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

[Dakotakid]

It is very very far from final. There will be large political deals, lobbyist meetings and trading of votes. This was just the first round of a contentious issue. But if the hunting community works together they may avoid a bad bill.

 

[Spartan_Eric]

In my experience, this is the step where participatory democracy goes to die. If leaders in the House and Senate want something to pass but get too much heat from the public, they pass different versions and then "fix it" in conference committee. By this point the average citizen has lost track and things "just get done".

Agreed, I think this is a long way from over. Vigilance must persist.

 

[Ben Lamb]

In my experience, this is the step where participatory democracy goes to die. If leaders in the House and Senate want something to pass but get too much heat from the public, they pass different versions and then "fix it" in conference committee. By this point the average citizen has lost track and things "just get done".

Yet another reason why having dedicated lobbyists up in a capitol during a session is a really good idea.

 

[HighCountryCommando]

I’m not bitching about the amendment ...I think it’s definitely a better deal than what was originally proposed. And I think it will likely get a little better as it moves through the house.

I’m more interested in understanding and following the political and social players, context, and intent of this issue as it relates to hunting bills across the west. While there may be a lot of wins in this amendment, it still represents the clear reality that deer and elk are a highly sought after limited resource. Which, in my opinion, the common hunter is ill equipped (in the long run) to defend him/herself against.

I think its inevitable, that in the next 10 to 20 years, blue collar non-residents will essentially be priced out of hunting out of state. It will become a rich non-resident and resident only game across the west.

At that point, the rich will have eliminated one of their two opponents And all their resources will then be focused on resident hunting. Just look at resident elk hunting in Utah, it continues to get worse not better.

 

[Bullbrl]

I disagree, strongly. Polite, professional emails that make your point are far better than threatening them with their elected position. Threats will piss them off a lot more than a well-stated email.

And emails might be annoying them in the short-term, but they are having the desired message - keep supporting this chit and expect more emails. And if they think this bill was a large volume of emails, "Hold my beer and watch this."

It is a new way that these issues will be communicated by those who can't take days off to go to Capitol hearings. If they are annoyed by being contacted and emails, that is because they don't want pressure interfering with their pre-determined votes that repay political debts. They want to repay those debts with no friction. Friction can be good.

I didn't word my post the best but what I'm saying is that if they vote this through they are going against the will of the people who vote in the state. Overturning a bill that the people voted on isn't the best way to get future votes, that can be said in a polite way....this is language they will understand.

 

[Bullbrl]

Yet another reason why having dedicated lobbyists up in a capitol during a session is a really

In my experience, this is the step where participatory democracy goes to die. If leaders in the House and Senate want something to pass but get too much heat from the public, they pass different versions and then "fix it" in conference committee. By this point the average citizen has lost track and things "just get done".

Exactly!!! The money behind this will push it through no matter what. It will happen behind closed doors, just like most issues.

I've been to too many of these hearings, one where thousands of sportsman towed their boats to the capitol in a show of support and this being after literally tens of thousands of emails and phone calls happened. The issue has been going on for decades but it never matters what the "average" guy/gal says or does. It was done behind closed doors and the governor ended up selling us out because "black money" was more important.

 

[Bullbrl]

I’m not bitching about the amendment ...I think it’s definitely a better deal than what was originally proposed. And I think it will likely get a little better as it moves through the house.

I’m more interested in understanding and following the political and social players, context, and intent of this issue as it relates to hunting bills across the west. While there may be a lot of wins in this amendment, it still represents the clear reality that deer and elk are a highly sought after limited resource. Which, in my opinion, the common hunter is ill equipped (in the long run) to defend him/herself against.

I think its inevitable, that in the next 10 to 20 years, blue collar non-residents will essentially be priced out of hunting out of state. It will become a rich non-resident and resident only game across the west.

At that point, the rich will have eliminated one of their two opponents And all their resources will then be focused on resident hunting. Just look at resident elk hunting in Utah, it continues to get worse not better.

Yep, and the only way to combat this is with lobbyists who will protect the rights of the average hunter. A group who can wield "influence" on our part. Without that, eventually those with the money and power will get their way. It will be like Europe, private "beats" on the river for fishing and clubs for hunting....a rich man's paradise. That is unless the game numbers aren't managed into the ground first.

 

[Hunting Wife]

In my experience, this is the step where participatory democracy goes to die. If leaders in the House and Senate want something to pass but get too much heat from the public, they pass different versions and then "fix it" in conference committee. By this point the average citizen has lost track and things "just get done".

Well in that case, the stubborn ass in me takes this as a personal challenge to continue bringing the heat.

 

[Big Fin]

I don’t disagree with most of this, but wildly cheering this on as if it’s a great deal, as some are, is akin to thanking the arsonist for only burning half of your house instead of all of it.

Your point is one I agree with. I share your same wish that none of this was on our lap. But, we don't have the chance to wish it away.

Following the same path of your analogy, we aren't thanking them for trying to burn down our house, rather we are trying to get to our house that has been lit on fire and hope we can save some of it or its contents.

Simply put, elections matter. When one looks at who is in the seats of those elected people, this is the equivalent of being unarmed at a gunfight with nothing more than a few rocks to throw.

I wish it was different and there will continue to be efforts pushing back on the things you mention, maybe even on this bill as amended. Yet, we're faced with a full assault on the things we cherish, not just with this bill, but a huge list of other bills on the docket. The deck is stacked, heavily, beyond what I've ever seen in my 25 years of being in this stuff.

