De-publicize, De-glorify and De-monetize Western State Hunting

[thebestusernamesaretaken]

I think that the Western Mountain States is suffering from a population boom and the accompanying wildlife habitat loss. Non-residents and changes associated with the digital age are easy to blame because they don't have a say in the political system and it makes people feel better to kick someone around.

I would recommend that you spend your efforts to find a way to learn as much as you can about the wildlife and how they use the land so that you can try to protect it from what's happing. What is happening can not be stopped so you might as well figure out the best path.

 

[rwc101]

I moved here for a job. Wyoming did rekindle a love of hunting that dimmed during college and grad school though.

 

[DouglasR]

90/10 doesn't create a bigger pie Does this 30 extra tags greatly increase any one person's odds of drawing? No .... but at least these 30 tags are going to people from Casper, Lusk, Big Piney, Sheridan, Cody, Lander, Laramie, Greybull .... etc., - someone who suffers through the long winters in Wyoming, low wages, etc. A simple truth about Wyoming is that everyone who lives here - except real estate agents in Jackson and those in the minerals industry - can make more money living somewhere else. So why do we stay? - for family and the outdoors - including hunting.

Bring your silly ass to Illinois where the sun doesn’t shine and there’s not a single thing to do for 6 months a year.
I guess if you don’t want me hunting out there then I’ll just have to spend my September’s alpine bowlyaneering, buying no tags thus contributing nothing to the wildlife agencies of blank state.

 

[mtnprst]

@Big Fin has been in Montana for over 30 years and he's not from Michigan either.

@mtnprst you're doing a great job making yourself look bad, keep it up

DDD is a pipe dream.

I stand corrected. From MN.
My apologies to Mr. Newberg on where he was from.

He started filming his own show in 2007/8. Not sure if he'd appeared in hunting shows before that.

He started youbube videos 6 years ago. The second video is on how to game the Wyoming Draw. Third is on leftover tags.

 

[Wildabeest]

social media is flooded with dead animal photos and kill shots - every upload turning non hunters against us and threatening the future of hunting.

I guess we should all flood social media with pics of ourselves in flex positions and lifting weights instead. Here’s mine...

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

Self-absorbed - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms

If you're overly concerned with yourself, including your own feelings and thoughts, you're self-absorbed. Self-absorbed people don't think much about how others are feeling.

www.vocabulary.com

 

[jt13]

He started youbube videos 6 years ago.

My statement stands. Keep doing a great job at undermining what little credibility you have left.

 

[Desk Pop]

I stand corrected. From MN.
My apologies to Mr. Newberg on where he was from.

He started filming his own show in 2007/8. Not sure if he'd appeared in hunting shows before that.

He started youbube videos 6 years ago. The second video is on how to game the Wyoming Draw. Third is on leftover tags.

Did your mom refuse you a boob as an infant or something? Or were you picked last for the recess kickball games one too many times?

In the words of Michael Scott: why are you the way that you are?

You keep disrespecting the guy who is continuing to let you on his site.

So what? Randy posted videos of things people are interested in and can learn from? Should he post videos instead on how to throw a football in a perfect spiral from his platform based on DIY public land hunting?

 

[BlazerBeam]

So many nonresidents and recent transplants on here that have so much to say, you’d think they lived out here 365 days a year for the past 40 years with all their expert knowledge they’ve been sharing. All based on tons of in the field experience and not just typer sniping and surfing the web. But really most of what they say is with the intent to guard their own perceived right to hunt in my state or any other westerner’s state. Then as soon as someone from WY or MT says something about the decline of game animals and that they feel it is connected in some way to the ridiculous onslaught of hunting BUSINESS and industry, they call that man selfish and accuse him of just wanting more tags for himself. What do YOU as a NR think you are sounding like you want? Who do YOU as a NR sound like you are concerned about? Oh I forgot, you’re an “advocate”. Fellas, many of you sound like an advocate for yourself just like you are accusing @mtnprst of being. And if you think that the explosion of hunting & hunting media as a business is not going to ruin hunting at the rate it is going then you have an IQ lower than a speed limit and are being duped.
My state doesn’t NEED your NR money to increase ungulate herds, you all are just easy targets to get that money. As more and more non residents apply each year, the cost is going to keep going up and up, not because they are trying to dissuade people from applying, but because you are willing to give more and more money. Increases in a couple states this year. That combined with hunting social media continuing to recruit more NR’s, it will become harder and harder for you to hunt out here.

