same old crap....

[onpoint]

In light of whats going on in Japan, the following is with all due perspective (if I have any).
Upon perusing the MT legislative website and looking at the coming week, a few tidbits.

1. I'll actually begin on a small victory...hearing on a bill to raise fines and penalties for illegal fish intros. Finally a call I can make in support of........
2. As I stated in the title - hearings schedule on the same old crap.....
2a. How about making us pay a buck more for our conservation license to fund wolf monitoring....I thought most hunters didn't want wolves in the first place.
2b. A hearing on the silencer bill....I'm not gonna be the one to start the rabid debate again because I think it's a waste of time.
2c. Hey, and lets have a hearing about a bill to make management killed wolf hides and carcasses available to be used to generate $$ for livestock loss mitigation. wolf hides, skulls and pecker bones will generate millions to compensate producers for lost calves and woolies.
2d. Those pesky mountain lions need to be shot on sight. Lets discuss tossing many years big game management out the window and make em into a predator.
2e. Thid one scares the hell out of me because of what this phrase could mean. "Reduce disease prevalence". Lets see, elk carry brucellosis. The ag community is worried about transmission of B from elk to livestock. What method(s) will be used to reduce disease in wildlife populations? If anyone gets a hold of a legislator before this hearing, a good question might be "does this include lethal methods"?
3. Look at a few other upcoming bill fiscal notes and be prepared to have reverse sticker shock at the loss of federal $$ to state resource management. If one thinks the loss of these dollars is a who cares thing...or a good thing, .

I'll let the very capable Ben (if he is so inclined inform us of the particulars of the weeks hearings. Just a heads up about the next round of lunacy. Can't wait till they go back into the holes they emerged from.

 

[angels2011]

2e - listen to the audio during the Senate Finance and Claims hearing and you will be even more scared. This bill scares the sh** out of me, hope I'm reading more into it than there really is.

 

[onpoint]

2e - listen to the audio during the Senate Finance and Claims hearing and you will be even more scared. This bill scares the sh** out of me, hope I'm reading more into it than there really is.

If the way I read the bill and what you heard isn't wrong - I hope you, I, and 5 other guys around the state aren't the only ones worried enough do something about it........

 

[shoots-straight]

I think it means. "Test and Slaughter" plain and simple. I'm thinking revolt time here.

Is there a way to help keep the legislature out of managing our wildlife? Do other states have laws that force them to leave the rules and regulations to the Fish & Game Departments? We need some legislation of our own. I hoping for some input from some of the better heads from this site.

 

[onpoint]

I think it means. "Test and Slaughter" plain and simple. I'm thinking revolt time here.

Is there a way to help keep the legislature out of managing our wildlife? Do other states have laws that force them to leave the rules and regulations to the Fish & Game Departments? We need some legislation of our own. I hoping for some input from some of the better heads from this site.

Yea, it's called "government for the people, by the people". The unfortunate reality is that there are tons of different types of people - sportsmen being more and more of a minority all the time. And of that minority, many different opinions abound about what matters and what doesn't...to some all that matters is pulling the trigger. It's been a mess in the making for some time now. It's a mess, it's always going to be a battle, and I THINK you and I and some others will probably be willing to stick with doing the heavy lifting. Hopefully enough outdoorsmen/women will take it on as a personal mission that collectively WE can keep winning some battles (the war is more scary so I'll be realistic and hope for a lot of won battles to keep a stalemate in place). My plan is to keep fighting for this stuff AS HARD AS I hunt and fish but too keep enjoying the fruits of my (our) labor. I gotta be careful not to "keep gazing into the abyss, lest the abyss gazes into me". And hey, if lazy, apathetic, "bitch about it later" sideliners don't like what I have to say...don't really care. I've been involved in this arena longer than some "hunt talkers" have been alive and have been able (with the help of "like minded individuals") to good things for hunting and fishing for a all of us...just by staying informed and involved. "Saddle Up" for another week at the fools parade......

 

[belly-deep]

In light of whats going on in Japan, the following is with all due perspective (if I have any).
Upon perusing the MT legislative website and looking at the coming week, a few tidbits.

