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

[Sytes]

Jan 26th, 2021 - Feb 05, 2021... 44,000+ views. 905 posts (Including this mere trivial tidbit...)

And people are curious about current social media info sharing capability for DIY vs Outfitter?

Mind you, I'm not opposed to ethical outfitters. I can see their attempt to gather Montana State Legislature ordered clients mandatory for their business. These are the days of Google 3D earth view, statistics, OnX / GoHunt, Cadastral, etc. AKA, E-Scouting... the modern hunter, NR and R has modified drastically.

The kitchen wall phone call here or there, paper topos, and requesting stats from FWP via mail or phone that led to a more powerful outfitter interest is slowly eroding. Time for Businesses to adapt - not complain DIY NR's are stealing Resident hunt land. It's MOGA and large non resident landowners greasing our elected Montana legislator's hands for mandatory outfitter clients...

 

[Eric Albus]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares. I would not voice an opinion on what Wy. Co. or any other state should do management wise. The ONLY province I would say should listen is SASK, and they should annually issue the owner of Milk River Outfitters (the one in MT, not ALTA.) a mule deer license, good for the first 50 miles of Southern Sask., Manitoba border to Alta. border. I will bet the good folks of SASK are printing me off one right now, because they care what an alien NR thinks.





The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

 

[mtmuley]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares. I would not voice an opinion on what Wy. Co. or any other state should do management wise. The ONLY province I would say should listen is SASK, and they should annually issue the owner of Milk River Outfitters (the one in MT, not ALTA.) a mule deer license, good for the first 50 miles of Southern Sask., Manitoba border to Alta. border. I will bet the good folks of SASK are printing me off one right now, because they care what an alien NR thinks.





The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

Did a quick edit didn't you? mtmuley

 

[jt13]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares.

Be sure to put that on the Milk River Outfitter brochures

 

[406dn]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares.

That sums it up, I guess.

Well, they are your customers.

They fund the lion's share of the FWP budget. But screw em, who cares what they think.

It's becoming obvious to me that outfitters consider every angle before they go hat in hand to get their guaranteed tags. One little kicker is your customers will now have to fork up extra money for their tag, just so there can be some stability in the outfitting business.

 

[mtmuley]

Be sure to put that on the Milk River Outfitter brochures

His original post was, umm more colorful. mtmuley

 

[BourbonSnowCone]

The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

HD652 used to be an absolutely premier unit. Seems like we used to dodge trophy bucks with the truck all the way up Hwy 24 to go ice fishing. Too many permits and disease issues haven’t done it any favors. There’s also been significant poaching issues with some area NR Hunt Clubs in the news over the past few years.

 

[Wildabeest]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares. I would not voice an opinion on what Wy. Co. or any other state should do management wise. The ONLY province I would say should listen is SASK, and they should annually issue the owner of Milk River Outfitters (the one in MT, not ALTA.) a mule deer license, good for the first 50 miles of Southern Sask., Manitoba border to Alta. border. I will bet the good folks of SASK are printing me off one right now, because they care what an alien NR thinks.





The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

So in the first paragraph you infer that NR should not have any input on states they don’t live in. Then in the second paragraph you directly state that you have opinions about MT districts that you don’t and have no intention of hunting “because you care.” Do you see any irony or hypocrisy in that Eric?

 

[Bullbrl]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares. I would not voice an opinion on what Wy. Co. or any other state should do management wise. The ONLY province I would say should listen is SASK, and they should annually issue the owner of Milk River Outfitters (the one in MT, not ALTA.) a mule deer license, good for the first 50 miles of Southern Sask., Manitoba border to Alta. border. I will bet the good folks of SASK are printing me off one right now, because they care what an alien NR thinks.





The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

I hope you let your NR clients know that their opinions don't matter, put that on your website, brochure, and in your booth at sportsman's shows. Do you feel the same way for any NR big landowner who "may" have greased the legislature with their NR $$$/voices behind this move by MOGA?

So the only opinions that matter are those of residents of Montana? If that's the case, why are you attempting to overturn their wishes in regards to 161? That's the funniest shit ever.

**** Edit to add....MOGA spouts off how the guiding business brings in so much money to Montana, helps local Main Street businesses, etc. etc...I think NR opinions should matter. Saying NR hunter opinions don't matter is kind of like biting the hand that feeds you. Or, how about NR just stop hunting Montana? Where would that leave the guiding business? Saying NR opinions don't matter and then trying to pass legislation to guarantee more NR business for you????....SMH.

