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

[Walkalot]

Thanks

 

[Walkalot]

Can we get a bill to ban outfitters in montana. Seems like that would solve many problems. The problem being $$$

 

[RobertD]

I some times wonder what I would be doing if I had went on to one of those better school and some how managed to over come my phatic spelling skills enough to get a masters or doctorate in economics. Probably be setting at some bank or finical firm pulling a high six figure salary and looking to retire in a few years. One thing is certain. I would not be in the middle of nowhere Montana, working outside most days and getting to go antler hunting and scouting for deer and elk almost every day. Some things are worth more than a big salary and a corner office.

There's an irony in a guy complaining about his own writing ability by affixing a nice Greek adjective to it

 

[Big Shooter]

You’re.

For shit sakes!!

 

[Big Shooter]

I some times wonder what I would be doing if I had went on to one of those better school and some how managed to over come my phatic spelling skills enough to get a masters or doctorate in economics. Probably be setting at some bank or finical firm pulling a high six figure salary and looking to retire in a few years. One thing is certain. I would not be in the middle of nowhere Montana, working outside most days and getting to go antler hunting and scouting for deer and elk almost every day. Some things are worth more than a big salary and a corner office.

I couldn’t agree more!

 

[easternmt]

After following along with this thread I have come to a point to give my ten cents worth. I have grown up in Montana from the time I was three years old. I started hunting on private land and public land when I was old enough to start. Since my early years a field I have seen it become almost impossible to hunt private property. From people abusing the private land owner to outfitters leasing up ranches. I cannot blame any of these private land owners for closing their gates to the public! To some this jealously leads people to a bitter taste and hating outfitters. What makes me mad is that the Montana fish and game won’t do their job and manage the wildlife properly. Do I think MOGA should have got 3000 extra licenses? No, like Eric said he sells a service. If it’s a good service people will be happy to use it. Outfitters have to provide a good service or just by word of mouth they wouldn’t make it. As with any job there is an associated risk. I think everyone should have an equal opportunity at available tags. I don’t think Montana legislature should be setting tag allocations and quotas. The fish and game committee should be able to handle this based on scientific land sustainablity and population objectives and off of this to determine tag quotas and not just off of land owner tolerance and profit off the wildlife.To me the answer to having land owners, outfitters, and the general public all getting what they want is we need to get Montana fish and game to start doing their job! It’s going to require a change in season structure and total tag numbers dropped for all of Montana and the realization that hunting as we used to know it needs to change. If we want lots of animals on the landscape we can’t kill everything off. The general public may not be on board with changes, but to that I would say tough sh$?. If it’s what the wildlife needs it’s what it needs and people will get over it. Rant over please continue.

 

[SAJ-99]

I some times wonder what I would be doing if I had went on to one of those better schools and some how managed to over come my phatic spelling skills enough to get a masters or doctorate in economics. Probably be setting at some bank or finical firm pulling a high six figure salary and looking to retire in a few years. One thing is certain. I would not be in the middle of nowhere Montana, working outside most days and getting to go antler hunting and scouting for deer and elk almost every day. Some things are worth more than a big salary and a corner office.

You probably make more than a lot of economists I know. They like to argue in the theoretical and never have to deal with the consequences, kind of like internet chat boards.

Ag markets are not perfectly competitive. The one thing you left out is in perfect competition there are also numerous buyers who are unable to control the market price. That isn’t true in ag. Especially cattle and pigs where there are just a few processors and the producers are price takers. In most grains Cargill and ADM, in barley the beer makers, etc. Capitalism and perfect competition don’t go together well. Also, I am not sure we have the same definition of “economic profit”. Farmers and rancher make a profit, even if it were a perfect competition. Just not “excess” profit. The only way to do that is to modify your product -go organic, grass fed, raise bison, etc- to differentiate it from norm.