1. I'll actually begin on a small victory...hearing on a bill to raise fines and penalties for illegal fish intros. Finally a call I can make in support of........
2. As I stated in the title - hearings schedule on the same old crap.....
2a. How about making us pay a buck more for our conservation license to fund wolf monitoring....I thought most hunters didn't want wolves in the first place.
2b. A hearing on the silencer bill....I'm not gonna be the one to start the rabid debate again because I think it's a waste of time.
2c. Hey, and lets have a hearing about a bill to make management killed wolf hides and carcasses available to be used to generate $$ for livestock loss mitigation. wolf hides, skulls and pecker bones will generate millions to compensate producers for lost calves and woolies.
2d. Those pesky mountain lions need to be shot on sight. Lets discuss tossing many years big game management out the window and make em into a predator.
2e. Thid one scares the hell out of me because of what this phrase could mean. "Reduce disease prevalence". Lets see, elk carry brucellosis. The ag community is worried about transmission of B from elk to livestock. What method(s) will be used to reduce disease in wildlife populations? If anyone gets a hold of a legislator before this hearing, a good question might be "does this include lethal methods"?
3. Look at a few other upcoming bill fiscal notes and be prepared to have reverse sticker shock at the loss of federal $$ to state resource management. If one thinks the loss of these dollars is a who cares thing...or a good thing, .

I'll let the very capable Ben (if he is so inclined inform us of the particulars of the weeks hearings. Just a heads up about the next round of lunacy. Can't wait till they go back into the holes they emerged from.

If you would read through a couple of those bills and try to understand them, they might make some sense to you.

For instance, a bill like 2a will have to pass for the feds to ever give up wolf management. The $$ to manage them has to come from somewhere and unfortunately, license dollars are the most likely source. So state wolf management = license increases. I'll take that trade off even though I don't like it; its still better than not getting to manage wolves at all.

2c is another one that isn't bad. Ranchers are not being compensated for their losses very well. The state of Montana is what funds most of the compensation, and the budget usually comes up short. So we take the money raised by selling wolf hides and put it into that fund. I don't see a problem with that.

On the other hand, democrats are trying to raise tobacco taxes $1.50/pack, so it looks like both parties are up to their usual tricks.

 

[onpoint]

If you would read through a couple of those bills and try to understand them, they might make some sense to you.

For instance, a bill like 2a will have to pass for the feds to ever give up wolf management. The $$ to manage them has to come from somewhere and unfortunately, license dollars are the most likely source. So state wolf management = license increases. I'll take that trade off even though I don't like it; its still better than not getting to manage wolves at all.

2c is another one that isn't bad. Ranchers are not being compensated for their losses very well. The state of Montana is what funds most of the compensation, and the budget usually comes up short. So we take the money raised by selling wolf hides and put it into that fund. I don't see a problem with that.

On the other hand, democrats are trying to raise tobacco taxes $1.50/pack, so it looks like both parties are up to their usual tricks.

Yeah, the ever present problem of wolf management. Look at the fiscal note for the bill. Projected $20 Million loss of federal matching funds for F&W management (Try and understand how the funding of wildlife mgmt works). If that loss of funding occurs, does anyone actually think the $1 increase on a conservation license is gonna amount to a hill of beans? And the fiscal note for the "wolf hide and carcass" bill projects a whopping (and questionable) $7500 in revenue....that'll really make a difference. Probably cost that much to prepare, write, hear, and pass the legislation. And I'm getting just a s selfish as most other voters.....I'm a hunter, not a smoker....don't give crap about a tobacco tax. Quit Copenhagen when I was 27 years old. Once again, it ain't about political party affiliation. If my mother was a democrat and she introduced legislation that threatened my hunting and fishing, I'd be chewing on her 70 year old butt too.

 

[onpoint]

holy crap. I tried to make myself older than I already am. I stated above that Iv'e been active in this side of hunting/fishing longer than some on this sight have been alive....I meant "longer than some have hunted". Unless of course there are guys on here younger than 26+/- years. I hope so, the majority of twenty somethings I personally know ain't into this stuff...busy on their tweeters tweeting and facebooking......