 

[WIbiggame]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares

With that attitude it should make the "Oh I am sorry you didn't draw a tag this year" easy and not so tearful and gut wrenching like the parade of hats made it sound.

 

[Marshian]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares. I would not voice an opinion on what Wy. Co. or any other state should do management wise. The ONLY province I would say should listen is SASK, and they should annually issue the owner of Milk River Outfitters (the one in MT, not ALTA.) a mule deer license, good for the first 50 miles of Southern Sask., Manitoba border to Alta. border. I will bet the good folks of SASK are printing me off one right now, because they care what an alien NR thinks.





The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

As much as I want 143 to fail, I do think that @Eric Albus was potentially invoking sarcasm which is always tough to pick up on the internet. He did use a smiley after all which could be the clue. I may be wrong tho. See Poe’s law.

Poe's law - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Eric Albus]

There was some sarcasm, for certain.

So it makes a difference as a resident if I don't plan on hunting the area ? I have already made plans to tour the area with one of the commissioners. I still don't plan on hunting there, but I actually care. So those who hide behind the anonymous identity continue to cast stones. At least the commission did no go with FWP recommendations of upping permits to 400.

 

[mtmiller]

It will be 300 next year. Might as well make it General. Only a matter of time.

 

[Gerald Martin]

There seems to be a major disconnect between how much pressure a finite resource can bear without crashing among the people advocating for “opportunity”.
Let’s add crossbows and a muzzle loader season to the mix.
I can’t wait until we get Helicopter season. They do it in Texas ya know?

 

[MTGomer]

I can’t imagine being from out of state, and spending $1k to come hunt Montana without local knowledge under current management practices.
Throw in some more opportunity and it just keeps spiraling.

At some point people are going to realize that opportunity has come at too great of a cost and the state is going to be hurting. I think the only reason that hasn’t happened already is because of how easy it is to make money the last few years.
The next time jobs shrivel up and the market declines there’s going to be a lot of people scratching $1k raghorn bulls and 120” muleys off the priority list.

 

[Addicting]

There was some sarcasm, for certain.

So it makes a difference as a resident if I don't plan on hunting the area ? I have already made plans to tour the area with one of the commissioners. I still don't plan on hunting there, but I actually care. So those who hide behind the anonymous identity continue to cast stones. At least the commission did no go with FWP recommendations of upping permits to 400.

Sure seems like your trying to change the subject of what this thread was started for. Your posts were rebutted with logic and actual math. Now you don’t want to keep trying to defend your position and instead want to talk about another problem.

I’m still waiting on how you plan to address my question which you chose to ignore.

 

[Eric Albus]

addickting, what is your question?

 

[Schaaf]

@Eric Albus I was disappointed in the 652 decision as well, and talked to the commission members. I understand CWD being one of the main factors in the decision but 200 people with a rifle tag in that small of unit puts it at about 1 person per square mile on the opening weekend. I tried convincing them to think outside the box rather than adding 75 more tags.

Hell, I would have taken OTC archery before 200 permits.

 

[huntin24/7]

200 tags is really going to hurt that unit. It already wasn’t that great for mature bucks at 100 tags, but it was a lot of fun when I hunted it a few years ago. Might have to start applying for a different LE unit now.

 

[Chad E]

NR hunter opinion? Who cares. I would not voice an opinion on what Wy. Co. or any other state should do management wise. The ONLY province I would say should listen is SASK, and they should annually issue the owner of Milk River Outfitters (the one in MT, not ALTA.) a mule deer license, good for the first 50 miles of Southern Sask., Manitoba border to Alta. border. I will bet the good folks of SASK are printing me off one right now, because they care what an alien NR thinks.





The thing that everyone should be up in arms about it being mostly ignored, in LE mule deer buck area 652 the commission voted to up the permits to 200. This should have Mt Resident hunters up in arms a whole lot more anything else I can think of. I would be willing to bet I am the only one who has contacted a commissioner about this. I have not applied for a permit there in 20 yrs(and have no intention of doing so), but it still pisses me off on account I care. This is an area at its inception had either 50 or 75 permits issued, and hunters had a chance at taking a mature mule deer buck.

There seems to be a consistent theme on this thread with supporters of this bill. It seems to involve trying to distract the conversation to some other issue that will in no way be addressed by this tag grab. "The public land is mismanaged" this bill does nothing to fix that. "The real problem is hunt clubs" again this bill doesn't solve that issue. "The thing everyone should be up in arms about is more permits in 652" This is a completely separate issue. The constant look over there..no look over there.. no over there, pretty much sums up how hard it is to defend this bill.