 

[BuzzH]

I don’t want you to misunderstand and think that I disagree with all your activities and positions. In the time I took to research, we share some common ground.

I guess I fail to see how advocating for a 90/10 spilt vs. 80/20 split in tag allocation creates a bigger pie vs. giving residents a bigger slice of the same pie.

Once again, residents should have better opportunity in their State than non-tesidemts I am not arguing that point. The flip side of that is that when non residents buy tags at non resident prices they are throwing a lot of monetary support toward whichever State the are buying tags in. Discounting that contribution seems a bit silly to me.

But hey, what do I know? I am just a guy who likes to hunt in and enjoy new landscapes that is willing to pay through the nose to do it.

Hey what do I know about this issue?

For starters, even though I've stated it over and over again, NR's need to put their listening ears on. From here on out, I'm only going to cut and paste this thread in regard to 90-10.

To address the money issue, NR's do contribute more of the LICENSE revenue in WY, but not the over-all budget. Look it up, I'm not a secretary.

If you believe money is the answer to these problems, you'd be wrong. I just listened to the commission meeting, where Doug B. made the comment that they've just thrown 9 million into mule deer to improve herds. The GF is currently sitting on about a years worth of surplus funding...meaning we have a surplus of right around 50-60 million according to the Director last time I met with him during a roundtable discussion.

So, yes, all States appreciate the NR contribution of money, but its not fixing the woe's of wildlife and if money really was the key to solving the issues then I'd address you to look at bighorn sheep management. We've spent a metric chit ton of money to "build a bigger pie"...and all I'm seeing is money going out, and tags being reduced. If money per animal spent created a bigger pie...we'd be swimming in bighorns. But, we aren't.

Another thing to keep in mind is that NR's in Wyoming under a 90-10 bill would NOT lose a single full priced elk tag...not one. Regulation sets 7,250 full priced tags going to NR's. All 90-10 would do is shift more tags into the general pool and tag 6% of the LQ tags from NR's. But, the net loss would be ZERO. If NR's can't be happy hunting on perhaps THE BEST general tag in the United States for elk...well, too bad, go somewhere else. When it comes to the LQ tags, I won't apologize for wanting 1,000 more Residents to enjoy those tags than a NR. The other states I apply for elk in, UT, NV, AZ (formerly MT) all hold me to 10% or LESS of their tags. That's fine with me. We also have to quit looking at this in the short term...1000 tags a year doesn't increase draw odds, but its 1000 more Residents that get to enjoy LQ elk hunting. Over 10 years, that's 10K more residents that reap the rewards of what they put up with to live here....and that is significant, on all counts.

Yes, NR's will lose 15% of their sheep tags, meaning that 30 or so more Resident sheep hunters get the chance. Again, they've earned it, they've lived here, they shop locally year round, they support wildlife year round. Again, the odds don't increase significantly, but over 10 years, 300 more Residents would get to hunt sheep. That is significant to 300 Residents.

Same with moose, goats, and bison...every state that has those species limit NR's to a range of from ZERO to 10% of their tags. Its not unreasonable for Wyoming Residents to expect the same.

I would recommend at this time to leave LQ deer and LQ pronghorn at current allocations. Being that NR's are receiving OVER their allocation of both...I don't see why there would be any belly-aching. I can tell the NR's, that their whining about 90-10 in regard to full priced LQ elk, moose, sheep, goat, and bison...has resulted in many R's now just pushing for ALL tags to go 90-10.

I've said it a lot, and I believe that NR's have had it way too good, for way too long in Wyoming. Wyoming's generosity has turned into NR's thinking they're entitled to something. That entitlement has led to a false premise that NR's think Residents are a bunch of assholes for wanting to change the allocations to benefit our citizens. We want what the rest of the Western States Residents enjoy...and that's not an unreasonable expectation.

Well, the times have changed...and changed a lot. In spite of adequate funding, increased studies, all that...our herds just aren't doing as well. Meaning that there just isn't the wildlife available to share. This year, almost 10K less pronghorn tags than issued in 2020. That number down over 20K pronghorn tags that were issued in 1990. We've lost about 1k pronghorn permits a year over the last 30 years. If this trend continues, expect R's to reduce NR allocations. Again, I'm going to work on ways to favor the Resident hunters and make sure they aren't on the side-lines while a NR takes their place. I wouldn't expect a Resident of AZ to increase my allocation of tags just so they could watch me hunt one. I would also expect less opportunity to change to favor Residents in tough times, including reducing the NR allocations.