Suffice to say, we'll do the best we can, with what we have, where we find ourselves.

 

[JLS]

Suffice to say, we'll do the best we can, with what we have, where we find ourselves.

All you can do, and I commend those who are doing just that. I’m not going to lie though, this whole charade makes me bitter.

 

[joelweb]

The bill will be on 3rd reading tomorrow. No debate is allowed on 3rd reading, but if it fails there, then it's dead. It could be reconsidered if the sponsor makes a motion to do so within 24 hours (I think, I haven't read this sessions' rules). If the reconsideration motion passes, then the bill is placed on 3rd reading again, and voted up or down.

If it passes, it moves to the House of Representatives who go through the committee process. The bill should be assigned to the House Fish, Wildlife and Parks committee. There it can be amended in committee. Votes tend to fall on party lines in committee though.

If it passes committee, it will head to the floor of the House for 2nd & 3rd reading. Here again, on 2nd reading, it can be amended. 3rd is the same process in the House.

If the House does amend the bill, then the Senate will have to vote to accept or reject the amendments. If rejected, it goes to a conference committee, set by leadership of both Houses. The committee will work out a compromise in order to try and find consensus. If they do so, then they send the bill back to the Senate & House for a concurrence vote.

If all of that happens, and the bill passes, then the Governor can issue an amendatory veto, outright veto, sign the bill or allow the bill to become law without his signature.

Why don't you move back to Montana, my friend. We miss you here, and thanks for the play by play updates.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Exactly!!! The money behind this will push it through no matter what. It will happen behind closed doors, just like most issues.

governor ended up selling us out because "black money" was more important.

I have been in and around politics for many years. In my experience it is not that much about money. There is so much money going around these days, and it is going to both sides, that they can get money coming and going - you can fill your coffers on either side of almost any issue (and the really skilled ones get both sides paying in).

I think in part it is about towing the party line, in part it is about being convinced by the initial sales pitch by one side or the other and then not being willing to change ones view at risk of bruising an ego or losing face, and in part tribe - folks want to do for folks they feel aligned with. It is also easier to push for something over time than to hold back the dike over the long term -- politician need to pass things, not just just vote against them. If I had to be on one side of an issue for one session I would prefer to be the one opposing something - but if I had to be on a side for 5 sessions in a row, easier to be the one pushing for something.

 

[antlerradar]

Anyone know how many outfitters/guides are also ranching? I know the main mountain range I hunt is surrounded my ranches that also offer guiding services in the summer and fall. A lot of the guides testifying in the committee hearing looked an awful lot like cowboys as well. Yet this gets spun like it's just a bunch of poor guides who can barely make ends meet if a client or two doesn't draw a tag that year.

Guiding might be the only thing keeping their ranch in the positive.

 

[BenInMT]

I didn't word my post the best but what I'm saying is that if they vote this through they are going against the will of the people who vote in the state. Overturning a bill that the people voted on isn't the best way to get future votes, that can be said in a polite way....this is language they will understand.

Not from around here huh? Going against voter passed initiatives is literally the Montana way! See: medical marijuana. See: Leagal Rec Weed which I have no doubt they are going to crush. See: Outfitter Sponsored Tags- we fing voted on this. People got enough signatures from every county in the state to get this on the ballot and we won, yet here we are.

 

[Bullbrl]

Not from around here huh? Going against voter passed initiatives is literally the Montana way! See: medical marijuana. See: Leagal Rec Weed which I have no doubt they are going to crush. See: Outfitter Sponsored Tags- we fing voted on this. People got enough signatures from every county in the state to get this on the ballot and we won, yet here we are.

That just proves my point. The way you put it...they just don't care what the citizens say or want. So what good are emails and phone calls going to do? There must be a reason why they defy their citizens, and I'm guessing that is either $$$ or power, most likely both.

Hunters need to find a way to buy their politicians. Don't hate the player, hate the game!

 

[8andcounting]

If this passes , then things will turn for the worse . The NR applications will probably be at a all time high this year , but if this passes and goes into effect in 2022 I think the applicant numbers will drop substantially. People want opportunity (Montana is good for opportunities like it or not) and if they have to wait 3+ years to draw a over priced $700 deer tag they’ll say f it .

 

[antlerradar]

If this passes , then things will turn for the worse . The NR applications will probably be at a all time high this year , but if this passes and goes into effect in 2022 I think the applicant numbers will drop substantially. People want opportunity (Montana is good for opportunities like it or not) and if they have to wait 3+ years to draw a over priced $700 deer tag they’ll say f it .

I can not disagree with this. Chances are good that the early draw will have 100% success for a few years.
@Greenhorn made one of the most important posts. As long as residents continue to require NR to pay for the bulk of the funding I predict we will see more than our share of smelly bills.

 

[JLS]

@Greenhorn made one of the most important posts. As long as residents continue to require NR to pay for the bulk of the funding I predict we will see more than our share of smelly bills.

I know I’m not the only one here who’s sat through a number of commission meetings, listening to how a $40 elk tag would absolutely bankrupt hunters.

 

[rwc101]

Holy shit. I thought our tags were cheap.

 

[The Hedgehog]

$77 to hunt deer, elk, bear, birds and fishing for a year. For another $14 total - you can apply for both limited deer/elk permits. Come on. That’s messed up.

I bought 2 lift tickets at the local ski hill yesterday..