Elk hunt access lists

[Forkyfinder]

The same folks who have focused so much time and energy on repealing 635 haven’t said a thing publicly about that form of NR preference that reduces resident opportunity. I would think that issue is one that every resident and MT based conservation group should be able to agree on.

Lots of words. As long as you feel justified ensuring that coveted elk permits are for sale - good for you.

It does reduce R opportunity - and NR opportunity. If you cant see that - youre blind to reality.

635 expanded the use of 454s - they are connected and its apparent and obvious.

 

[Rack Daniels]

 

[Forkyfinder]

@Gerald Martin you don’t want to get worked up polishing turds?

My favorite part of the turd polishing is the blatant lack of admission that this is about LE permits.

 

[Frequently Banned Troll]

My favorite part of the turd polishing is the blatant lack of admission that this is about LE permits.

That was not claimed by Gerald.

 

[Forkyfinder]

That was not claimed by Gerald.

Thats true - the point is more that patently not acknowledged.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Thats true - the point is more that patently not acknowledged.

You’ve got so many “points” scattered across your threads it would give Sherlock Holmes a headache trying to keep track of everything you think proves you’re right.

Why are you calling on me to acknowledge something that you claim is proof of something?

 

[Forkyfinder]

You’ve got so many “points” scattered across your threads it would give Sherlock Holmes a headache trying to keep track of everything you think proves you’re right.

Why are you calling on me to acknowledge something that you claim is proof of something?

Simple question gerald.

Why buy a preference point?

 

[Gerald Martin]

To have a better chance at drawing a general tag.

 

[Forkyfinder]

To have a better chance at drawing a general tag.

Why would someone - who can get a general tag, without preference points, buy them?

Do you really not get it? I cant tell if youre obtuse or ignoring the real issue.

 

[Gerald Martin]

They won’t buy preference points. Enlighten me on what the real issue is.

 

[Forkyfinder]

They won’t buy preference points. Enlighten me on what the real issue is.

Yeah? You know what this is?

107/131 collect them. Do you know why?

 

[Gerald Martin]

View attachment 379180

Yeah? You know what this is?

107/131 collect them. Do you know why?

Sounds like you’re ready to tell me…. Fire away.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Sounds like you’re ready to tell me…. Fire away.

Because the laws always been about limited entry hard to draw permits.

Do i need crayons to draw it up for you?

 

[Gerald Martin]

Because the laws always been about limited entry hard to draw permits.

Do i need crayons to draw it up for you?

Yes please. Blue is my favorite color. And draw slowly so I can follow. Bonus points for snark or innuendo about nefarious motives.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Yes please. And draw slowly so I can follow. Bonus points for snark or innuendo about nefarious motives.

I guess that beats extra bonus points for EHA for NR LO only.

I'll just walk you through what any reasonable person seeking to maximize their opportunity would do.

1. Acquire a general permit via 635, while buying preference points
2. Enroll in a sham EHA, collect extra BP, hunt my own property (wink wink) in the LE district
3. When you have 3 PP or 2 PP if you can handle some marginal risk of not hunting - and double the bonus points of anyone else in the same time frame - apply for the NR LO permit pool and get a gen tag through traditional methods. Hunt the whole unit.

Theres no doubt to most in the conservation community (and the ranch real estate sales business) that this is what its always been about.

"non-resident landowners with a minimum of 2,500 acres of contiguous land within a special hunting district, HB365 remains beneficial. This is because a general license is a prerequisite for eligibility to draw a special permit."

"While these agreements are designed to provide public access and landowner permits in special hunting district areas where tags are otherwise difficult to draw, they are also available for a nonresident landowner owning land in a general hunting district"

Montana's New Game-Changer: House Bill 635

House Bill 635 Empowers Non-Resident Landowners to hunt Elk on their own land, Plus Four other proven strategies for non-resident landowners to maximize…

landinvestorguide.com

Edit - @Gerald Martin - i forgot to compare how much better this is for folks like the wilkes and galts, than generational ranching families. The law you defend with a pavlovian response - gives NR LO a gigantic leg up. One of the snake oil sales pitches of 635 was providing the NR LO owner "similar incentive" as R LO, they have much better if you understand things in practice.

