Non Resident tag sales Montana 94-2010

[mdunc8]

Don't all NR tags available have to meet a certain percentage of all available tags by law? I'm confused?

I think you're thinking about limited tags, which I believe, but I may also be confused, are limited to 10% of the total.

 

[shoots-straight]

I think you're thinking about limited tags, which I believe, but I may also be confused, are limited to 10% of the total.

That I do know. Your right mdunc8.

 

[thetruth]

I think you're thinking about limited tags, which I believe, but I may also be confused, are limited to 10% of the total.

That's why it's so important to keep the limited elk archery permits in all of eastern Montana. It's the only way to limit non-residents to no more than 10%. Otherwise, they will continue to take more and more of our trophy bull opportunities.

 

[shoots-straight]

What is the chip on your shoulder about with non-resident hunters?

Today there was a 2 x 12, and I wish someone would have knocked it off. I apologize to those I offended today, Bambie, Dink, and others. That's as good as it gets.

To the Montana Legislators I would like to say, I can't wait to get even. Paybacks are a you know what. Rest assured, it's not revenge he's after, it's a Reckoning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GREE8GdRrc

 

[Lawnboy]

That's why it's so important to keep the limited elk archery permits in all of eastern Montana. It's the only way to limit non-residents to no more than 10%. Otherwise, they will continue to take more and more of our trophy bull opportunities.

I'm sure glad that only the eastern part of the state has trophy animals. Must be convenient for those of us out west only get to hunt raghorns. Those NR are taking trophies on the private land that we can't hunt anyway who cares. I'd rather be able to go hunt the Snowies one weekend and then maybe the Moccasins the next and who knows sneak down to Ashland and try my luck. That is of course if the resource can handle it. Nah it's better that it's like Utah.

 

[mdunc8]

I may be in the minority, but I don't think every 6 point bull that roams Montana is necessarily "mine", which is the impression I get from some of the people on here. Every Montana resident can still hunt elk, deer, and antelope to their heart's content. Yes, maybe the hunting isn't as great (i.e., easy) as it was when you were kid. However, I spent about 18 days in the field hunting deer and elk on public land last fall. I ran into a whopping three hunters. All were less than 1/2 mile from a road. Montana is a big flippin state. If an inexperienced idiot like myself can find animals every day (and occasionally shoot one of them), I don't think the rest of you who have lived and hunted here a lot longer than myself should have a problem tracking down a critter. Sure, it may be a little tougher to find a six point bull, but there's plenty of animals out there for everyone (except for a few spots in the SW corner as SS and TJones can attest to). If in fact we Montanans do legally own the animals that roam this great state, then I'm willing to donate one of "my" six pointers to a NR next year.

 

[Big Fin]

That's why it's so important to keep the limited elk archery permits in all of eastern Montana. It's the only way to limit non-residents to no more than 10%. Otherwise, they will continue to take more and more of our trophy bull opportunities.

If keeping non-residents from taking "more of our trophy bull opportunities" is the objective to be accomplished by cutting resident tags in these units, count me as against it. May not have been meant to sound this way, but it sounds like a dislike of non-residents who might be hunting near you, or a serious "possessiveness" issue.

Had hoped the objective might be something related to biology, resource, opportunity, etc.

I never felt non-residents were taking anything from me in these units or in the Breaks. They paid their share, which is a hell of a lot more than me. I didn't mind them having a crack at the same critters. Maybe I am in the minority.

Seems the places where biology would dictate the use limited tags is the wolf and winter decimated areas. Not the booming elk areas of eastern and central Montana. I am not promoting that in these hard hit areas, but pointing out that those are the places where I can see justification for it, as the guys in the Bitteroot did to protect their elk hunting resource.

Or, are non-residents not taking any of the trophy bull opportunities in those hard hit areas? From your logic, it seems they could be.

Seems like it is possible that any non-resident, whether limited or unlimited tags, has the potential to take one of those guarded "trophy bull opportunities." Why just limit those archery tags, if that is the concern? Could it be because those are the areas you hunt?

Just pointing out the conflicts in that your statement and the difficulty in trying to reconcile such a statement with anything related to biology, opportunity, and reasonable sharing of the resource with non-residents.

 

[shoots-straight]

As it's looking right now, we're increasing NR opportunities, not decreasing. Not this year, but next be ready for 17,000 Big game, 2,000 Wilderness, + what ever deer tags of that get returned, + 3400 relatives of a relative, native. + 4600 deer combo's + (landowner sponsored?). Thats going to make my attachment look silly. 27,000 + tags. Fin, your the accountant, is that close? That's is if everything gets signed into law. Hope we get some good BM areas out of this.

The other thing that might happen, is when many NR hunters show up, they might find the huntings not so good in many areas, and not buy the tags the following year. The demand might not be there. That will be our double edged sword. If we do make headway, then the presure will pick up and could cancel out our efforts. SB 285 will do the same thing to a point. We can't affford to loose many bulls in that area.

