Western Sportsmans Alliance?

[Big Fin]

I think this thread is a valuable discussion. I hope it can stay on topic and can be conducted in a civil manner.

It will be interesting to see what happens with future tag allocations to non-residents. I know some states are moving toward a lower percentage to non-residents. New Mexico being the most recent. Oregon taking it from 10% to 2-5% a decade prior. And some states feeling they need more restrictions on NRs.

It is completely within the right of each state to do that. In fact, if states wanted to, they could go to 0% to non-residents. But, given the dependency on non-resident revenues, I doubt that is what will happen. And if proposed in my state of MT, I would fight it all the way.

In fact, I would advocate that MT should have a separate pool of tags for NRs that represent a true 10% of the limited entry tags. That would give them some transparency to what their odds are and they would know they are getting the true 10%, not the "up to 10%" as currently exists.

I could easily make a case as to why MT would benefit from providing 15% of all limited entry tags to NRs. I know if I promoted such idea, I would probably get burned at the stake when my fellow MT residents got their hands on me, but I would be open to that discussion.

In my mind, residents have to be careful both in how they price their non-resident hunting opportunity and how they allocate it. The more we price them out, the greater the likelihood the average self-guided hunter will not be able to participate. Just a function of economics. Yet, those who often express little concern for non-resident economics are the first to bemoan the commercialization of hunting and how they feel it is becoming a rich man's sport. You can't have it both ways.

On the flip side, non-residents, including me as a non-resident in all but one state, have a tendency to look at any change in tag allocation as taking away from us. When in reality, every tag we are given is one more tag than what a state is required to allocate to us. Legally, a state is not required to issue a single non-resident tag.

From that, when states like CO and WY are as generous to NRs as they are, I am ecstatic. When states like AZ, NV, UT, ID, AK give us 10%, I am still a happy guy, based on my perspective that they don't have to give us a single tag. And when states like CO, ID, AK, allow some over-the-counter opportunity, I am even happier. To me as a NR, the glass is way more than half full.

I know some NRs do not share the "glass is half-full" perspective I do. That is just human nature; we all look at it differently. And our perspective usually depends upon which shoes we are in; the R or the NR.

In the bigger picture, we need NRs to hunt in our states. The more people hunting, the better off we all are. Both from a funding stand point, but also from a bigger picture that hunting needs as many participants as possible.

I get a ton of emails from people who do not have elk hunting in their state. They all want to come an hunt an elk. Most of them don't care if they shoot a big bull, a raghorn, or a cow. Most of them just want to come and experience elk hunting with the possibility that they might see one. Converting these people to elk hunters is critical to the long-term future of elk hunting, elk habitat, and the other wildlife that benefits from elk conservation. They also represent a huge asset in the political and societal debates about wildlife conservation on the public lands that are a thousand miles from where they live.

I think it is rather ironic that at the same time, on the same days, on the same web forum, we have discussions about how we could lose hunting on Federal lands via some thinly veiled transfer/sale scheme where we westerners could benefit greatly from the input and participation of those living in the non-elk states; yet, on other threads we are having discussion about possibly reducing the ability of these non-residents to participate in hunting out west, via reductions in tag allocations and further increases in pricing to them.

It will be a pretty hard pitch to convince my friends and family in Minnesota to write Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar (their Senators) about the western public land issues, when all they see is less and less opportunity to participate in the greatest connection they have to those lands; hunting. Just a fact of how we as humans operate. If there is little in it for us, we have other demands on our time and interest that will engage us.

I am not sure where the intersection of R/NR opportunity lies. I am not sure where the best intersection of R/NR pricing ratios lies. I do know that we are all in this together and further division and staking out our camps with merely our own interest in mind, whether that be the NR interest or the R interest, probably spells a rough road for the future of hunting and conservation.

I also know that when we fight among ourselves over scarce resources, we have a tendency to focus on what is our share of the pie today. When we all know that building a bigger pie, putting more animals in the hills, is what helps us all, whether R or NR. Improving our wildlife numbers and the lands they live on not only helps us as hunters, it also furthers/retains our credibility with the non-hunting community who at times is provided some pretty damning examples that causes them to question what purpose and value hunting serves in today's world.

Anyhow, keep this discussion civil and on point. It is too valuable to let it be lost in the bickering and name calling that often results from discussion of these very passionate topics.

 

[Big Fin]

Be careful agreeing with me. Nobody likes me on this site because I am a mainstream hunter who does not dislike the way other people hunt like they do. I dont' preach hate or conflict like these folks do constantly. I preach acceptance and understanding of other styles of hunting in other parts of the country and world.