So, the facts point out that a vast majority of the NR complaining about 90-10 is about nothing more than WHERE they hunt, not a drop in total tags. Region wide NR general deer tags, no impact under 90-10. All 7,250 full priced tags, no change in total tags under 90-10. As pointed out, NR's get over-allocations of pronghorn, LQ deer, cow/calf doe/fawn deer and pronghorn already. Yes, 10% loss of moose, goat, and bison and 15% of the sheep quota. Those rare hunts should be 90% resident opportunity. Not much to complain about, and I would just recommend those that would quit applying under 90-10 good luck in the other Western states that provide vastly less opportunity. In particular opportunity with any quality.

Finally, under 90-10 building a bigger pie will benefit both NR's and R's, and it is a goal we all need to focus on. IMO/E, building that bigger pie has much more to do with local involvement, that Residents shoulder a vast, vast majority of, than a NR cutting a check every year, or 3 or 5 to whack a big-game animal.

But, like I said, what would I know...I'm just the guy blowing vacation days, money, fighting crap legislation, attending meetings, putting thousand of miles on my vehicles, taking time away from hunting, family, etc. etc. on top of taking shit from all angles working for wildlife here in Wyoming. Wish I could just cut a check for a NR tag once every 1-5 years and skip the real work...

Carry on...

 

[JM77]

Hey what do I know about this issue?

For starters, even though I've stated it over and over again, NR's need to put their listening ears on. From here on out, I'm only going to cut and paste this thread in regard to 90-10.

To address the money issue, NR's do contribute more of the LICENSE revenue in WY, but not the over-all budget. Look it up, I'm not a secretary.

If you believe money is the answer to these problems, you'd be wrong. I just listened to the commission meeting, where Doug B. made the comment that they've just thrown 9 million into mule deer to improve herds. The GF is currently sitting on about a years worth of surplus funding...meaning we have a surplus of right around 50-60 million according to the Director last time I met with him during a roundtable discussion.

So, yes, all States appreciate the NR contribution of money, but its not fixing the woe's of wildlife and if money really was the key to solving the issues then I'd address you to look at bighorn sheep management. We've spent a metric chit ton of money to "build a bigger pie"...and all I'm seeing is money going out, and tags being reduced. If money per animal spent created a bigger pie...we'd be swimming in bighorns. But, we aren't.

Another thing to keep in mind is that NR's in Wyoming under a 90-10 bill would NOT lose a single full priced elk tag...not one. Regulation sets 7,250 full priced tags going to NR's. All 90-10 would do is shift more tags into the general pool and tag 6% of the LQ tags from NR's. But, the net loss would be ZERO. If NR's can't be happy hunting on perhaps THE BEST general tag in the United States for elk...well, too bad, go somewhere else. When it comes to the LQ tags, I won't apologize for wanting 1,000 more Residents to enjoy those tags than a NR. The other states I apply for elk in, UT, NV, AZ (formerly MT) all hold me to 10% or LESS of their tags. That's fine with me. We also have to quit looking at this in the short term...1000 tags a year doesn't increase draw odds, but its 1000 more Residents that get to enjoy LQ elk hunting. Over 10 years, that's 10K more residents that reap the rewards of what they put up with to live here....and that is significant, on all counts.

Yes, NR's will lose 15% of their sheep tags, meaning that 30 or so more Resident sheep hunters get the chance. Again, they've earned it, they've lived here, they shop locally year round, they support wildlife year round. Again, the odds don't increase significantly, but over 10 years, 300 more Residents would get to hunt sheep. That is significant to 300 Residents.

Same with moose, goats, and bison...every state that has those species limit NR's to a range of from ZERO to 10% of their tags. Its not unreasonable for Wyoming Residents to expect the same.

I would recommend at this time to leave LQ deer and LQ pronghorn at current allocations. Being that NR's are receiving OVER their allocation of both...I don't see why there would be any belly-aching. I can tell the NR's, that their whining about 90-10 in regard to full priced LQ elk, moose, sheep, goat, and bison...has resulted in many R's now just pushing for ALL tags to go 90-10.