 

[mixedbag]

Hey, can I get that donated 6 point this year mdunc8???lol.i've had alot of help fromresident hunters this year preparing for my hunt.I'm betting, if I hunt like mdunc,and get off the roads a few miles that I won't have any competition.I doubt I'll ever agree with SS on much as I'm a NR,but thats OK with me
Some of those outfitters you hate so much were more then happy to help me.I've had phone conversations with a couple of them and they know they won't book me.They offered their help to allow me to have a good hunt,and know I'm willing to hump it in a ways.
I'm not for adding 2000 more tags,but I'm definitely not for reducing any
if me ormy partner connect on a bull this archery,out of respect, I won't post what I took from you,lol

 

[jlmatthew]

Depending on how many are sold OTC 2011 could go as high as 17,800.

That would be a dream here, try having over 100,000 Nonresident tags sold and see how much you like it

 

[Black Hills]

That would be a dream here, try having over 100,000 Nonresident tags sold and see how much you like it

And Colorado is smaller than MT and yet you still have nearly twice as many elk,

 

[jlmatthew]

And Colorado is smaller than MT and yet you still have nearly twice as many elk,

OK.... then we double MT's amount and limit them to 35,600 tags and it would still be a dream scenario :hump:

 

[belly-deep]

I'm going to agree with those on here who think NR hunters need to be limited to past numbers. You can call me a protectionist or a possessivist or what ever, I don't care. What I do care about is my hunting. If that makes me a jerk, then so be it. I've never been afraid of being called that name before.

The fact of the matter is, NR bring in money. Both in tag sales and also to outfitters. When more NR bring in money to outfitters, more outfitters can lease land, etc. DIY NR hunters are the best kind. They fund the FWP but don't cut down on access too much. Also, they don't know what the hell they are doing most of the time, so I don't have to worry about them in my spots.

 

[Jezz]

As I will be a MT resident within the next 10 months it concerns me with all the legislation that has been happening this term. That being said I think MT hunters are pretty spoiled. Don't take this wrong way, but look at the opportunities you guys have. You DON'T have to choose a weapon, you can hunt the full archery season then if you don't kill an animal you can hunt the whole rifle season and you can also hunt pretty much any unit in the state unless it is an LE. You also get to kill multiple deer for a tiny cost. I think MT F&G is as much responsible for the declining numbers as any other factor. Talking with Tjones a few years back when they extended the rifle season for multiple weeks because (if I remember correctly) poor weather. T also said it was poor move as the herds were already hurting and then they extend the season?? That would never happen here.

In ID, I am pretty much forced to hunt either rifle or archery for elk. Then when you do choose a weapon you have to choose which unit or in limited cases maybe 2-3 units. For deer you have either a general tag or a whitetail tag, not both. Once you punch your deer tag you are done, unless you want to buy a leftover NR tag at NR prices. Which I have done several times. There is no difference between NR and R except for pricing. I am not complaining, just the way it is.

All I am saying is MT is a great state that is going thru some trying times right now. It's kinda like the guy that is bitching about fuel prices, but as he is filling up his rig he is drinking a $1.50 bottle of water. Pretty much the majority of people and states are going thru tough financial times and people need to stick together and not be biased towards someone that doesn't have your states license plate on his or her rig, but has the exact same interests and goals as you may have. We as sportsman need the support of both NR and R as well as your individual states.

 

[Black Hills]

OK.... then we double MT's amount and limit them to 35,600 tags and it would still be a dream scenario :hump:

Jl, I am agreeing with your point...........

 

[Black Hills]

Montana Sportsmen.

Doesn't FWP set the quotas and the regs each year?

 

[elk_hunter]

Or, are non-residents not taking any of the trophy bull opportunities in those hard hit areas?

Hey, speaking of NRs not taking bulls...I've been hunting MT for a bit now and have yet to take an elk. Can one of you Rs tie one to a tree for me before I drive up in September?

 

[noharleyyet]

OK.... then we double MT's amount and limit them to 35,600 tags and it would still be a dream scenario :hump:

...that's why I try to hunt private land...don't wanna piss off you guys who own the National Forests.

 

[jlmatthew]

...that's why I try to hunt private land...don't wanna piss off you guys who own the National Forests.

Thats part of the problem with OTC tags. The private land has been Texa-fied because you guys come up here and lease everything up, especially when you guys can do it long term knowing you can come back every year. Now that leasing plague is taking over the Eastern part of the state which is killing small game opportunities which is a gateway sport for youth hunters.

The other issue with OTC tags is crowding on the public land to the point where nobody's enjoying the hunt. I know a few guys that just gave up hunting because they were tired of fighting the crowds.

 

[Drake4]

I know a few guys that just gave up hunting because they were tired of fighting the crowds.

Must have been pretty lazy hunters...