After 3 years - the NR LO has over 3 times the chance to draw the "unit wide" odds than the R landowner does.

I cant fathom you not understanding that before arguing for it in Helena. But what i said is obviously happening - or they wouldnt be buying preference points.

 

[Rack Daniels]

 

[Frequently Banned Troll]

Here’s your sign..

 

[Ben Lamb]

I guess that beats extra bonus points for EHA for NR LO only.

I'll just walk you through what any reasonable person seeking to maximize their opportunity would do.

1. Acquire a general permit via 635, while buying preference points
2. Enroll in a sham EHA, collect extra BP, hunt my own property (wink wink) in the LE district
3. When you have 3 PP or 2 PP if you can handle some marginal risk of not hunting - and double the bonus points of anyone else in the same time frame - apply for the NR LO permit pool and get a gen tag through traditional methods. Hunt the whole unit.

Theres no doubt to most in the conservation community (and the ranch real estate sales business) that this is what its always been about.

"non-resident landowners with a minimum of 2,500 acres of contiguous land within a special hunting district, HB365 remains beneficial. This is because a general license is a prerequisite for eligibility to draw a special permit."

"While these agreements are designed to provide public access and landowner permits in special hunting district areas where tags are otherwise difficult to draw, they are also available for a nonresident landowner owning land in a general hunting district"

Montana's New Game-Changer: House Bill 635

House Bill 635 Empowers Non-Resident Landowners to hunt Elk on their own land, Plus Four other proven strategies for non-resident landowners to maximize…

landinvestorguide.com

Edit - @Gerald Martin - i forgot to compare how much better this is for folks like the wilkes and galts, than generational ranching families. The law you defend with a pavlovian response - gives NR LO a gigantic leg up. One of the snake oil sales pitches of 635 was providing the NR LO owner "similar incentive" as R LO, they have much better if you understand things in practice.

After 3 years - the NR LO has over 3 times the chance to draw the "unit wide" odds than the R landowner does.

I cant fathom you not understanding that before arguing for it in Helena. But what i said is obviously happening - or they wouldnt be buying preference points.

You do realize that you can only hunt your deeded property or private land leased for ag purposes on a NR LOP license, right?

Same with the EHA - the landowner has to hunt on the property they open for public access.

And you can get a B10 with your EHA. You don't need the 635 license pool for that.

If you want people to engage in a conversation about stuff like this, perhaps don't lead with personal insults and fabricated information.

 

[Forkyfinder]

You do realize that you can only hunt your deeded property or private land leased for ag purposes on a NR LOP license, right?

Same with the EHA - the landowner has to hunt on the property they open for public access.

And you can get a B10 with your EHA. You don't need the 635 license pool for that.

If you want people to engage in a conversation about stuff like this, perhaps don't lead with personal insults and fabricated information.

Ben - thats not fabricated.

If what i am saying wasnt true - why would the vast majority of those (107/131) be buying preference points?

 

[Ben Lamb]

The 635 pool is still a draw, even though the odds are 100%. Some folks will still purchase a point as extra insurance, or in case they want to apply for a state-wide license in a future year (holding more than one point is still a common application strategy.) The preference point is for licenses, not for permits. Permits require bonus points, which is why we inserted the BP incentive for 635 licenses - to encourage landowners in those hard to draw areas in working with the agency on creating new access.

Regardless, your point that 635 enhances EHA's is moot since the EHA already has the license attached to it: https://fwp.mt.gov/hunt/landownerprograms/public-elk-access-agreements

You are claiming that under both 635 & 454 the landowner can hunt statewide/district wide. That is simply not the case. If people are doing that then they should be reported so FWP can address the issue, same with issues around the EHA lists - which I think most everyone is not happy with at this point given another administrative change this year.

In fact, 907 would have created the situation you seem to be upset about: allowing NR landowners to hunt statewide on a landowner license. That bill also had no understanding of the current laws and rules around landowner licenses, and the amendments showed that as well. As amended it would have made it so much easier for NR landowners and hunt clubs to get licenses and permits while enrolling sub-prime lands into block while reserving the best spots for themselves. As it was introduced, it disincentivized the over 200 folks who receive free B10's by enrolling in Block Mgt from continuing to do so because they would have been excluded from the extra BP incentive.