Let's fast forward 20 years to 2040. Montana's elk population is 10x over objective limits, according to the 2024 Elk Management plan overseen by Governor Gianforte. In response to this, the FWP commission (under the order of the state legislature) extends general rifle season from September 1- March 15, with a 5 elk annual limit on all public and private land.
95% of elk harvest comes off private land in 2040. Luckily though, due to the resounding success of Montana's Master Hunter program, 100 hunters a year are accepted to participate in a $1,500, 400 hour course* (with 40hr annual continuing education) which allows them the honor of reserving trespass hunts on select ranches (antlerless only, of course). Due to the success of these trespass fees, and the skyrocketing prices of outfitted private land bull hunts, the state's block management program can no longer compete and will be discontinued.
*brought to you by core sponsors, see any banner surrounding this post for more details.
What a great time to be a public lands hunter in Montana, nothing to worry about folks.
95% of elk harvest comes off private land in 2040. Luckily though, due to the resounding success of Montana's Master Hunter program, 100 hunters a year are accepted to participate in a $1,500, 400 hour course* (with 40hr annual continuing education) which allows them the honor of reserving trespass hunts on select ranches (antlerless only, of course). Due to the success of these trespass fees, and the skyrocketing prices of outfitted private land bull hunts, the state's block management program can no longer compete and will be discontinued.
*brought to you by core sponsors, see any banner surrounding this post for more details.
What a great time to be a public lands hunter in Montana, nothing to worry about folks.
onpoint
Well-known member
Funny guy, Ben. Dead now.
Put that in the context of what I just pm'ed you about.....
Good thing we can laugh.
Gallows humor.
Put that in the context of what I just pm'ed you about.....
Good thing we can laugh.
Gallows humor.
onpoint
Well-known member
Not too long after the wonderful EMP we currently "operate"
under was implemented, there was an MFWP public meeting held at the Gran Tree in Bozeman.Not too long before that meeting, one of the major MFWP players in Montana's elk management - which previous to that time was largely concerned with research & management directed toward elk population for hunters - retired.
He showed up at the said meeting and walked up to the mic. Addressing discussion about the EMP, he looked at the panel of FWP bio's and managers and asked (paraphrasing) "The problem is too many elk"?
Then he turned around, looked at the audience and said "What a wonderful problem. You're welcome".
Some on this forum were at that meeting......
Betcha' when he was going balls to the walls on roads and their effects upon elk populations, the Gravelly/Snowcrest Project, and elk hunter harvest statistics, he probably thought that elk would NEVER be thought of as a problem to be reduced in number to appease politicians, ag interests, and an agency who thought elk were a pain in the ass.
Maybe he did, he was pretty damned sharp, and a Butte Guy.......
Anyways, the wacky scenario Randy11 concocted would never happen, right?.........................................
Besides, times change. Change 'em. Get a certificate, a tshirt, access to the fill-in-the-blank ranch, and ethical superiority. Join us.
My leg hurts, ain't kickin that thing no more....
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Or... in 2019 a bunch of organisations independently and together started working to create more informed and vocal sportsman and women who showed up and pressured the legislature into getting out of the elk business and putting the management reins of the FWP Bios.
MTelkHuntress
Well-known member
I don't know but that is not a world I want to live in.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Based upon what I've seen, Master Hunter groups are perfectly content advancing their own agendas at the expense of others.
onpoint
Well-known member
Like.
Goddamm that'd be nice. If I could pull up some of my (and others??) first posts on this forum from 'bout 2011 sayin the same things - "sportsman/women need to get together and......"
And here we are.
For those that get better understanding from these things
Hope somebody(s) are able to get that REALLY done. Read it again - REALLY.
I worked for all you guys for 30+ years. Personally, it would be great to see........................................................................................................
onpoint
Well-known member
wllm1313 and buzz should engage in a battle of the concerned don't-live-in-Montana-no-more's.
Between wllm's reaction score title and buzz' clout, a clash of "titans"
Even though neither own pigs nor the farm (anymore)
............................................................................................
Between wllm's reaction score title and buzz' clout, a clash of "titans"
Even though neither own pigs nor the farm (anymore)
............................................................................................
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
wllm1313 and buzz should engage in a battle of the concerned don't-live-in-Montana-no-more's.
Between wllm's reaction score title and buzz' clout, a clash of "titans"
Even though neither own pigs nor the farm (anymore)
............................................................................................
Fair point.
Partly I engage in these things because I think we need we need to start looking beyond state boundaries and consider wildlife at the landscape level.
Partly I engage because I think it's important to understand what is and isn't working across the county.
Partly I engage because I come back to Montana to hunt and fish.
