,5,6 and 7. I’ve never paid a dime, but my ability to fix fence is fair and my wife makes one hell of an apple pie.

Yep it's all BS.

Any one who knows me knows that if there's one thing I lack it's ambition and drive. You got me. I give up.

 

[Carnage2011]

Again, you're making shit up? I never said it was tags for landowners... who are you arguing with?

It is far more leased up than anywhere I hunt in ND. We have close family friends in Broadus. We're aware of where the leases are. There are plenty of them. This has been a growing trend, not a shrinking one.

You're right, there isn't but a little logic can go a long way. Anything to do with private lands becomes about money. This won't be any different. You're setting aside tags for those with access to private land. A smaller group than those without that access. The longer that system is in play, the more concentrated those two groups will become.


Yep it's all BS.

Any one who knows me knows that if there's one thing I lack it's ambition and drive. You got me. I give up.

You said “why would they get their own pool of tags?” I said that landowners don’t get their own tags...the tags are for anyone that wants to hunt private.

I don’t care about ND and as for Broadus....there is a lot more to 704 than just the Broadus area. I know there are leases, but there is still plenty of private land open with some due diligence.

Im not saying you lack ambition or drive. I hear all the time about how terrible access is and then when I go check it out I find otherwise. I wasn’t trying to attack you personally, I apologize if it came off that way. There is access to be had on private all over the state...

 

[brocksw]

You said “why would they get their own pool of tags?” I said that landowners don’t get their own tags...the tags are for anyone that wants to hunt private.

"They" as in those that have access to private land or an outfitter on private land. But certainly, some landowners fall into that category as they will hunt only private land.

as for Broadus....there is a lot more to 704 than just the Broadus area. I know there are leases, but there is still plenty of private land open with some due diligence.

Sure, but the trend is to more leased up land not less. Our family friend down there tells us all the time how more and more land is getting leased up.

You're absolutely right about broadus not representing the whole unit. But again, the trend certainly seems to be going that direction everywhere....even in ND. I've ran into farmers who want 75$ a head just to shoot geese in December. The trend is to monetize.

I'm sure it's not impossible to find private land to hunt. I'm not saying it is. But my thinking, and sure I could be wrong, is that once they have a "private land" tag that this will create a demand for those tags from a subset of hunters. There is no advantage to public land tag, there is no exclusive access, there is no paying for locking up permission for a certain time period. This is not true with a private land tag, all of those things can be done. So by creating the tag, you create the market.

I wasn’t trying to attack you personally, I apologize if it came off that way. There is access to be had on private all over the state...

No worries. I have thick skin and I'm a smart ass.

 

[antlerradar]

What about just making smaller districts, drawing boundaries to have mostly private and mostly public units and then setting quotas based on the herd dynamics of those units.

NR apply for a specific district in the draw not a statewide tag.

This is what I was getting at in post 1890

 

[mtguy]

Just got done listening to the podcast with Mac.
When the discussion turned to MT outfitters modeling their business the same way WY outfitters do (same Preference Point system). Did Mac really say a lot of MT outfitters don't understand how to do that? I'm guessing the one's making money know how to market and fill potential clients. Seems odd that the MOGA guy would actually disparage some outfitters.
Carry On.

 

[LostinOregon1]

This is what I was getting at in post 1890

We have come along way on this thread from Montana residents trying to help the NR do it yourselfer by defeating the outfitters bid at dedicated tags, to lets just NR crowd apply for small units that will undoubtedly cause point creep and supply and demand issues. Maybe it wasn't about sticking up for the DIY crowd after all?

Rich

 

[antlerradar]

We have come along way on this thread from Montana residents trying to help the NR do it yourselfer by defeating the outfitters bid at dedicated tags, to lets just NR crowd apply for small units that will undoubtedly cause point creep and supply and demand issues. Maybe it wasn't about sticking up for the DIY crowd after all?

Rich

Don't think for a minute that I was thinking about just nonresidents.

 

[huntin24/7]

I’m not sure that anyone here thinks just non residents should have to apply for a unit. Most everyone here seems to be in agreement this should be for residents as well. The general sentiment I’m picking up from most residents here is we’re willing to sacrifice some of our own opportunity for healthier better managed game herds.