Buzz, Greenhorn, Shoots Straight, and Ben are just as bad as the Wolf crazies. They use the same tactics straw man, personal insults, half truths, exaggerations, chest thumping, acting like jerks, etc... they drive a wedge within the hunting community and that is why this site has turned from a pro hunting site to basically an anti hunting site filled with hate about all kinds of hunting from crossbows to TV hunters and especially people from other parts of the country like Texas or back East. Ultimately these folks consists of a handful of extremist who look down upon everyone else in the world for how they hunt because it's not how they do it in Montana, WY, CO, etc. They all believe their way is the only way and everyone else is dumb and every other state is screwed up. All you have to do is ask them, they will tell you. There is no point in having a discussion with them as they do not listen and already have their mind made up before it starts. If you want proof go look at the crossbow threads that have been closed. Go look at how they jump on NPaden for asking a simple question about what he could do to help support Western hunting without getting involved with the politics of some of these groups. Look at how they talk about other types of hunting.


All I can say is thank god most hunters dont' act like this as hunting would be no fun with a bunch of jerks in the woods all the time. These guys are basically to hunting what the Westboro Baptist church is to religion. Just a group of elitist extremist who dont' share the same vies that the vast majority of hunters but like to parade around the internet telling everyone how dumb they are for not having the same views. The proof is there for everyone to read.

Hey bud, go back and read this post you just made - Pot meet Kettle.

You come here and you bitch and moan about people calling you names and not agreeing with you. You are always the first one to start calling names and use some pretty interesting analogies. You cannot handle a differing opinion. When you start like you have with the post above and people hand it back to you, you start whining that someone is picking on you.

Look at the highlighted items in the above post you made. It is a perfect example. Until this point, not a single person has called you a name, labeled you as anything. And when they read your post and do give you a does of your own medicine, you will be bitching and moaning of how intolerant they are; how you are being picked on.

We've had this discussion via PMs many times. Time for you to go elsewhere.

 

[have gun will travel]

I agree with Randy! Wish I could write like that....

I think the hunter that hunts one weekend a year is just as important to our sport as the guys that hunt every day of the season.

 

[mdunc8]

I'm not opposed to sending emails and letters. But you need to realize lobbyist are professionals that's what they do.. Do you do your own dental work no you leave that to a dentist.but for your part you brush your teeth. Every group out there uses lobbyist, that's how our government works today like it or not. I'm for an all of the above approach. We should leave no stone unturned.

So getting paid instantly makes you qualified?

The problem is that the biggest stone is just sitting on its lazy rear whining about how nothing gets done.

 

[have gun will travel]

All I'm saying is in today's politics lobbyist get a lot of what they want. I don't like the idea. It's sad that's where we are today, but that's where we are today. As far as sitting on ones rear, there are thousands of hunters that are not going to write emails or letters, so give them an avenue to donate there money to the cause there voice can be heard from organizations they donate to. We need every one involved no matter how big or small there envolvment. Like I've said before I'm for an all of the above approach. I'm always open to ideas.

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Well I must have read a variation of this post a thousand times over the years, just the title changed. I know I can't spend the time away from work and family to do a weed control project with a Dept. Of Wildlife in (Insert state). But I can support those that do by sending funds, sometimes as hard ass as you might want to paint it that is all some can do. Now we are basically talking about supporting and upholding the tradition of hunting Public Lands, we all have them in our states for the most part. We can see what projects our National Forests need for us to help with in our home states. In my simple thinking you have to realize that by helping a local National Forest you will inadvertantly help those National Forests out west. Like an Army we can only put so many boots on the ground wheather you are Hunting or at war. So, tags are going to get tighter as more of us indulge in hunting out west or if we take care of ALL National Forest more hunters may stay instate with just an occasional trip out west. BTW, There are some real breath taking things to be seen in the eastern National Forests and we are OTC. John

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Draftstud,

I suspect many of us on here would agree with you but I also suspect most of us would somehow manage to find the time and money to break away from work and family to hunt sheep in (Insert State). Perhaps that is the problem?

 

[npaden]

I just go to the math. If 1,000 folks contributed $100 each you would have $100,000 to pay for some boots on the ground salary and expenses for someone to go to meetings, do some habitat work, etc.

Get 10,000 folks and drop it to $50 each and you could have 6 or 7 guys doing the same.

The problem is that then the organization needs to start working on feeding itself, promoting itself, fundraising, educating members on what it is doing, and the money ends up diverted from what it's intended use was.

Just thinking out loud here, not coming to any good conclusions.

