But that would require advertising and leg work. What business wants to do that
Non-resident outfitter license (MT) Bill is up for hearing 2/2/2021 (SB 143)
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
- Status
antlerradar
Well-known member
You and I can likely both agree that with a limited number of tags the best way to distribute them is with a random draw.
This is far form the system we have in Montana. Montana has landowner sponsor licenses, a 15% landowner set aside in limited entry, coming home to hunt licenses, NR youth licenses, a up to 10% cap on nonresidents in limited entry and maybe some others that I am not thinking about. All of these give an advantage to some group over the others wanting a license. It is easy to see why the outfitters would think that they should be entitled to a portion of the licenses too. Hard for me to honest with myself and argue that there should be no outfitter licenses when I favor some of the others that benefit me. Easy to see how this is it looking a little like outfitter hate.
Last edited:
We do agree on this and I am not in favor exacerbating the situation. I am in favor of landowner tags, but even that system is being abused.....example 680 elk. This should be cleaned up...but now I am getting off topic.
It is also getting old hearing people on this thread hate outfitters when in fact they disagree with how this shit show has been shoved down our throat and is being vocally supported by a couple folks that benefit financially on a subsidized public resource. Time to get a towel; getting a warm, wet back.
sacountry
Well-known member
Feeling inspired today by the Rolling Stones
What we need to do is to get all the stakeholders together prior to the next legislative session, hash this stuff out, draft some legislation, pick a legislator or two to sponsor it, get it passed. Everyone should feel a little bit of I didn't get what I want, but I got what I needed. Waiting for government to do it for us will devolved in to 10 NR tags / 620 acre landowner slaughtering.
What we need to do is to get all the stakeholders together prior to the next legislative session, hash this stuff out, draft some legislation, pick a legislator or two to sponsor it, get it passed. Everyone should feel a little bit of I didn't get what I want, but I got what I needed. Waiting for government to do it for us will devolved in to 10 NR tags / 620 acre landowner slaughtering.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I probably should have put "a little like" in all caps.
Wildabeest
Well-known member
I think it’ll be tough to get MOGA to the table without a Citizens Initiative forcing them. They got far more than they wanted through the slimy methods they employed in Helena, so why would they want to change that? They have all the leverage right now, and unfortunately I think they need to see a serious threat to the new status quo before they have any interest in bargaining in good faith. If I’m in their shoes, I’d play along with that game, not give up much of anything in negotiations, and milk this situation for as along as I could drag out that process. A Citizens Initiative will level the bargaining table. Without it, I don’t see an acceptable solution materializing.
Big Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2008
- Messages
- 482
You couldn’t be further from the truth. There is a handful of us that would gladly have a round table with the opposition. Randal has already reached out to us about some discussion. Shouldn’t paint with such a broad brush.
Wildabeest
Well-known member
just curious, why didn’t you try that before this legislative session? You’ll have to pardon me if I have a hard time trusting MOGA right now.
Walkalot
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 254
Big shooter what in your paid for mind should be in discussion.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
1). any talk of OSL has to include talk of support for outright acquisitions of land into public hands. Easterners are all foaming at the mouths over APR, and others but also against State land net gain. Outright purchases from willing sellers would be a win for all.
a. It's a way to combat orgs like APR and others. Outfitters could still use these lands. It also combats hunt clubs and Richy richs from locking up those lands.
2). That the OSL comes out of 17,000. 3000 is the number now. so 3000 out of the 17,000.
3). If those things happen, maybe Resident hunters would add skin in the game to pay a fee for more acquisitions of lands like those locked up in the crazies.
4). Corner crossing legislation support. Members of MOGA need to agree to some sort of legislation or join in some sort of initiative to pass corner crossing laws.
Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
a. It's a way to combat orgs like APR and others. Outfitters could still use these lands. It also combats hunt clubs and Richy richs from locking up those lands.
2). That the OSL comes out of 17,000. 3000 is the number now. so 3000 out of the 17,000.
3). If those things happen, maybe Resident hunters would add skin in the game to pay a fee for more acquisitions of lands like those locked up in the crazies.
4). Corner crossing legislation support. Members of MOGA need to agree to some sort of legislation or join in some sort of initiative to pass corner crossing laws.
Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
MThuntr
Well-known member
who paid for what? all this talk about providing for wildlife but lots of program money also pays for that....just saying
farm.ewg.org
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database put the issue on the map and is driving reform. Just ten percent of America's largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths of federal farm subsidies; cash payments that often harm the environment.
farm.ewg.org
Last edited:
It benefits you, common talking point.who paid for what? all this talk about providing for wildlife but lots of program money also pays for that....just saying
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database put the issue on the map and is driving reform. Just ten percent of America's largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths of federal farm subsidies; cash payments that often harm the environment.
MThuntr
Well-known member
Possibly but since all this occurred on private lands for those willing and able to pay (via locked up leases) you and I don't even get crumbs. 3k extra hunters at over $1.2 million over the years in bonus handouts we don't qualify for.
Big Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2008
- Messages
- 482
I get it, and don’t blame you. Probably should have.
T
tjones
Guest
I talked to an outfitter that hunts east of town on FS. He is slammed and trying to add guides to do FS day trips with NR. Fun times coming.
But this was to help the overcrowding of public land by Nonresidents
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,643
So the outfitters who sought to ensure full camps by booking a surplus to account for 30% or more not drawing are going to be bursting at the seams this fall.
Sure glad we can trust them not to exceed their allotted FS user days. I expect to see impeccable records keeping this fall.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,643
What was the number or name of that failed bull that sought to do away with mandatory reporting for outfitters to FWP?
Glad I don't hunt East of town. mtmuley
- Status
