SB 380 Reconsideration of Bill!

[Pierre]

MOGA chooses which bills to support just like everyone. MSA has no budget yet we testify for the resource on almost every bill. We work successfully with our biologists and employees in FWP because we listen, offer input, and certainly do not make claims of superiority. Just how much does MOGA spend on 2 full time lobbyists? All on self serving legislation. Once again, it tells us much about your organization and its leadership. They made conscious decisions NOT to weigh in on bills supporting resource health and wildlife welfare. They chose to sit in condemnation of FWP biologists and remind them constantly of the inferiority. They choose to take credit for their perceived successes.
Most sportsmen have educated themselves to an understanding of the basics of biology. We are not rabidly anti predator. We work hard on being a part of managing the resource.
SFW and MOGA being allied on predator management....ya right. Neither of you have done squat but rail on shoot on sight...even to the extent of encouraging illegal activity?
While you folks are patting yourselves on the back for everything we have that's good, have you seen "Back From the Brink?"

 

[Pierre]

Looks to me like MOGA has only supported self-serving legislation. You are certainly NOT the savoir of the NR hunter as you profess. If they are true sportsmen, the resource is more important than your profit. I suspect we actually better represent their interests unless they are only out for themselves and to hell with the NAm. model, Public Trust, and fair chase.

 

[shoots-straight]

shoots, MOGA does not have the man-power or funding to battle every bill that comes along, you are wrong to think that we don't care though. Maybe next time around email me about some bills that could be worked on for the benefit of wildlife. I will see if I can garner support. I suggested MOGA support the game warden's salary increase( we did), and then the Gov. vetoed it.

197 was not a bad bill, 260 why would anyone care how many or by who large predators are killed?, what was wrong w/ 298?

31, out of fear of wolves being delisted? 418, 381 i can understand res. hunters not liking, 397 I did not like either...anything w/ a predator lable, large or small should be shot on sight...which is why we don't have a problem w/ "large predators" in Eastern MT....now, if everyone would just get as aggessive on coyotes



Ben, my clients are used to that....one of them told me last fall, "remember, we are old and paying you for this, you shouldn't be yelling at us"...we had a good laugh on that one.

SB 260 would have raised the percentage NR hunter could draw on predators. That includes lion, and Grizzlies. Right now on limited entry, NR can get no more that 10%. This pissed off resident hunters.

HB 298 purposely left the resident sportsman out of the mix. We would have no representation there.

HB 31 went to far, and if the guy writing the bill had been involved from day one he would have known that. There's many things to consider when dealing with the wolf issue. Amateurs should stay out of it. As it is, we are sitting where we need to on predators. You did see the new wolf season proposals, right?

Thanks for hanging in here and taking this.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Perception is a funny thing. Just how many "bad bills" in your opinion did MOGA introduce? How many did MOGA support that were "bad bills"?

After sportsmen as MSA, various groups, and individuals continuously testified, telephoned, wrote, and emailed (often with comments on this forum also) regarding bill after bill supported by MOGA, you cannot "perceive" how many and which bills are bad bills to sportsmen, then how in the world could you possibly think someone could collaborate with you? Either you are in denial or you just want to be argumentative because it somehow pumps your ego or something.
'Guess it's as a wise friend once told me, "Don't waste your time in a debate trying to apply logic where it doesn't exist."

 

[Eric Albus]

Joe, I have not seen "back from the brink"...how is that germain to anything we are discussing right now? I know a little about it, but what has the fact that hunters have championed wildlife and want to see abundant populations of ungulates and avians to do with anything we are discussing here?

Do you think it is a coincidence that elk and moose numbers are off?

Informed and voter do not go hand in hand...a small percentage of voters are informed enough to actually vote on an issue or for an official. If you don't believe me, just ask a few people you know about an issue they voted on...amazing how many vote w/ no knowledge.

email or call me next time there is a bill that makes sense and supports wildlife. I will call and see if I can garner support from MOGA.

If you step back and take a look at things realistically MOGA can't support every feel good bill that comes along. Some for political reasons, others because when a good bill has an excellent chance of passing why waste time and effort on it?

 

[Eric Albus]

shoots, i have not seen the new wolf proposals...this is the first day I have taken off since end of Feb.

 

[Eric Albus]

straightarrow...that road runs both directions...I was merely asking a question to get the take of those on here which bills were bad. When I deserve to be insulted I will make it abundantly clear, thank you.

shoots, thanks for the clarification, I have forgotten the wording on most of the bills, as I was not very involved this legslative session, was to busy calving in snow storms to even attend many of the conference calls....i agree asking 15% was to much, and should have ruffled the residents... When I was in on a discussion about 260 I said as much...should be no quota on predators anyway... that will probably stir some houndsman, but any predator that is abundant should not have a season until they are few enough in number to warrent protection...like that would ever fly.