I've said it a lot, and I believe that NR's have had it way too good, for way too long in Wyoming. Wyoming's generosity has turned into NR's thinking they're entitled to something. That entitlement has led to a false premise that NR's think Residents are a bunch of assholes for wanting to change the allocations to benefit our citizens. We want what the rest of the Western States Residents enjoy...and that's not an unreasonable expectation.

Well, the times have changed...and changed a lot. In spite of adequate funding, increased studies, all that...our herds just aren't doing as well. Meaning that there just isn't the wildlife available to share. This year, almost 10K less pronghorn tags than issued in 2020. That number down over 20K pronghorn tags that were issued in 1990. We've lost about 1k pronghorn permits a year over the last 30 years. If this trend continues, expect R's to reduce NR allocations. Again, I'm going to work on ways to favor the Resident hunters and make sure they aren't on the side-lines while a NR takes their place. I wouldn't expect a Resident of AZ to increase my allocation of tags just so they could watch me hunt one. I would also expect less opportunity to change to favor Residents in tough times, including reducing the NR allocations.

So, the facts point out that a vast majority of the NR complaining about 90-10 is about nothing more than WHERE they hunt, not a drop in total tags. Region wide NR general deer tags, no impact under 90-10. All 7,250 full priced tags, no change in total tags under 90-10. As pointed out, NR's get over-allocations of pronghorn, LQ deer, cow/calf doe/fawn deer and pronghorn already. Yes, 10% loss of moose, goat, and bison and 15% of the sheep quota. Those rare hunts should be 90% resident opportunity. Not much to complain about, and I would just recommend those that would quit applying under 90-10 good luck in the other Western states that provide vastly less opportunity. In particular opportunity with any quality.

Finally, under 90-10 building a bigger pie will benefit both NR's and R's, and it is a goal we all need to focus on. IMO/E, building that bigger pie has much more to do with local involvement, that Residents shoulder a vast, vast majority of, than a NR cutting a check every year, or 3 or 5 to whack a big-game animal.

But, like I said, what would I know...I'm just the guy blowing vacation days, money, fighting crap legislation, attending meetings, putting thousand of miles on my vehicles, taking time away from hunting, family, etc. etc. on top of taking shit from all angles working for wildlife here in Wyoming. Wish I could just cut a check for a NR tag once every 1-5 years and skip the real work...

Carry on...

What he said!

 

[get-n-birdy]

What's MP's stance on fair chase methods, within forcefully advocating for subsistence acquiring food, be it mammals or fish? A lot of subsistence food gathering rarely resembles hunting to me personally. Not against it, just wondering what's ethical and what is not in MP's viewpoint?

What's MP's views on trapping?

Is MP's stance on no baiting for bears just in regions the group as a whole is familiar with, and does anyone in the organization have any experience bear hunting east of the Missouri River?

Does MP recognize regional hunting traditions may differ greatly based on the varying habitat wildlife inhabits across a very broad and diverse continent?

Is there any plans to start a fishing division to address boat size, hp size, technology and equipment that has drastically changed fishing over the last 2 decades?

In fishing, mapping software has done just as much to affect the resource, as just about all the rest of the next gadgets combined. What's MP's thoughts on gps's, smartphones, onx and gohunt's mapping software giving hunters an unfair advantage?

What about weather apps, current radar technology, etc, that is very helpful?

Clothing and boots are far superior vs a decade or 2 ago, any chance we can suck that turd back in?

What about camping equipment, trucks, backpacks, trailers, generators, heat packs, spotting scopes, scopes, range finders, binoculars, inreach, led headlamps and flashlights, gortex, windstopper fabric, chopper mitts and merino wool?

What about mt's upland bird hunting hours? Seems unsporting to a Midwestern'er.

Why use terms like "forcefully discourage" and how is "forcefully" achieved? Through regulations, legislation or strong arming people to bend and yield to MP's beliefs on morality and ethics in hunting?

What is the definition of a "self promoter"? Seems like the organization is selling t-shirts and merch promoting its beliefs? Kinda confusing to weed out the difference between all the definitions and verbiage?

Legalizing or "forcing" ethics or morality might seem great in theory, but how it's achieved is a slippery slope for regulating agencies or groups committed to show how bad everyone else is and how good it's own path is in comparison. Seems cult-ish.

