Thin the herd!
- Thread starter Hilljackoutlaw
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
I don't think you're wrong just wondering what parts bother you?
I have issues with the price of Resident tags, but that's not limited to Montana, and I thought the same clear back when I still lived there.
None of it bothers me. If anything, it’s likely to lead to an outcome that I would personally be happy with.
Just an observation/prediction.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,749
My 2 cents.
NR’s are part of the problem. R’s are part of the problem. I don’t like the number of NR’s I see in 6&7, I also don’t like the number of R’s coming to 6&7. For now pick your region if off the table. Mandatory reporting is off the table. It’s difficult at best to determine the severity of a problem with no support data.
I could not believe the reaction of some legislators to reporting. I even told them the reports would only be released by FWP regionally. Excuses I heard ranged from “to much govt in my life already “ to “I don’t want anyone knowing where I hunt”. Other quotes resistant to change, “this will affect me”. “If we separate wt and Md license, it’ll affect me, I killed my best wt on a Md hunt”.
After being here I’ve concluded, it’s all about ME for most ppl.
Tenable solutions are what is needed. The outfitted clients in 6&7 are primarily on private, most of us in 6 have reduced mule deer clients to near none. There is nothing left. In 7 we’ve all cut hunter numbers way, way back. Some of as much as 50-70%. So the outfitters and their clients are not really a part of the problem. We will get the blame though.
NR’s are part of the problem. R’s are part of the problem. I don’t like the number of NR’s I see in 6&7, I also don’t like the number of R’s coming to 6&7. For now pick your region if off the table. Mandatory reporting is off the table. It’s difficult at best to determine the severity of a problem with no support data.
I could not believe the reaction of some legislators to reporting. I even told them the reports would only be released by FWP regionally. Excuses I heard ranged from “to much govt in my life already “ to “I don’t want anyone knowing where I hunt”. Other quotes resistant to change, “this will affect me”. “If we separate wt and Md license, it’ll affect me, I killed my best wt on a Md hunt”.
After being here I’ve concluded, it’s all about ME for most ppl.
Tenable solutions are what is needed. The outfitted clients in 6&7 are primarily on private, most of us in 6 have reduced mule deer clients to near none. There is nothing left. In 7 we’ve all cut hunter numbers way, way back. Some of as much as 50-70%. So the outfitters and their clients are not really a part of the problem. We will get the blame though.
BuzzH
Well-known member
So much truth to that post.
I'm more than willing to give things up for better mule deer in Montana even though I'll probably never hunt them again there.
The one thing that bothers me is the whole "too much government in my life"...what a worn out argument. Having to follow regulations is not too much government. Making it a requirement to fill out a mandatory harvest report is not too much government. No different than any other hunting regulation. It's not like the MTFWP asks much from hunters, one simple ask is too much? WAFJ.
I heard the same shit when WY wanted to start hunting late mule deer bucks around here for CWD concerns. I said hey, if we're going to kill off mule deer bucks, CWD testing should be mandatory. The response ? "Well, we can't make it mandatory because some will say it's too much government". My response was well, make it a regulation and fine the living shit out of hunters or suspend their license if they don't comply, no different than if they poach.
Don't want to follow the regulations, then you don't get to hunt next year and pay a fine.
Not sure if this was discussed elsewhere. @Ben Lamb @Big Fin you have anymore info on it? Any legs?
Montana hunters request study in hopes of easing crowding
Montana hunters aim to ‘track’ solutions to overcrowding with new study request.www.montanaoutdoor.com
I think both SJ17 & HB562 have legs. I've spoken with the Skyline and Anaconda boys and it sounds like there's a desire to work with MOGA on this and vice- versa. The primary issue that Butte & Anaconda guys are concerned about is crowding in public land. That's not a bad thing to bring hunters & outfitters together on.
antlerradar
Well-known member
My bet is many are already following the regulations loosely, and don't want to have to report what they are doing.
Hilljackoutlaw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2019
- Messages
- 6,918
Someone actually said this and was not being sarcastic? That guy or gal should lose hunting privileges for 5 years for that statement. Haha
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 3,394
I heard a lot of the same when ive told anyone about the mule deer proposal
Hilljackoutlaw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2019
- Messages
- 6,918
That is not a good reason.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
I’m at the point where I’m starting to judge effectiveness of a proposal based on how pissed the general public is. If they are pissed then it will likely do exactly what is needed. If they are thinking it won’t affect them then it probably doesn’t make a difference for wildlife.
Similar threads
- Locked