Life takes weird turns, I'm sure I will live in a number of different places in the next decade... might happen one of them is Montana.
onpoint
Well-known member
wllm1313,
Don't read in what I ain't sayin'.
Ya always have to be so literal on the webz.com- it was in jest. Partly.
Hell - guys like you and Buzz are more engaged (on these topics on here) than the lion's share of "like Minded" Montana ht'ers.
Tip of the cap........
Barring unforeseen-ness, MT's where I'll become dirt.........................................
Don't read in what I ain't sayin'.
Ya always have to be so literal on the webz.com- it was in jest. Partly
.Hell - guys like you and Buzz are more engaged (on these topics on here) than the lion's share of "like Minded" Montana ht'ers.
Tip of the cap........
Barring unforeseen-ness, MT's where I'll become dirt.........................................
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
wllm1313,
Don't read in what I ain't sayin'.
Ya always have to be so literal on the webz.com- it was in jest. Partly
Hell - guys like you and Buzz are more engaged (on these topics on here) than the lion's share of "like Minded" Montana ht'ers.
Tip of the cap........
Barring unforeseen-ness, MT's where I'll become dirt.........................................
I'm just wondering when we are gonna go fishing, so I can annoy the shit out of ya with fish related questions...
Full disclosure I still don't really know which way my real is supposed go on on my fly rod
HSi-ESi
Well-known member
Dipping my toe into the discussion a bit - just breaking out a few points - and these are specific to MT
First, I see problems occurring because of growing pains - both in population of people and elk. Problems abound.
It used to be that you met folks in social settings, school events, brandings, down at the local watering hole - and struck up a conversation. As always, you'd find lots of people you both knew - whose kids went to school with who, etc. Hunting would come up - and it might not be the first conversation - but eventually - there would either be an invite to come hunt - or they kept the place to friends / family. In all my 43 (almost 44) years of being in MT - I've never gone door-to-door knocking for hunting permissions.
Since it was so communal - and I lived in small communities - and there is plenty of public land - we were never suffering lack of opportunities. Obviously, this type of interaction does not scale well. Public (IE State run programs) - be it BMA's or access through easements have helped (and hurt some) - but I would say a net positive.
When I first saw this program and looked into it - it seemed like a good faith effort in trying to bridge the gap. Yea, definitely a PR problem with the "Master" hunter portion. If I were needing a place to hunt - and had the free time to put into the program - I could see it as a viable option. If I needed some exclusive or limited place to take my kids out - then it might be worth it.
Extrapolate this out to someone who just moved to MT - or is a viable candidate for being on the @hipstersofbozeman instragram feed - and needs a fast track on the social learning side - I could see it helping.
I really don't see a program like this taking over the model for how access to private land is gained in MT. If you look at the mix of landowners now - with a higher percentage of places not being working ranches now, or primarily run by local folks but owned as a vacation spot - it's an easy way to screen. Not that some a$$hat can't become a "Master" hunter and leave a black mark on the program - that'll happen too I'm sure.
So we've got a mix of BMA's, WMA's, easements, Outfitter leased, Public land (accessible), Public land (in-accessible) and this program. Plus some I'm sure I've forgot about.
If the program can "produce" some like-minded folks that love hunting and all the it entails - that's great. It's more recruitment to help ensure our lifestyle exists.
I will laugh my a$$ off though the first time someone pulls out a "Master" hunter card to display their creds though.
First, I see problems occurring because of growing pains - both in population of people and elk. Problems abound.
It used to be that you met folks in social settings, school events, brandings, down at the local watering hole - and struck up a conversation. As always, you'd find lots of people you both knew - whose kids went to school with who, etc. Hunting would come up - and it might not be the first conversation - but eventually - there would either be an invite to come hunt - or they kept the place to friends / family. In all my 43 (almost 44) years of being in MT - I've never gone door-to-door knocking for hunting permissions.
Since it was so communal - and I lived in small communities - and there is plenty of public land - we were never suffering lack of opportunities. Obviously, this type of interaction does not scale well. Public (IE State run programs) - be it BMA's or access through easements have helped (and hurt some) - but I would say a net positive.
When I first saw this program and looked into it - it seemed like a good faith effort in trying to bridge the gap. Yea, definitely a PR problem with the "Master" hunter portion. If I were needing a place to hunt - and had the free time to put into the program - I could see it as a viable option. If I needed some exclusive or limited place to take my kids out - then it might be worth it.
Extrapolate this out to someone who just moved to MT - or is a viable candidate for being on the @hipstersofbozeman instragram feed - and needs a fast track on the social learning side - I could see it helping.
I really don't see a program like this taking over the model for how access to private land is gained in MT. If you look at the mix of landowners now - with a higher percentage of places not being working ranches now, or primarily run by local folks but owned as a vacation spot - it's an easy way to screen. Not that some a$$hat can't become a "Master" hunter and leave a black mark on the program - that'll happen too I'm sure.