Looked at MP's site and there's some good food for thought. But it comes across condescending and pretentious. Especially with the pic of the president weight lifting and the other dude with his chest hair out, with a bloody game bag and blood on the antlers showing plain as day, from an organization that believes that bloody stuff shouldn't be shown. Not gunna beat around the bush, those are some douchey, unflattering pics and misaligned with the strictly fundamental moral code and agenda preached.

In mn, mi, wi and parts of Canada, the bear harvest would tank without bear baiting. It's been tradition in regions and to stop it because it goes against a different regions tradition of ethics, is similar to MP bending to peta because of their beliefs in the morality of not killing animals for eating for any reason. This slope has gotten extremely slippery, and if past performance is even kind of indicative of future results, it'll only get slippery'er.

Don't disagree with a lot of what MP stands for. The Tomfoolery within the ranks of a lot of groups representing hunting is problematic. But equally so, the packaging and delivery of MP does a great disservice for its message just as poorly.

 

[HighCountryCommando]

I got banned from rokslide for (1) defending fair chase...

I would loooooove for you to make another thread and jump down the rabbit hole of defending fair chase. I'll go purchase a 50lb sack of popcorn and two 55 gallon barrels of diet cherry Dr Pepper. I've been reading your articles for years and your position on fair chase smacks of worst kind of rancid elitism stuffed in the sweet smelling pseudo covering of concern for conservation. As a former fly fishing guide, your ethical position is rank and file parallel with those fly fisherman who feel its unethical to use anything other than Sage rods and dry fly patterns developed after 1980 to catch trout. You've got a small echo chamber in which you and a few other "enlightened" individuals create problems out your own imagination for your own self righteous purposes. Out of the sincerity of my heart, I hope you get the sudden urge to burn your bow and convert to long range rifle hunting.

 

[MTLabrador]

I'll go purchase a 50lb sack of popcorn and two 55 gallon barrels of diet cherry Dr Pepper.

That might give you diabetes.

 

[HighCountryCommando]

That might give you diabetes.

Too late...thus the need for diet soda.

 

[MTLabrador]

Too late...thus the need for diet soda.

Missed the diet part...

 

[HighCountryCommando]

So many nonresidents and recent transplants on here that have so much to say, you’d think they lived out here 365 days a year for the past 40 years with all their expert knowledge they’ve been sharing. All based on tons of in the field experience and not just typer sniping and surfing the web. But really most of what they say is with the intent to guard their own perceived right to hunt in my state or any other westerner’s state. Then as soon as someone from WY or MT says something about the decline of game animals and that they feel it is connected in some way to the ridiculous onslaught of hunting BUSINESS and industry, they call that man selfish and accuse him of just wanting more tags for himself. What do YOU as a NR think you are sounding like you want? Who do YOU as a NR sound like you are concerned about? Oh I forgot, you’re an “advocate”. Fellas, many of you sound like an advocate for yourself just like you are accusing @mtnprst of being. And if you think that the explosion of hunting & hunting media as a business is not going to ruin hunting at the rate it is going then you have an IQ lower than a speed limit and are being duped.
My state doesn’t NEED your NR money to increase ungulate herds, you all are just easy targets to get that money. As more and more non residents apply each year, the cost is going to keep going up and up, not because they are trying to dissuade people from applying, but because you are willing to give more and more money. Increases in a couple states this year. That combined with hunting social media continuing to recruit more NR’s, it will become harder and harder for you to hunt out here.

You just need to mandate a diversity quota and expand the number of NR hunters within your pool of friends.

 

[HighCountryCommando]

We've seen first hand the effectiveness the environmental organizations have had in using litigation to fight for wildlife species and other conservation issues.

One complicating factor is that many of the wildlife issues we're concerned about - migration corridors - for example, are handled at the state level, and while there is plenty of previous litigation we can model for federal lawsuits, we're finding squat at the state level...

And the big fat truth is you will continue to get squat.

There is a reason environmental groups that have been around for several decades continually and exclusively go after the feds and not the states. Feds are a nice big fat juicy immobile target begging to get hit. In fact, the federal environmental laws beg for suitors to litigate against it. States have quick feet and quick hands and can take a punch. States can also effectively tell you to go pound sand. If there is no federal hook in your litigation, your at the mercy of state sovereignty...and state sovereignty is neither nice nor fair. What you need is a treasure chest of money and a few lobbyist and then you will 100% need to ditch the 501(c)(3) status...or else your just bringing archery equipment to a long range rifle fight.