 

[angels2011]

I think we can all agree that losing the P/R monies in any manner would not be optimal for sportsmen in MT.

I know that the bond between sportsmen and ranchers is tenuous, at best, but should we slaughter all the elk for them when their cattle are the reason that brucellosis is here in the first place. I'm for working with the ranchers for some kind of solution but this sounds to me like the existing bison plan (haze and slaughter) adapted for the elk herds.

I will agree with belly-deep on the 'sin tax' increase, just plain BS as well. What's next, sugar tax to pay for all the healthy people or whatever excuse they want to give? Another one of my pet peeves but that's for a different forum so I'll say sorry for that last rant.

Cripes, that's more than I've said in the last 2 weeks.

 

[shoots-straight]

If you would read through a couple of those bills and try to understand them, they might make some sense to you.

For instance, a bill like 2a will have to pass for the feds to ever give up wolf management. The $$ to manage them has to come from somewhere and unfortunately, license dollars are the most likely source. So state wolf management = license increases. I'll take that trade off even though I don't like it; its still better than not getting to manage wolves at all.

2c is another one that isn't bad. Ranchers are not being compensated for their losses very well. The state of Montana is what funds most of the compensation, and the budget usually comes up short. So we take the money raised by selling wolf hides and put it into that fund. I don't see a problem with that.

On the other hand, democrats are trying to raise tobacco taxes $1.50/pack, so it looks like both parties are up to their usual tricks.

I read through the bills, they did make perfect sense. They give special treatment to ranchers AGAIN! There's a cost of doing business, and if your a Rancher, and you loose some animals to predation, that's a cost of doing business. They pay very little for leases to graze public lands, and that's where a lot of predation occurs. The predation by wolves is small compared to all predation. Not even a drop in the bucket compared to disease, and other non predator related livestock deaths. We all have losses from one thing or another. Many Ranchers feel entitled to compensation.

We get out on a slippery slope when we give compensation, to fund the woes of all those who think they have a claim.

Our county passed an ordinance that you couldn't build on anything less than a 2 acre lot. It was called 1 for 2. Land was going for $120,000 for a 2 acre pc. Try putting a $120,000 home on a lot that expensive and sell it. Anyway, should the people of Ravalli County have had to pay me, for my loses. There's cost's in any business, and that is part of life. No special treatment. No entitlements.

The costs to the tax payers, because of sicknesses caused by smoking cost Billions. I see that tax on cigarettes saving tax payers money in the long run. My dad, uncle, and grandad all died from lung cancer. The costs to save all of them took most of all the life savings and then some. Insurance costs are staggering because we all pay for smokers. If it's too expensive to smoke, we might save more money and lives because of it. I don't like taxes either. Why should we all suffer because smokers want to smoke? (off topic)

 

[onpoint]

My dad smoked his last Camel straight just before he went into triple bypass surgery, a procedure from which he never recovered...lot of the complications due to smoking. Shoots says off topic. Yea kinda. But he's the guy that taught me to fish and I can't do that with him anymore. He also taught me to think critically and independantly, to recognize BS and not put up with it. Things that come in pretty handy these days. Those of us whose dads taught us to hunt/fish etc, and aren't around anymore are probably somewhere smiling watching their kids stand up for what they care about.

 

[belly-deep]

I read through the bills, they did make perfect sense. They give special treatment to ranchers AGAIN! There's a cost of doing business, and if your a Rancher, and you loose some animals to predation, that's a cost of doing business. They pay very little for leases to graze public lands, and that's where a lot of predation occurs. The predation by wolves is small compared to all predation. Not even a drop in the bucket compared to disease, and other non predator related livestock deaths. We all have losses from one thing or another. Many Ranchers feel entitled to compensation.

So you can't let them have the $$ raised off of wolf hides? BFD

Hey, I'll take as many allies as we can get in this wolf thing. Mebbe I'm nuts. You'll obviously cut off your nose to spite your face. Let me know how that works out for sportsmen in 50 years.

We get out on a slippery slope when we give compensation, to fund the woes of all those who think they have a claim.