298 should have been revised to include sportsmen, was never in a MOGA discussion about that one...however, I can tell you about FWP/landowner relationships, at least here in Reg. 6-7...I don't need a study or survey.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I was merely asking a question to get the take of those on here which bills were bad

Perception is a funny thing. Just how many "bad bills" in your opinion did MOGA introduce? How many did MOGA support that were "bad bills"?

NO, the latter was the question, as though you were still arguing that you could not identify bills that sportsmen would consider "bad." After all discussed and specifically described to you, it is illogical that you could not understand the extent of MOGA's "blood bath" of bad bills, adverse to the interests of sportsmen and of wildlife, in many cases. Sorry, if I insulted you, but ... again ... if you can't at least acknowledge the sportsmen perspective, then what are you doing trying to have a discussion on this forum?

If I have expressed anything that may have offended you, believe me .....

 

[Big Shooter]

If we cut the non residents back to where they should be, (around 10% of tag sales) then there will be no more leasing for outfitted clients than we have today. That's the main new, regulation that needs to come down the pipe, and would curtail any new growth. That would be a citizens initiative, and tell me how complicated that would be for the average Montanan to grasp? I'm pretty sure they could figure that one out. That would also take away MOGA attempts at adding more every session. I think this one needs to happen.

How do you suppose the average DIY hunter would benefit by passing such an initiative? Let me guess.......you think that this would automatically open the locked gates?!? I hate to be "that guy".....but that is not going to fix the problem and will more than likely make it worse. When you talk about the "average Montanan", do you mean the ones that you can con into signing your petition with a free glass of prune juice served chilled outside of his or her favorite bingo parlor, or the ones that actually know what is going on with the licenses, game conditions, and access issues?

 

[Eric Albus]

arrow, there is a pointed difference between a question and a statement. Were I not posing it as a question, "in your opinion which were bad bills" , then shoots would not have answered it as such. You must give me to much credit if you think I can remember every nuance to every bill.

As to the 10%, certainly that would hurt the outfitting industry, 10% would also be a punative measure, so sell it as such. 161 was purely a punative measure, and signature gather's were telling people as much. . Why not just own up to the fact that you hate outfitting and be honest about it?

10% might be the best thing to happen, perhaps the resident license would have to increase to fund FWP. When that happens, and the residents are seeing no improvement in "their hunting, or access" license sales will drop further...making the 10% more puntative....and subsequently a larger increase in resident license fees would have to occur....perhaps driving the cost of resident license beyond what most would be willing to pay or could afford.... "unintended consequences" I warned of them last time, and very few listened.... be much simpler and cleaner to run a campaign to end outfitting on private land... and a lot more transparent.

 

[Pierre]

Eric, Back From the Brink chronicles the loss of wildlife (no professional wildlife mgmt) and what it took to bring it back. It actually gives credit where credit is due. Certainly relevant to claims of outfitter mgmt. Your statement about "shoot predators on sight" is also evidence of lack of education and understanding in these matters. All critters are a valuable part of a whole system. Mgmt is the key and you are dead wrong! They'd all be listed if you had your way. Remember, the Dept is charged with oversight of the public trust....it doesn't just say those with horns. There are folks to whom lions, bears, and wolves are just as important as ungulates are to others. MOGA stands by Barrett legislation that is more detrimental to our ungulate pops than predators. Elk and moose? Sure, predators eat them. But that certainly has not proven to be the only problem. Listen to the research and learn.
Voting is democracy. If you lose, voters are uninformed? If you win they are rocket scientists? Sorry, not buying it. A citizens initiative is just that; your opinion is your vote and the folks on this forum may disagree on your assessment we are all uninformed.
As a MOGA member and board member, you chose the bills to support. Once more an indication of the character of your organization and its leaders. You have 2 paid lobbyists. If you are only weighing in on chickchit bills, question your leaders, their advice, and the direction they are taking you. You claim to represent NR sportsmen. Bull. You represent yourselves and thats it. NR sportsmen have responsibility for issues of wildlife health and welfare and adequate funding of the mgmt. You folks might consider redirection because my hands are full. You seem to think you are the only one busy. It is not my intention to lobby MOGA to be ethical when they are spending big bucks on lobbyists and lousy legislation. We did that with Jean and Mac this session and you folks still remained on the sidelines so as not to upset your R buddies. Look to your organization and what you might do to strap a set of balls on them. Give you a clue.....who decided it was not in MOGA's best interest to oppose the sheep bill??? or the Transplant bill, or many others??? Taking direction from SFW on predators is real smart too. Perhaps Mac has a direct line to Toby Bridges?

 

[The Hedgehog]

why would anyone care how many or by who large predators are killed?

...anything w/ a predator lable, large or small should be shot on sight...which is why we don't have a problem w/ "large predators" in Eastern MT....now, if everyone would just get as aggessive on coyotes

Seriously?

I'd rather see all your tame Milk River deer get a few more bouts of EHD, and bison running rampant over there.. 10% cap on nonresident deer/elk licenses is the best idea I've heard yet.