 

[mtnprst]

What's MP's stance on fair chase methods, within forcefully advocating for subsistence acquiring food, be it mammals or fish? A lot of subsistence food gathering rarely resembles hunting to me personally. Not against it, just wondering what's ethical and what is not in MP's viewpoint?

Sorry - don't understand the question. Our positions on Fair Chase, including specifics, are public.

What's MP's views on trapping?

Don't have one. Trapping isn't hunting.

Is MP's stance on no baiting for bears just in regions the group as a whole is familiar with, and does anyone in the organization have any experience bear hunting east of the Missouri River?

MP is a western-state hunting nonprofit.

Does MP recognize regional hunting traditions may differ greatly based on the varying habitat wildlife inhabits across a very broad and diverse continent?

We don't represent the continent.

Is there any plans to start a fishing division to address boat size, hp size, technology and equipment that has drastically changed fishing over the last 2 decades?

Not at the moment.

In fishing, mapping software has done just as much to affect the resource, as just about all the rest of the next gadgets combined. What's MP's thoughts on gps's, smartphones, onx and gohunt's mapping software giving hunters an unfair advantage?

No issue with navigation.

What about weather apps, current radar technology, etc, that is very helpful?

No issue.

Clothing and boots are far superior vs a decade or 2 ago, any chance we can suck that turd back in?

No issue.

What about camping equipment, trucks, backpacks, trailers, generators, heat packs, spotting scopes, scopes, range finders, binoculars, inreach, led headlamps and flashlights, gortex, windstopper fabric, chopper mitts and merino wool?

No issue.

What about mt's upland bird hunting hours? Seems unsporting to a Midwestern'er.

Our focus is on western-state big game.

Why use terms like "forcefully discourage" and how is "forcefully" achieved? Through regulations, legislation or strong arming people to bend and yield to MP's beliefs on morality and ethics in hunting?

Our immediate concern is the long term political damage to the future of hunting through the dead animal pictures, kill shots and other gore the hunting industry is currently flooding onto social and other media. The way to "forcefully discourage" this is to de-monetize it from the public networks and platforms and force it onto private networks non-hunters are much less likely to come across it.

Demonetizing it = (1) confronting the gear/clothing and other business producing this and/or sponsoring this stuff to causing them to stop; (2) pressuring the public platforms which are private companies (instagram, Facebook, YouTube, etc.) to remove hunting gore from their platforms.

This will push this stuff to private networks where current hunters interested can find and pay to see it, but where it has a much less chance of being stumbled upon by non hunters. Brian Call has already made this move and this is the future of hunting media if there is one.

What is the definition of a "self promoter"? Seems like the organization is selling t-shirts and merch promoting its beliefs? Kinda confusing to weed out the difference between all the definitions and verbiage?

Any person who produces hunting media (video, photos) with the intention of monetizing it.

Legalizing or "forcing" ethics or morality might seem great in theory, but how it's achieved is a slippery slope for regulating agencies or groups committed to show how bad everyone else is and how good it's own path is in comparison. Seems cult-ish.

Kill shots, dead animal photos, gore, etc. is political suicide for the future of hunting. Those producing this stuff to monetize it are allies of the anti-hunting movement and direct political opponents of those who want to preserve hunting as long as possible.

Looked at MP's site and there's some good food for thought. But it comes across condescending and pretentious. Especially with the pic of the president weight lifting and the other dude with his chest hair out, with a bloody game bag and blood on the antlers showing plain as day, from an organization that believes that bloody stuff shouldn't be shown. Not gunna beat around the bush, those are some douchey, unflattering pics and misaligned with the strictly fundamental moral code and agenda preached.

In mn, mi, wi and parts of Canada, the bear harvest would tank without bear baiting. It's been tradition in regions and to stop it because it goes against a different regions tradition of ethics, is similar to MP bending to peta because of their beliefs in the morality of not killing animals for eating for any reason. This slope has gotten extremely slippery, and if past performance is even kind of indicative of future results, it'll only get slippery'er.

Don't disagree with a lot of what MP stands for. The Tomfoolery within the ranks of a lot of groups representing hunting is problematic. But equally so, the packaging and delivery of MP does a great disservice for its message just as poorly.

 

[HandgunHunter]

I volunteer with G&f in Wyoming

Last year I lead the charge to change bullet regs with game and fish in Wyoming...

But I have only lived here for 5 years.....so I reckon by the opinions stated in this thread I don’t matter...