It’s becoming very clear why buzz is turning against nonresidents. This could be fixed with a season structure change a resident price increase and a huge cut in nonresidents licenses. I doubt it will be but it is possible to right the ship.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sometimes I wonder why you are on HT. mtmuleyWe’re not going to agree on that one, but not the point of the thread so I don’t want to divert any more than I already have.
I'm glad he is, makes it easier to keep cutting NR opportunity. I used to think that keeping higher tag splits was appreciated by NR, but then you read a post of his wanting transferable tags, commercialized hunting, leasing...makes that decision easier.Sometimes I wonder why you are on HT. mtmuley
I hear there's hunting boards that pander to your style of hunting, mostly Texas specific. Probably a better fit, try there.Because I love to hunt. If I’m being rude/offensive, please shoot me a PM or ignore me- not my intention.
mtmuley, are you insinuating there is a “group thought” on HT that I don’t match? If so, that’s probably accurate on some topics but I’m surprised when grown adults cannot handle a discussion in which opposing viewpoints are presented without getting butthurt.
Its about inclusion, Block manegment as well as our public lands are open to anyone legally able to access them, there is no segregation. LandTrust is leading us down a path where those with the financial freedom to spend income on access will receive more, better, increased access. While those who can not afford the payment, loose what was once open to them.Not overly familiar with how BM works in MT but as I understand it the Landowner is paid to allow access. There are different types of BM land some unlimited, some limited, some signup. Also believe there was a recent push to increase payments for BM in an attempt to make it more competitive with hunting leases which was seen by most on here as positive. Do I have this about right?
If I do how is LandTrust any different? Is it the fact that the entire fee is paid by the one doing the hunting rather than being spread out amongst all folks that buy a license regardless of if they hunt the BM or not?
Not butthurt at all. HT promotes access. Doesn't seem to be a concern for you. mtmuleyBecause I love to hunt. If I’m being rude/offensive, please shoot me a PM or ignore me- not my intention.
mtmuley, are you insinuating there is a “group thought” on HT that I don’t match? If so, that’s probably accurate on some topics but I’m surprised when grown adults cannot handle a discussion in which opposing viewpoints are presented without getting butthurt.
THIS ^. This is the difference between BM and Landtrust. One is public, one is pay to play, with the private market setting a market price. It's essentially private.Its about inclusion, Block manegment as well as our public lands are open to anyone legally able to access them, there is no segregation. LandTrust is leading us down a path where those with the financial freedom to spend income on access will receive more, better, increased access. While those who can not afford the payment, loose what was once open to them.
For us (the public hunter) to compete with these private options, we need to really up our game. Hunter behavior, time loss organizing hunter traffic, monetary return, etc. are all issues that are driving landowners away from public access programs and to these type of options. If we want landowners to continue enrolling in public access we need to give them better options.
I don’t think he meant you should get off of HT or anything, just that if your views are consistently antithetical to the mission and vision of 95% of members, and you don’t seem to post much about anything other than arguments, it’s just an odd marriage.Because I love to hunt. If I’m being rude/offensive, please shoot me a PM or ignore me- not my intention.
mtmuley, are you insinuating there is a “group thought” on HT that I don’t match? If so, that’s probably accurate on some topics but I’m surprised when grown adults cannot handle a discussion in which opposing viewpoints are presented without getting butthurt.
consistently antithetical to the mission and vision of 95% of members
In Montana it would be once every 5-10 years if we started putting wildlife instead of opportunity first. You might not like it but that’s what needs to happen. Unlimited opportunity is leading to programs like this and the privatization of hunting.Sincerely, a NR that likes to hunt and concerned about the future of how to do it.
This is the reason I joined HT. I have a buddy that has warned me for years this is the path MT is headed. Going to have to pay to play.Anyway, this is an interesting topic. If not for HuntTalk it would probably be years before I learned about it.
You do come across as someone interested in hunting and the future of hunting. However, you do seem to miss that this forum is primarily about DIY hunting on public lands, advocacy for hunting and access, and advocacy for wildlife, particularly wildlife to hunt and eat. That is why the point of a common attitude on HT is expressed to you.I respect your posts snowy, and I wish you didn’t view me as someone just here to argue. Thanks for the call out on that.
I do want to address the quote above- you would probably be surprised at the PMs I receive supporting my position on this topic in particular. I do think here is a very vocal contingent on here that all tends to echo one another any time a topic like this comes up (this thread is a great example), I don’t disagree there.
Anyway, sorry to those that I’ve offended on this one- will bow out now. Sincerely, a NR that likes to hunt and concerned about the future of how to do it.