 

[npaden]

Draftstud,

I suspect many of us on here would agree with you but I also suspect most of us would somehow manage to find the time and money to break away from work and family to hunt sheep in (Insert State). Perhaps that is the problem?

What if you earned some type of bonus point for participating in an approved habitat conservation project like some states give for hunters safety classes or being a hunters safety educator, etc.?

I'm sure there are a small minority of folks that are willing to do those types of things with no strings attached, but you could probably get a much higher participation if you were able to have some perks attached to doing them.

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

MC, I understand what your saying, but if I go to Montana for 6 days for a project, it just cost me an additional 7200 dollars before I come back to do that Sheep Hunt. That is the problem for a NR. John

Draftstud,

I suspect many of us on here would agree with you but I also suspect most of us would somehow manage to find the time and money to break away from work and family to hunt sheep in (Insert State). Perhaps that is the problem?

 

[Deleted member 18333]

What if you earned some type of bonus point for participating in an approved habitat conservation project like some states give for hunters safety classes or being a hunters safety educator, etc.?

I'm sure there are a small minority of folks that are willing to do those types of things with no strings attached, but you could probably get a much higher participation if you were able to have some perks attached to doing them.

You are correct more people would participate if there was something extra in it for them. What we need to do is get more of us to realize the perk can be more wildlife and therefore more tags and therefore better odds at drawing. Sounds like a nice perk to me. The only problem is its not a guarantee and most of us wont do it if we aren't guaranteed something.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

MC, I understand what your saying, but if I go to Montana for 6 days for a project, it just cost me an additional 7200 dollars before I come back to do that Sheep Hunt. That is the problem for a NR. John

Agreed. Easier said than done but most worthwhile things are. It's problem for all of us not just NR's.

 

[BuzzH]

BuzzH, if you have the answer then I'm all ears, that's why I started this thread.

Instead of sarcasm, please enlighten us.

You're saying all I need to do is take some vacation time and go to a meeting or two in states that I can't vote and everything will be solved?

Npaden,

I didn't say you had to go to a meeting, there are many levels of involvement in how you can address these issues we all face.

What bothers me, is that in nearly every case, there has to be something in it for hunters to get involved. Just like your comment regarding getting a preference point for stepping up for wildlife. I disagree with that on every level, unless your only goal is to ensure YOUR chance to hunt and YOUR access to wildlife.

Hunters, as a group, need to take a major step back and ask themselves whats really important. The view from here, is that they think about themselves and what tags they'll draw, 99% of the time, before they give consideration to wildlife, wildlife habitat, public lands, and the host of issues that impact same, much more severely.

Every single day that I wake up, I thank those guys like my Grandparents, Father, etc. that gave so much without asking a single thing in return. They helped to fund and promote the wildlife, habitat, and public lands that we all enjoy. They didn't expect anything and looked to the future of the sport. My Grandfather is a perfect example, he, and his generation, along with their vision, created the wildlife we enjoy today. They did it all, on a shoe-string budget, and expected little. They also realized that their efforts would very likely never net them a bighorn tag, a goat tag, a moose tag, a bull tag in the breaks, etc.

They also didn't ask for special consideration, more preference points, or anything for their efforts. Even though my Grandfather never got the opportunity to personally hunt a moose, goat, or sheep in Montana...his son, and grandsons have. I'm sure if he were still alive today, he would smile knowing that his efforts afforded opportunity for others and that wildlife and wildlife habitat, were better after his hunting days and life were over, than they were before.

That's why I find it hard to listen people say they care so much about their kids future to hunt, etc. A hunter worrying about another preference point, or drawing a tag, is not going to save the future of the sport or benefit their kids in the future.

If they really cared they would be writing letters, contacting their reps on things that really ARE going to impact wildlife. You don't need to spend vacation days contacting your congress to put the brakes on things like this transfer of public lands bullshit. Spend time researching and commenting on Federal Land Management Plans, Travel Plans, wildlife initiatives, etc. etc. etc.

It concerns me that I have to point these types of things out to people who supposedly care so much about the wildlife, wildlife habitat and the future of hunting. I wonder where and when we got off course so far? How was the message lost? Who is to blame?

Somewhere along the way to a bigger trophy room and the next tag, the important things have been forgotten about, no question of that.

There needs to be a fundamental shift in priorities and vision, or we're going to find ourselves up chits creek without a paddle.

Those before us did the hard part, all we have to do is keep what they accomplished. Yet, in many cases, we seem unable to do even that.

 

[npaden]

Okay, I can do some of that.

I really appreciate guys like Oak posting information on public input on sheep issues and I try to respond to those even though I very much doubt I will ever be hunting sheep in my lifetime. I think lots of folks (well, some anyway) do the same.

