Billings Gazette Article


Its almost like legislation made that market accelerate. Huh. Weird.
In the bigger picture, I don’t see this as a major reason, but we can agree to disagree.

With the outfitter subsidies they can lease and then use that access to tags, just like they did back in the 1990s.
 
In the bigger picture, I don’t see this as a major reason, but we can agree to disagree.
Yeah - wouldnt it be an obviously bad thing and contributor?

And no. They couldnt just lease an outfitter and have access to those tags. They are permits. You would draw one every 5-10 years. They will get one every year. Independent of draw odds.
 
Last edited:
Yeah - wouldnt it be an obviously bad thing and contributor?
Honestly, I haven’t dug into the nuance of this today whether it’s good, bad, or neutral. Just saying the landowner exclusivity is nothing new and there were easy workarounds to tags back then and still are.

I’m sure it’s contributed. It would be naive to say it’s had zero affect. One of the neighbors to the Diamond Cross was using an outfitter to get tags for the owner long before this.

The bigger picture is far more complex than HB635.
 
@El Jason, agree but you’re describing what the rest of the country (especially in the whitetail and waterfowl world) has already experienced long ago.

Montana isn’t special- just behind. Times change.
Nothing about that is good for the general populace. Do you think that high dollar leases, hunt clubs and outfitting have been a good thing for whitetail and waterfowl hunting?
 
1. @TheTone, it does not matter if it’s good for the general populace or not, it is protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause (the land purchase part, anyway) for good reason. The Constitution serves to protect from the general populace as much as it does for it.

You can apply that question to all sorts of things: what kind of vehicle do you drive? Is it good for the general populace or would they be better served if you rode a bike instead? Thankfully it’s none of their damn business though as long as you’re following the law, right?

Game tag allocation is the one factor that residents do indeed have a legitimate say over, that is for them to decide.

2. Some good, some bad. In terms of the health of the resource, almost all good. “High Dollar” is your words, many may feel it perfectly reasonable depending on their own personal means.

I personally can’t really think of a personal impact I’ve felt from it one way or another.
 
Last edited:
1. @TheTone, it does not matter if it’s good for the general populace or not, it is protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause (the land purchase part, anyway) for good reason. The Constitution serves to protect from the general populace as much as it does for it.

You can apply that question to all sorts of things: what kind of vehicle do you drive? Is it good for the general populace or would they be better served if you rode a bike instead? Thankfully it’s none of their damn business though as long as you’re following the law, right?

Game tag allocation is the one factor that residents do indeed have a legitimate say over, that is for them to decide.

2. Some good, some bad. In terms of the health of the resource, almost all good. “High Dollar” is your words, many may feel it perfectly reasonable depending on their own personal means.

I personally can’t really think of a personal impact I’ve felt from it one way or another.
At least you keep your thoughts into it. mtmuley
 

Forum statistics

Threads
119,651
Messages
2,233,035
Members
38,954
Latest member
LosPadre
Back
Top