Jeez, SS, if thats the way you feel then you better stop campaigning for the democrats all over this forum. You're mixed up, man...

 

[belly-deep]

He also taught me to think critically and independantly, to recognize BS and not put up with it.

Running all over the country creating sin taxes does not involve critical or independent thinking, in fact it is just the opposite. It is the government trying to control our lives, and they can do it because enough of the population is anti-smoking to let them get away from it.

If democrats really wanted to help the poor, they wouldn't keep raising taxes on them.

 

[onpoint]

So you can't let them have the $$ raised off of wolf hides? BFD

Hey, I'll take as many allies as we can get in this wolf thing. Mebbe I'm nuts. You'll obviously cut off your nose to spite your face. Let me know how that works out for sportsmen in 50 years.



Jeez, SS, if thats the way you feel then you better stop campaigning for the democrats all over this forum. You're mixed up, man...

Funny thing Belly, that cutting off the nose to spite the face thing is exactly how I (and obviously some others) feel about telling the feds to take a flying leap on wolves in exchange for sacrificing $millions for ALL wildlife management. Oh, if only wolves were the main problem.....I guess many think they are. Also funny but sad, you seem to still think its about DEM vs REP.

 

[belly-deep]

. Also funny but sad, you seem to still think its about DEM vs REP.

Why don't you go back and read your original post in this thread and tell me if what you just said still makes any sense.

Or you could read this one again.

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=245968

Seems to me, what's good for the goose is good for the gander

 

[onpoint]

Running all over the country creating sin taxes does not involve critical or independent thinking, in fact it is just the opposite. It is the government trying to control our lives, and they can do it because enough of the population is anti-smoking to let them get away from it.

If democrats really wanted to help the poor, they wouldn't keep raising taxes on them.

This is the last thing I'll say on this tangent. Wanna talk about taxes? My wife and I have no children. We do not burden the "system" with offspring, yet we had to pay +/_$2000 in income tax above and beyond what we already got hosed out of our paychecks, yet my buddy with 4 kids got $2200 back. I say BS. People with kids all get entitlements via the tax system at my expense. But I don't whine about it (with the exception of now). Taxes never stopped me (or from what I've seen, others either) from buying a new rifle, bird vest, dog, driving to Malta to hunt. Tax whiners are boring. Tax whining, there's some independent thinking.

 

[onpoint]

Why don't you go back and read your original post in this thread and tell me if what you just said still makes any sense.

Or you could read this one again.

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=245968

Seems to me, what's good for the goose is good for the gander

Maybe you should read it closer. I said I vote DEM because they scare me less. Research the sponsors of 90%+ of the legislation guys on here are pissed at...all sponsored by Montana GOP's. This little "tiff" is a waste of time.

 

[belly-deep]

Maybe you should read it closer. I said I vote DEM because they scare me less. Research the sponsors of 90%+ of the legislation guys on here are pissed at...all sponsored by Montana GOP's. This little "tiff" is a waste of time.

So in other words, you...

seem to still think its about DEM vs REP.

 

[onpoint]

So in other words, you...

You also seemed to have not caught the part of that post which I stated that I don't think either party will fix the real mess. Maybe you should go back to whining about sin taxes, Oh that's right, I got off that sub topic already. I'm a little more concerned about the possibility of "test and slaughter" isssues than wasting my time with your tangent. Pick a useless conversation with somebody willing to waste their preciouos time.

 

[shoots-straight]

Belly, I'm not telling anybody to vote for any one party. I'm saying which party is responsible for 99% of the bills that are attacking sportsman. Your the one that's saying I'm campaigning for Dems. I don't like anybody getting subsidies. I've always said that. Read my posts. I've been against Outfitters getting them, I'm against Ranchers getting them, and I'm not asking for any. Isn't that what the Republican party was suppose to be FOR? What I'm seeing is a lot of hypocrisy for this party. I hate the party system. It's to blame for most of the quagmire we're experiencing right now.

I too, am more afraid of the far right than what the left can do to taxes. I'd rather pay higher taxes, and have something left to hunt than sit around watching my big screen TV, in my million dollar mansion.

I know this, I voted Republican, and now regret it.