A vote to increase resident permit cost in Montana

Coming from a state that "solves" problems by taxing then throwing money at them, you might want to pump the brakes. Whether our resident cost of Fish and Game license, roads, gas tax, DMV fees, etc... this state is the king of pay more get less. I hear alot of "don't California my Texas/Montana", be mindful what you wish for. The value of the elk or deer tag is obviously more than what is reflective in price for resident but what would be the expected outcome of price increase? Is there a revenue shortfall? At least you can continue to stick it to the nonresidents.
These are great questions. The status quo is the problem. Somehow it must be deeply analyzed and systematically changed. The increased could help with this work. How does that work get done without an increase?
 
Substandard or even poor hunting will always be better than no hunting at all. Tough to have any leverage.
This is what some administration and public lean on though. It’s similar to what I’ve heard for years as a teacher. Well Nick, you didn’t go into teaching to get rich. Well Nick, you teach for the love of the kids… These statements are true, but invalid. There’s a reason the average teacher only lasts 3 to 5 years depending on the state.

Change is scary and hard. Truth moment… it’s like when I left my first wife. She was very successful, we had kids, we had the “American Dream.” However, she slept with other dudes and did crazy shiz. I tried and tried for the kids, but finally I needed better. I damn near died. I left the McMansion Life and moved into a little dump. I stripped it down to the studs and rebuilt my life with the love and support of my community (shout out to Hamm59701). I met Kim and am truly living a dream. When does the reward become greater than the risk?
 
I think one way to look at it is to think about who "owns" the wildlife of the state you live in. I believe in Montana it is the people of Montana, not the state government which is the manager of the resource. What you pay for is not the actual animal by purchasing a tag and license it is the management and regulation of the resources. Similar to the public land many of us hunt on, the wildlife is also a public resource to be utilized as well as cared for.
A few hundred dollar increase in fees may hit individuals much harder than any benefit through revenue increase to an agency. For those that hunt or fish as a lifestyle the money may not seem like much, but there are many casual hunters/anglers out there that can be priced out when tags and license inflate like everything else.
The combo tag in MT w/o bear is $75… Economics requires some inflation. It should be analyzed and justified. What if there were more discounts? Based upon income?
 
The combo tag in MT w/o bear is $75… Economics requires some inflation. It should be analyzed and justified. What if there were more discounts? Based upon income?
This certainly isn’t defending FWP, because they are managing deer like it was a half century ago, and even though the state is blessed with an abundance of elk/field rats, they can’t seem to figure out how to manage them other than shoot them for nine months of the year.

That said, everyone wants “better” management. It isn’t free to capture and fit with GPS collars, test for CWD, conduct net surveys in the rivers, do lek counts, do flight classifications, acquire access area/, maintain wildlife winter grounds, and so on.

Ultimately, folks have to prioritize what’s important to them. People frequently complain about government bloating and inefficiency, yet audits of fish and game agencies don’t seem to paint the same picture.

A 75 dollar sportsman combo is an absolute joke.
 
Best case scenario would be for 1/3 of the people buying licenses realizes how bad public land hunting has gotten in Montana and not buy licenses. Perhaps create a funding shortage that the agency relies on. Hell I’m pretty close to that point. I know it’ll never happen and I’ve said many times, we hunters are the constant in the equation. No matter how bad it gets we’ll line up to buy their crappy product.
A lot of Montana residents are knocking on my door and they are willing to pay for a product that is not so crappy.
 
A lot of Montana residents are knocking on my door and they are willing to pay for a product that is not so crappy.
Not trying to be antagonistic, but a few questions. Product? Are they paying the State or you for said product? I met a guy in Central Montana that had paid a $4000 trespass fee. It included a cabin and a week to himself on a ranch. Trespass fee? Hmmmmm
 
A lot of Montana residents are knocking on my door and they are willing to pay for a product that is not so crappy.
The main difference between private and public is that private landowners aren’t completely hammering everything that moves. That’s why they still have quality.

It doesn’t cost a dime for FWP to reset season structures to give wildlife a break.

