Bulls for Billionaires - MT EQC Meeting today 1:30 PM

Ben Lamb

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
20,429
Location
Cedar, MI
As folks are all aware, FWP went through some rough weather when they handed out "Bulls for Billionaires" tags under the 454 agreement. Those agreements were not well thought out, and in one instance in particular, came in for approval AFTER the general rifle season was started. The Environmental Quality Council is the interim committee focused on FWP oversight as well as other topics (DNRC, DEQ). FWP will be presenting before the committee on this issue today. It's worth tuning in to listen to what the agency has to say in regards to the implementation of the program, and how it got so sideways in such a short order.

While PLPW is going to be working on this effort, EQC will be a big part of the equation moving forward.

You can find the materials here: https://leg.mt.gov/committees/interim/eqc/

Here's the live feed: http://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00309/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20220322/-1/43824
 
I listened to the recording. Pro-454 for the win, but who doesn’t want to bitch slap Hank when he talks?

I hope MOGA pays Taylor well. I almost wept during his little speech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DFS
The problem isn't necessarily the 454 program, it's the piss-poor implementation of the program under this administration, and the political chicanery that happened around 637 to create a mess where one didn't exist before.

But it is telling that Billionaires need to have trophy bull tags before even considering letting kids with cancer & wounded war veterans hunt their kingdoms.
 
Ben Lamb said:
Why do you like out of state billionaires more than Montana citizens?

Both of these are dumb questions. Nobody is saying to kill 454, they're saying to change it so it's actually a management tool, and not a giveaway to out of state billionaires.
Click to expand...
You always know when there is a liberal politician in the discussion, when they fail to answer the question, and insert class warfare or race into said discussion...
 
MTBirdhunter said:
You always know when there is a liberal politician in the discussion, when they fail to answer the question, and insert class warfare or race into said discussion...
Click to expand...
I read his answer was "no". But maybe my reading level is different.

All the "such a great program" details/examples provided by Taylor in his speech are, and have always been available to the billionaires. Only difference is those bull tags right into the hands of landowners. There's essentially no elk objective management solution that's offered up- that's not already there.

It's all about a subset of landowners who want that big elk rack above their fireplace, Hank's Legacy... We can't throw water on that..

Fascinating.
 
I asked One landowner (a born/bred/raised/Mt Resident) who participated in the program his opinion of 454, and I’ll quote, “it was a pain in the ass, and not really worth it”. (he is certainly not a “billionaire” either)

Remember I’m outside looking in here as well. It appears to me the landowners are providing a lot in terms of access and service to the public.

So, what exactly are you looking? Ben, greenhorn? Give me your personal utopia in the elk debacle.
 
I think the Utopia is that the Bulls (and deer) are "owned" by the people of Montana. The regular Joe Schmoe should have the same chance to shoot one of the publicly owned bulls as the rich billionaires, but that is not the case here and not even close.
 
Landowners have every tool they need to manage elk population through cow tags and shoulder season. Hell they can even put in for landowner tags (bull) with much better odds than most people. This fight is over nothing but bull tags and more likely transferable bull tags.
 
Eric Albus said:
Give me your personal utopia in the elk debacle.
Click to expand...

Utopia? My bar isn't that high.

As a MT resident and primarily public land hunter, I'd like to be able to hunt where elk they are managed with more forethought than only catering to those lining their pockets through well-heeled hunters vacationers, or those with land or great connections. If that means I can't hunt every year, state-wide, and for 4-6 months with 3 weapons, or draw a limited quota bull permit all the time, then I'm okay with that. I would appreciate a chance, based on either luck of a fair draw, or putting in enough effort to enjoy a quality elk hunting experience. "Quality" might vary for people. I don't expect any exclusive "access" or private land hunting privileges. I don't believe our politicians with their favorite landowning or industry nutfleas should be calling the shots and pulling all the levers on how elk are (mis)managed for the public land hunters, regardless if many of the elk are on their property. The tools are there to hunt them, profit off them, or not allow hunting, or to pick who hunts them and when.

I also expect the leadership of our state (and FWP) should be genuine in their intentions with the public. THAT is big the problem here.
 
Greenhorn said:
It's all about a subset of landowners who want that big elk rack above their fireplace, Hank's Legacy... We can't throw water on that..
Click to expand...
When your a billionaire you could "buy" a big rack above the fireplace every single year and twice on Sunday in Utah, Colorado, New Mexico. Must be a little more to the story. The billionaires want to shoot it on their own land maybe? Truthfully its got to be a control thing. When you are a big shot, you call the shots...and you own the game on your land...in Texas. Or a campaign donor rewards point system
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ben Lamb
MT EQC Hearing
Replies
2
Views
1K
Ben Lamb
Ben Lamb

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,126
Messages
1,947,985
Members
35,034
Latest member
Waspocrew

Share this page

Back
Top