@Eric Albus, Customer don’t necessarily get the benefit from subsidies in cheaper product, but rather more stable prices. surprised no one has made a point that resident tag prices could be viewed as being subsidized by NR prices.

 

[Eric Albus]

I took at least a dozen 300 level or better econ and ag econ classes at MSU and received A in all of them. I usually was one of the top students in the classes. Just before I graduated my advisor called me in. This is what he said " Art, are you thinking about graduate school, MSU and far better schools would be happy to accept you. Doctor Smith is very impressed with your analytical ability." I looked Stauber right in the eye and replied back " Doctor Smith would not be very impressed when I flunked out because my spelling and English skills are crappy". That was the end of the graduate school talk.
A guy needs to know his weaknesses and spelling is mine. Never have been able to spell and I doubt that is going to change.

That’s funny stuff

 

[Eric Albus]

You probably make more than a lot of economists I know. They like to argue in the theoretical and never have to deal with the consequences, kind of like internet chat boards.

Ag markets are not perfectly competitive. The one thing you left out is in perfect competition there are also numerous buyers who are unable to control the market price. That isn’t true in ag. Especially cattle and pigs where there are just a few processors and the producers are price takers. In most grains Cargill and ADM, in barley the beer makers, etc. Capitalism and perfect competition don’t go together well. Also, I am not sure we have the same definition of “economic profit”. Farmers and rancher make a profit, even if it were a perfect competition. Just not “excess” profit. The only way to do that is to modify your product -go organic, grass fed, raise bison, etc- to differentiate it from norm.

@Eric Albus, Customer don’t necessarily get the benefit from subsidies in cheaper product, but rather more stable prices. surprised no one has made a point that resident tag prices could be viewed as being subsidized by NR prices.

You are 100% spot on. We R’s are heavily subsidized by NR licensure.

 

[Eric Albus]

There's an irony in a guy complaining about his own writing ability by affixing a nice Greek adjective to it

That’s what made it so funny

 

[Eric Albus]

Can we get a bill to ban outfitters in montana. Seems like that would solve many problems. The problem being $$$

You can ban outfitters and it won’t change a thing.
There will be no opening of gates allowing free access. Most of the places in Montana are selling to out of state absentee owners. Most of them are NOT even allowing the outfitter who hunted them to continue. One outfitter I know used to run 60 hunters a year, now due to the places he hunted selling he runs 10-15 hunts.
The point I’m making is Outfitter’s are leasing less than 6.2M acres, but we have the target on our back. Landowners who don’t want to deal with the public tell door knocking hunters “leased out” hunters assume its to an outfitter when the place may not even be leased, or is leased to R/NR hunt club.

I can understand the angst of NR DIY guys having to draw and NR Outfitted clients being able to get license every year, and I can understand the R hunter who has family that can't draw but every other year not liking NR outfitter clients being able to license every year. If I remove my outfitters hat and look at the situation from an R hunters perspective, I would much rather see NR have to go with an outfitter. In most cases they are going to be hunting private land I can't access, or going into the backcountry via horses that I can't/won't/don't access. The NR hunters most of us are taking the hunting public of Montana doesn't see, except at the processor or gas station.

 

[Eric Albus]

After following along with this thread I have come to a point to give my ten cents worth. I have grown up in Montana from the time I was three years old. I started hunting on private land and public land when I was old enough to start. Since my early years a field I have seen it become almost impossible to hunt private property. From people abusing the private land owner to outfitters leasing up ranches. I cannot blame any of these private land owners for closing their gates to the public! To some this jealously leads people to a bitter taste and hating outfitters. What makes me mad is that the Montana fish and game won’t do their job and manage the wildlife properly. Do I think MOGA should have got 3000 extra licenses? No, like Eric said he sells a service. If it’s a good service people will be happy to use it. Outfitters have to provide a good service or just by word of mouth they wouldn’t make it. As with any job there is an associated risk. I think everyone should have an equal opportunity at available tags. I don’t think Montana legislature should be setting tag allocations and quotas. The fish and game committee should be able to handle this based on scientific land sustainablity and population objectives and off of this to determine tag quotas and not just off of land owner tolerance and profit off the wildlife.To me the answer to having land owners, outfitters, and the general public all getting what they want is we need to get Montana fish and game to start doing their job! It’s going to require a change in season structure and total tag numbers dropped for all of Montana and the realization that hunting as we used to know it needs to change. If we want lots of animals on the landscape we can’t kill everything off. The general public may not be on board with changes, but to that I would say tough sh$?. If it’s what the wildlife needs it’s what it needs and people will get over it. Rant over please continue.