I would pay double for there to be 30% less tags.
 
Not trying to be antagonistic, but a few questions. Product? Are they paying the State or you for said product? I met a guy in Central Montana that had paid a $4000 trespass fee. It included a cabin and a week to himself on a ranch. Trespass fee? Hmmmmm
I don't take money, that said there are plenty of Montana residents that are willing to pay for better quality hunting and if I chose to I could likely find a Montana resident willing to pay thousands, even tens of thousands in a weeks time.
The trade off with opportunity management should not just be measured in terms of a decrease in the quality of trophys.
 
Talking about here in a forum does nothing. Contact those politicians that can do something instead....
How can we get organized and work as a herd? 😉 Are there already efforts? Well researched and written form emails for others to edit and send?
 
I would be all for a price increase in resident deer and elk tags, But I think that bumping the Base license up a bunch would be a better way to go. FWP is too dependent on deer and elk license sales.
Fishing pays for its self, and deer and elk cover there management costs and then some. Everything else is a money loser and the difference needs to be made up by the surplus provided by deer and elk license sales. Harder for FWP to make the tough decisions with deer and elk when needed when deer and elk are the cash cow.
This is a very good point.
 
This thread has definitely taken a turn. I think it us more about the mission, vision, and goals of the MFWP and how they’re funded. Do we have any actual idea what the greater populations opinions are?
 
This thread has definitely taken a turn. I think it us more about the mission, vision, and goals of the MFWP and how they’re funded. Do we have any actual idea what the greater populations opinions are?
Just a swag, but Manage fish and game levels to provide the highest opportunity to Montana citizens. No differentiation between public land and private. Nothing about older age-class bucks and bulls. There is lots to criticize FWP about, but changing that goal is a tough road.
 
Whatever happened to the OP perpetrator of this thread?
Still here, just reading and thinking. Interesting to see some many different views and expectations. I end up feeling that overall we have great opportunities in this great state. Edison once said opportunity is often overlooked because it wears overalls and looks like work. The challenge is what makes hunting so amazing.
 
As a non resident I'm always shocked to see the price a resident hunter in Montana pays for a elk or deer tag. I live in MN and pay 38 bucks for a deer tag. Whats the price of a resident Montana elk or deer tag??? And when is the last time the price of a resident tag was increased??
 
As a non resident I'm always shocked to see the price a resident hunter in Montana pays for a elk or deer tag. I live in MN and pay 38 bucks for a deer tag. Whats the price of a resident Montana elk or deer tag??? And when is the last time the price of a resident tag was increased??
Idk, I think 15 for deer and 20 for elk. General permits
 
Talking about here in a forum does nothing. Contact those politicians that can do something instead....
I recall in a recent Region 1 (MT) Town Hall meeting (Director, Staff, Commissioner(s), politician(s)) we brought up this specific point - RAISE RESIDENT FEES. We were informed they are unable to do such until another year or two(?) it's on a time frame for modifying the fees. Truth or not - is beyond me though that is the response to a public land hunter and those who agreed with him, including myself.
 
These are great questions. The status quo is the problem. Somehow it must be deeply analyzed and systematically changed. The increased could help with this work. How does that work get done without an increase?
Looking at this from the outside I don't think the "problem" with management is caused by a lack of funds. It may be an arguable point but from many threads here it appears to be decision making, not lack of funds. If it was a simple revenue issue, then a fee increase might be the answer. If the simple answer is not money and the question appears to be management why tax the user? As stated before pay more get less.
Again, I'm an outsider just relaying my experience in my state, which has an increase in fees yearly with not much to show for it in way of sound management.
A couple examples are bears and pigs. The state has a very large bear population, over populated actually. Talk with a biologist or Warden in Northern CA and they will encourage you to shoot a bear. With that said CA has no combo bear tag and a single bear tag is around $50. Pigs are non native and called invasive but a single tag is over $20, used to be $1 not long ago.
Once fees go up they never come down and usually just keep climbing. I would hate to see a state like Montana start taxing its resident hunters the way CA does.
 
Back
Top