So we've got a mix of BMA's, WMA's, easements, Outfitter leased, Public land (accessible), Public land (in-accessible) and this program. Plus some I'm sure I've forgot about.
If the program can "produce" some like-minded folks that love hunting and all the it entails - that's great. It's more recruitment to help ensure our lifestyle exists.
I will laugh my a$$ off though the first time someone pulls out a "Master" hunter card to display their creds though.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Moving forward isn’t always progress.
This quote, taken directly from the RMEF article implies a quid pro quo for the class
I know, private land and private rights.
We can revisit this in ten years and see where things are at. We’ll see if the program evolves into just a special opportunity card for hunters, or it altruistic. Or, is it simply a business venture for providing anointed hunters to exclusive ranches all in the name of perpetuating the hunting industry?
How long before Master Hunters are lobbying for MH only seasons to solve the state’s elk population “problem”. Will it evolve into a booking program, where there is financial reward for providing elite ranches with a list of upper crusters? As @Randy11 said, all brought to you by <inset sponsor here>.
Just typing the phrase hunting industry makes me want to vomit and shower 10 times. WTF happened to tradition, heritage, and partaking in a public resource, and when did it become industry?
Last edited by a moderator:
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Perhaps the program would be more acceptable if each Master Hunter was referred to several recent Hunter Education graduates and their parents to mentor new hunters and introduce them to hunting through the private land access available through the program. Then the stigma of MH personal privilege would be lessened.
Interesting comments here.
The Montana program, as I am familiar with it, was designed to open access to otherwise closed properties of landowners who wanted hunting, but had bad experiences with the chaos of Block Management and also did not want to go the outfitted route. It was a project put together between landowners who want more alternatives than BMA or leasing. It is also my understanding that landowners' concerns of BMA program and/or open public hunting is that too many of the hunters that were showing up at their doorstep were inclined to behave in a way that is not good for hunting.
Unlike most other states' advanced/master hunter programs, this Montana program is not operated by the state. If I understand correctly, that was due to the landowners not wanting it to be a state-run program. Given the benefit to hunters is access to quality properties and such access is obtained from the landowners, it seems logical why this is not a state-operated program if the landowners don't want that.
So, the term "Master" set aside for this discussion, I'd be interested to know what alternatives folks see as workable. Rather than pollute this thread with a diversion, I will start a new thread, "Alternatives for public elk hunting access" and I hope those who have provided comments here would chime in and give some thought to what solutions are practical and possible.
Easy to hammer those who are trying different ways to solve this problem of inaccessible lands/elk, a problem only getting worse and likely to be the main complication to wildlife management twenty years from now. What is harder, much harder than hammering on Hunt Talk over your morning coffee, is to stick your neck out and try to solve problems when you know there are no perfect solutions and the likelihood of criticism is high.
Just started that thread here - https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/alternatives-for-public-elk-hunting-access.294331/
The Montana program, as I am familiar with it, was designed to open access to otherwise closed properties of landowners who wanted hunting, but had bad experiences with the chaos of Block Management and also did not want to go the outfitted route. It was a project put together between landowners who want more alternatives than BMA or leasing. It is also my understanding that landowners' concerns of BMA program and/or open public hunting is that too many of the hunters that were showing up at their doorstep were inclined to behave in a way that is not good for hunting.
Unlike most other states' advanced/master hunter programs, this Montana program is not operated by the state. If I understand correctly, that was due to the landowners not wanting it to be a state-run program. Given the benefit to hunters is access to quality properties and such access is obtained from the landowners, it seems logical why this is not a state-operated program if the landowners don't want that.
So, the term "Master" set aside for this discussion, I'd be interested to know what alternatives folks see as workable. Rather than pollute this thread with a diversion, I will start a new thread, "Alternatives for public elk hunting access" and I hope those who have provided comments here would chime in and give some thought to what solutions are practical and possible.
Easy to hammer those who are trying different ways to solve this problem of inaccessible lands/elk, a problem only getting worse and likely to be the main complication to wildlife management twenty years from now. What is harder, much harder than hammering on Hunt Talk over your morning coffee, is to stick your neck out and try to solve problems when you know there are no perfect solutions and the likelihood of criticism is high.
Just started that thread here - https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/alternatives-for-public-elk-hunting-access.294331/
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
I’m not hammering anyone Randy. I just want people to be damned aware of the future we are potentially creating. IMO we’re creating a monster in the name of mainstreaming hunting to further recruitment.
And yeah, I’ve stuck my neck out......
Maybe it doesn’t count because I’m not sponsored by <insert business here>?
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