This is what needs to happen. It is what I have said for years. "If the accessible lands looked like the places I hunt we would not even be having a conversation about this". Nobody would care who leased what if it all held the same quality. Nobody but a complete moron would lease private land if the public held the same quality. Hunting BLM, FS, CMR is CHEAP compared to hunting private land. And yes, outfitters do pay BLM, FS, CMR to hunt, further subsidizing the R hunter, but it's cheap compared to private.

 

[SAJ-99]

You are 100% spot on. We R’s are heavily subsidized by NR licensure.

I know, but it really boring arguing both sides of an argument.

 

[Wildabeest]

Most of them are NOT even allowing the outfitter who hunted them to continue. One outfitter I know used to run 60 hunters a year, now due to the places he hunted selling he runs 10-15 hunts.

So I guess we now know what MOGA’s legislative strategy will be next session. “An Act to Require All Landowners to Lease to Outfitters”. Because, you know, it’s much easier to go to Helena with your hand out than figure out how to run a business within the natural constraints of that business like every other business somehow manages to do.

 

[BuzzH]

You are 100% spot on. We R’s are heavily subsidized by NR licensure.

Outfitters are subsidized, Residents still pay for their tags that funds management. Outfitters pay exactly nothing toward the management of the wildlife they take.

 

[Eric Albus]

So I guess we now know what MOGA’s legislative strategy will be next session. “An Act to Require All Landowners to Lease to Outfitters”. Because, you know, it’s much easier to go to Helena with your hand out than figure out how to run a business within the natural constraints of that business like every other business somehow manages to do.

Outfitting on private land is going to pretty much done and over with in the next 10-15 years, as ranchers are aging out and selling to NR absentee owners. This has been a topic of discussion amongst us for a few years.

 

[BuzzH]

Outfitting on private land is going to pretty much done and over with in the next 10-15 years, as ranchers are aging out and selling to NR absentee owners. This has been a topic of discussion amongst us for a few years.

Gee, that's too bad...need a tissue or just another 3,000 NR tags?

I have no sympathy for your plight...you reap what you sow. Never saw a single outfitter have any concern when friends/family were kicked off their hunting spots when you and your "industry" leased it out from under them.

Its not personal Eric, its just business...that's what I've heard.

 

[Eric Albus]

Outfitters are subsidized, Residents still pay for their tags that funds management. Outfitters pay exactly nothing toward the management of the wildlife they take.

Outfitters are paying fees to FS, BLM, CMR, State for the privilege of use of these lands. Outfitters are also required to have and hold conservation license in Montana. Sportsmen pay nothing to access BLM, CMR, FS.

 

[Eric Albus]

Gee, that's too bad...need a tissue or just another 3,000 NR tags?

Neither, but thanks for asking.

 

[BuzzH]

Outfitters are paying fees to FS, BLM, CMR, State for the privilege of use of these lands. Outfitters are also required to have and hold conservation license in Montana. Sportsmen pay nothing to access BLM, CMR, FS.

Hunters aren't making a profit from BLM, CMR, or FS...and I know what the "fee's" are, not enough to cover administration. Recreational users pay for that access via Federal Taxes.

WOW, a whole conservation license...between all the outfitters combined they chip in enough to buy a couple tanks of gas. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back for all you do...