I have no idea where to even start on researching and commenting on stuff like that without someone coming on here and pointing it out though.

Let's get on the public land transfer bandwagon. Do I just email or snail mail my legislators a poorly worded response saying I'm against it or has someone already crafted a well written document that I can cut and paste from and then send that to my legislator?

I think the vast majority of hunters are going to need to be spoon fed on this type of stuff.

Is there an hunting organization that keeps an ongoing tally of bills and issues popping up and what is going on with some canned letters that we can send in? You know PETA and HSUS are great at that type of thing. NRA does pretty good at that as well. I'm sure the legislators discount some of this, but I also think they do keep a running tally of for and against at a minimum.

As far as any special consideration, I think it is great that some people think that way, but I would have to say you could get a lot more people involved if they felt like that might possibly have something to gain. Heck, a lot of money has been raised selling raffle tickets, people just need to have a tiny fraction of a chance to get them moving in the right direction, but it sure seems to help.

Not sure we can fix all the problems in the world, but if we could get organized and get the masses to actually do something even if it is just an email or a phone call it would be a big step in the right direction.

I think the masses are willing to do something, they just need some guidance and maybe a tiny bit of incentive.

 

[BuzzH]

Npaden,

You don't know where to start your research? I think this board is a perfect place to start your research. I bet if you did a search of public lands transfer, you could find a mountain of information.

As to your question regarding a list of bills at the State level, you bet, several groups stay on top of them. The Wyoming Sportsmens Alliance, BHA, Montana Sportsmens Alliance, to name a few.

I have no problem with the canned letters and there is value.

However, the best written letters and best testimony at hearings, committee meetings, commission meetings ,that have the most impact are when talking from a script are dropped and people begin talking with their hearts and souls.

Some of the best testimony I heard at Wyomings session last year in support of funding the GF came from Representative John Freeman a member of the TRW committee. He flat told the committee and those in attendance, that is his mind his fathers life was lengthened because of elk hunting. He shared that even was his Dads health was very poor, and the prognosis dire, he was still talking about where they should hunt elk in the coming fall. He asked if that kind of thing was worth funding in the future. I have no doubt that Rep. Freemans testimony, swayed 2 of the TRW committee members to vote to allow SF45 to head to the floor for a vote. One guy, one story, allowed SF45, a major funding bill, to move forward and ultimately pass.

I was the only person who listened to that testimony in the committee hearing, to personally shake his hand and thank him. What he did, he wasn't required to do.

That kind of testimony has a huge impact, it comes from something, and somewhere, way deeper than what I'm going to write or testify for you in a canned letter or statement.

I think another route to take is to support groups, like those I mentioned financially when isseus like this arise.

 

[jryoung]

If they really cared they would be writing letters, contacting their reps on things that really ARE going to impact wildlife. You don't need to spend vacation days contacting your congress to put the brakes on things like this transfer of public lands bullshit. Spend time researching and commenting on Federal Land Management Plans, Travel Plans, wildlife initiatives, etc. etc. etc.

It concerns me that I have to point these types of things out to people who supposedly care so much about the wildlife, wildlife habitat and the future of hunting. I wonder where and when we got off course so far? How was the message lost? Who is to blame?

Buzz,
I think a lot of the problem is understanding where and how to help. Simply put, it is difficult for many (myself included) to navigate the various issues from a variety of authorities. It is hard to know what agency to start with USFS, BLM, State F&G to State Legislatures. From there, how does one monitor publications, announcements etc.etc. I would consider myself to be pretty damn good at the internet, but when I try and work through some of the various websites, it is hard to know what is a threat and what is not.
A lot of the stuff can be a tough read for many, it's slow and technical...this is coming from a guy who lives in the tax code. I can handle slow and technical, but many like sexy and simple, which is why hot button issues get the attention, when their impact to the future of hunting and fishing may be immaterial.


On the motivation side, I wish that we were a more altruistic bunch, but we aren't. We can wish that to change, but I don't see it happening. From my perspective, I have had a hell of a time motivating folks here in CA. It's a pretty tough gig here, 17 National Forests, 15M acres of BLM land across three districts and 15 offices. I can't get anybody to step up and help monitor what is going on in their local forest or BLM office.

On the flip side, mention the hound ban, copper bullets, or that our F&G Commission works for The Audubon Society and folks go ballistic.

We should chat more in March, I know guys like you and many others know how to extract and distill this information pretty easily, maybe there is opportunity to develop some tools for the average user to better access information and be able to provide pointed feedback on various issues.