 

[brockel]

I’m not sure that anyone here thinks just non residents should have to apply for a unit. Most everyone here seems to be in agreement this should be for residents as well. The general sentiment I’m picking up from most residents here is we’re willing to sacrifice some of our own opportunity for healthier better managed game herds.

Absolutely.

 

[timmy]

Absolutely.

I’m not sure that anyone here thinks just non residents should have to apply for a unit. Most everyone here seems to be in agreement this should be for residents as well. The general sentiment I’m picking up from most residents here is we’re willing to sacrifice some of our own opportunity for healthier better managed game herds.

Until you take it to the general public that don’t care about a resource. I’m not sure how things could change outfitters aren’t going to be willing to take away their cash cow either. I honestly don’t see the end game public hunters happy to shoot any deer and private land owners and outfitters cashing in on a bad season structure.

 

[LostinOregon1]

Fair enough, all I hear when I am in Montana or talking to Montana folks is they love the traditions they have with a long deer season and coming home to hunt the week of thanksgiving. It reminds of the Wyoming residents wanting to keep the general seasons even though the deer are suffering. Sooner or later, something has to give.

Rich

 

[Big Shooter]

Until you take it to the general public that don’t care about a resource. I’m not sure how things could change outfitters aren’t going to be willing to take away their cash cow either. I honestly don’t see the end game public hunters happy to shoot any deer and private land owners and outfitters cashing in on a bad season structure.

Don’t paint with too broad of a brush please. Just saying.

 

[Eric Albus]

Until you take it to the general public that don’t care about a resource. I’m not sure how things could change outfitters aren’t going to be willing to take away their cash cow either. I honestly don’t see the end game public hunters happy to shoot any deer and private land owners and outfitters cashing in on a bad season structure.

The outfitters with whom myself and Rod consort put the wildlife first. If we don’t we’re out of business by our own doing, and that’s worse than being put out of business by inability to secure license.

There needs be sweeping changes made to Montana’s season structure and the mindsets of R sportsmen. I personally could give 2 sh_ts(need to buy a vowel ) what any NR(including my clients) have to say about OUR wildlife. Until a group of us(sportsmen,outfitters) sit down with the director and commissioner to demand these changes we’ll see no improvement.

 

[Ben Lamb]

We have come along way on this thread from Montana residents trying to help the NR do it yourselfer by defeating the outfitters bid at dedicated tags, to lets just NR crowd apply for small units that will undoubtedly cause point creep and supply and demand issues. Maybe it wasn't about sticking up for the DIY crowd after all?

Rich

From my perspective, I agree with you.

We tend to get lost in battling for the last pieces of the pie, rather than continuing to bake more pies.

NR DIY hunters are conservation advocates, in my book. Resistance to SB 143 wouldn't have had the kind of impact that it did if the actual customer hadn't spoken up loud & clear.

So from one to another - thank you for doing the right thing, regardless of how the conversation has turned.

FYI - the revised fiscal note for 143 is up. It would create almost $2.5 million per year extra for large scale acquisitions & conservation easements for Habitat MT. That's the provision that MOGA seems most eager to eliminate.

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2021/FNPDF//SB0143_3.pdf

 

[Eric Albus]

From my perspective, I agree with you.

We tend to get lost in battling for the last pieces of the pie, rather than continuing to bake more pies.

NR DIY hunters are conservation advocates, in my book. Resistance to SB 143 wouldn't have had the kind of impact that it did if the actual customer hadn't spoken up loud & clear.

So from one to another - thank you for doing the right thing, regardless of how the conversation has turned.

FYI - the revised fiscal note for 143 is up. It would create almost $2.5 million per year extra for large scale acquisitions & conservation easements for Habitat MT. That's the provision that MOGA seems most eager to eliminate.

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2021/FNPDF//SB0143_3.pdf

I’m fine with limited acquisition. I am for no net gain. I would rather see the state give up(sell) a piece that was not of critical concern in exchange for something more beneficial.
I could see my way to allow some gain were the piece of super value, like critical winter range and so on. The argument can be made “every piece Is critical” so a rigid requiem would need be set.
I realize many of you don’t feel the same way about no net gain. If you were mine or Rod’s boots you’d understand the reasoning. If I step back and look at it as a non landowning sportsman I’d be for the state buying more too, so I could have more free hunting/recreation.