 

[Eric Albus]

Me 2...and I used to love my "tame Milk River Deer"...they were great...to bad you didn't call when we had to many...would have let you hunt them...so i could find out how really tame "my deer were"/

 

[Eric Albus]

Joe, let the Dept. try to make a living selling coyote, mnt. lion and wolf tags...when they go broke and we have no wildlife left you can say "Albus was right again"...Do understand though , I do not want to see the last coyote, or mtn. lion killed, but there is the fact that ungulates are what funds FWP, a line that must be drawn....you can buy into the left and their agenda...and see predators take over and manage wildlife... is that the agenda you really wish to see? Are you "pro-predator, or pro-hunting? They do not go hand in hand.

And do not give me "voters informed"....for shits sake....ask a few people what 161 was, or anything else they voted on...most have no clue....161 failed, so you are now working on more putative measure against outfitting..stop attempting to sugar coat it and admit, you hate leasing and outfitting, be transparent....oh, and FYI, my "pair" is firmly attached...just so you know.

 

[shoots-straight]

Joe, let the Dept. try to make a living selling coyote, mnt. lion and wolf tags...when they go broke and we have no wildlife left you can say "Albus was right again"...Do understand though , I do not want to see the last coyote, or mtn. lion killed, but there is the fact that ungulates are what funds FWP, a line that must be drawn....you can buy into the left and their agenda...and see predators take over and manage wildlife... is that the agenda you really wish to see? Are you "pro-predator, or pro-hunting? They do not go hand in hand.

And do not give me "voters informed"....for shits sake....ask a few people what 161 was, or anything else they voted on...most have no clue....161 failed, so you are now working on more putative measure against outfitting..stop attempting to sugar coat it and admit, you hate leasing and outfitting, be transparent....oh, and FYI, my "pair" is firmly attached...just so you know.

I-161 did not fail. If not for I-161 block funding would have dried up. We made over $2 million dollars more because of it. With less hunters! How is that a failure? We need more money with less presure on the resource right now. I-161 is doing that. Now if we could get rid of the $4.9 million we are losing in tag give aways.

You do have me re thinking my statements about "Voters being uninformed" now! Your proof of that.

 

[Big Shooter]

I-Now if we could get rid of the $4.9 million we are losing in tag give aways.

Is the $4.9 million strictly tag give aways, or is that the total amount of lost revenue due to an extremely large under-sell? Because if part of that is just non-resident tags that have not been sold,......then I-161 had a very direct affect on that.

 

[shoots-straight]

Is the $4.9 million strictly tag give aways, or is that the total amount of lost revenue due to an extremely large under-sell? Because if part of that is just non-resident tags that have not been sold,......then I-161 had a very direct affect on that.

The $4.9 million is just tag give-aways.

Shooter, even though the tags didn't sell out, we made over $2 million more than if I-161 had not passed, and we had sold all the tags available. What part of that is hard for an outfitter to understand? Just in denial I guess? Could we have made more if all those tags had sold? Yes! With all the give aways, there's now over 32,000 tags available to NR hunters in one form or another. That's wrong!

Tags are undersold throughout the west. Even more so in Idaho than Montana.

The tags were undersold before I-161. I think 3 years in a row.

 

[Eric Albus]

shoots, when I said 161 failed, I did not mean for tag revenue...anyone w/ half a brain knows it succeeded in providing more funding...It failed to open gates and run outfitters out of business...that was the main selling point for the signature gather's I listened to...

The 32k tags is also including all "B" license, mouse and grasshopper tags....explain to me the "tag give aways"...early in the morning and I must be forgetting something.

 

[shoots-straight]

shoots, when I said 161 failed, I did not mean for tag revenue...anyone w/ half a brain knows it succeeded in providing more funding...It failed to open gates and run outfitters out of business...that was the main selling point for the signature gather's I listened to...

The 32k tags is also including all "B" license, mouse and grasshopper tags....explain to me the "tag give aways"...early in the morning and I must be forgetting something.

Now your talking just like the others from MOGA. Full of BS.

I-161 only failed if you believe your rhetoric. I got signatures for I-161, and those points were NOT what we used. One point was to put a hold on the acres leased by Outfitters. Thats a fact!

Yes, the 32,000 tags included the 1,100 NR B-tags. That was it. No Grasshoppers, mice, or any other ignorant statement you can come up with.

The tag giveaways are those that have been give for reduced rates, and added to the overall NR pool.

(Come Home to Hunt)
Relative of a resident
College students

I'll get a break down for you.

So much for the civil dialog!

 

[The Hedgehog]

greenhorn...I am a "public hunter" as well. ...public land hunting is what it is, and will remain so until managed.

Hope so... Did some large predator hunting on public land on the weekend.. Saw piles of elk and deer, even with all 5 large predators in the area...

Keep up the good work on the pastures, pivots, and river bottoms. Bill Jerdon and the Bone Collector gotta keep the hillbillies entertained.