In Montana NR Hunters secured over 85,000 hunting licences.

[Deleted member 16864]

2021 is the most recent year I have foia data for elk in colorado and we had 71,569 NR elk hunters - that's draw, otc, and youth draw elk hunters.

and remember, thats ONLY ELK. i suspect we get up into the 120,000, maybe 130,000, range for NR when you include every other species. i'd have to look sometime, i don't actually know.

but, don't know what y'all are complaining about up there in montana, sounds like you have it pretty nice

Your elk population is twice the size of Montana's, so............you must need more wolves?

 

[Pucky Freak]

If you ever wanted evidence of an incestuous relationship between the outfitting lobby, politicians and FWP, this will provide it.It never ceases to amaze how willing they are to hose resident hunters.

Incest? That’s a ménage a trois + a MT resident hunter cuck getting “hosed”

 

[brockel]

Make non residents buy a non refundable base hunting license to apply like Arizona does for $150. Should be able to cut some tags back and keep funding

 

[Deleted member 16864]

Incest? That’s a ménage a trois + a MT resident hunter cuck getting “hosed”

Incest and your avatar made me laugh..........

 

[Ben Lamb]

To me it seems like the state is breaking the NR deer and elk cap? Are they not?

No. The cap is 17,000 B10 Combination Licenses (Deer/elk)

Then there's the 6600 Deer licenses (4,000 B11 combos, 2600 Landowner set-asides that get dumped back into the NR draw if not fully subscribed.

In 2013 or 2015, a bill that was widely supported by hunting groups and outfitters was passed that allowed for the resale of the returned deer portion of the B11 combination tag. So technically, those deer tags are not over the cap since they exist because of the cap. You're seeing multiple transactions on a spreadsheet which helps elevate some of those numbers if interpreted a specific way.

Additive to this is the free & reduced cost license program that adds a few thousand more: Those are the come NR Youth, home to hunt, native MT & College kids license.

So the cap is statutorily what it is, but it is not the totality of NR licensing for Deer & Elk.

Then you have the B-tag situation that has seen the largest growth. In 2022, the agency eliminated a ton of doe harvest due to declining populations, and in 23, the Legislature passed SB 281, which reduced the number of antlerless licenses available to NR's to 1 if you don't hold a combo license, and 2 if you hold a combo license.

Upland is already capped at 12,000. It never hits that cap. Waterfowl - all funding for NR's goes to the Wetland Conservation Program (access & habitat) and those licenses just got jacked up significantly, so I suspect we'll see some drop in those numbers as folks move to a cheaper date.

FWP's Budget Data from 2023:

Budget Report: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publications/fiscal/Session-2021/SubCom-C/FWP-all.pdf

2 year budget comp: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publications/fiscal/FR-2023/Sec-C/FWP.pdf

FWP Budget PowerPoint: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat.../Session/FWP-Budget-Information-and-Guide.pdf

June 2024 Interim budget Committee Report: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...ne24-Q4-FY24/Section-C/52010-FWP-June2024.pdf

If you want to dive into what FWP is spending it's funding for capitol construction/habitat restoration it's here: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...tion-C/Interim/FWP-HB-868-Report-June2024.pdf

Any cut to NR licenses that does not get paid for either through a special revenue account or increased resident fees will likely receive a ton of opposition from organizations that use the conservation funding that NR licenses provides, nor will it pass the legislature and most- likely won't get the Governor's signature.

 

[Deleted member 56631]

Thank you Ben

 

[Ben Lamb]

Thank you Ben

 

[Nameless Range]

No. The cap is 17,000 B10 Combination Licenses (Deer/elk)

Then there's the 6600 Deer licenses (4,000 B11 combos, 2600 Landowner set-asides that get dumped back into the NR draw if not fully subscribed.

In 2013 or 2015, a bill that was widely supported by hunting groups and outfitters was passed that allowed for the resale of the returned deer portion of the B11 combination tag. So technically, those deer tags are not over the cap since they exist because of the cap. You're seeing multiple transactions on a spreadsheet which helps elevate some of those numbers if interpreted a specific way.

Additive to this is the free & reduced cost license program that adds a few thousand more: Those are the come NR Youth, home to hunt, native MT & College kids license.

So the cap is statutorily what it is, but it is not the totality of NR licensing for Deer & Elk.

Then you have the B-tag situation that has seen the largest growth. In 2022, the agency eliminated a ton of doe harvest due to declining populations, and in 23, the Legislature passed SB 281, which reduced the number of antlerless licenses available to NR's to 1 if you don't hold a combo license, and 2 if you hold a combo license.

Upland is already capped at 12,000. It never hits that cap. Waterfowl - all funding for NR's goes to the Wetland Conservation Program (access & habitat) and those licenses just got jacked up significantly, so I suspect we'll see some drop in those numbers as folks move to a cheaper date.

FWP's Budget Data from 2023:

Budget Report: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publications/fiscal/Session-2021/SubCom-C/FWP-all.pdf

2 year budget comp: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publications/fiscal/FR-2023/Sec-C/FWP.pdf

FWP Budget PowerPoint: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat.../Session/FWP-Budget-Information-and-Guide.pdf

June 2024 Interim budget Committee Report: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...ne24-Q4-FY24/Section-C/52010-FWP-June2024.pdf

If you want to dive into what FWP is spending it's funding for capitol construction/habitat restoration it's here: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...tion-C/Interim/FWP-HB-868-Report-June2024.pdf

Any cut to NR licenses that does not get paid for either through a special revenue account or increased resident fees will likely receive a ton of opposition from organizations that use the conservation funding that NR licenses provides, nor will it pass the legislature and most- likely won't get the Governor's signature.

Hey Ben, where can I find information about the NR upland cap? I didn't know there was one and can't find any reference to it.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Hey Ben, where can I find information about the NR upland cap? I didn't know there was one and can't find any reference to it.

I can't remember off the top of my head. I have to chase that down again.

 

[lynlan1819]

Simple fix,triple the current NR tags prices too lower applicants, just like Disneyland does.

 

[sschultz]

Better idea raise resident fees to what a non resident pays and then limit the nonresident

 

[Deleted member 56631]

Simple fix,triple the current NR tags prices too lower applicants, just like Disneyland does.

Montana is definitely the Disneyland of hunting.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Montana is definitely the Disneyland of hunting.

It's a Small World, after all.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Simple fix,triple the current NR tags prices too lower applicants, just like Disneyland does.

FWP is currently experiencing a downward trend in NR applications (per FWP). You can look at their latest quarterly report here: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...ne24-Q4-FY24/Section-C/52010-FWP-June2024.pdf

Their data indicates a convergence in terms of the Ending Fund Balance (EFB) and the expenditures, leading to deficit spending if some alterations aren't made in 2027 or 2029. It sounds like there may be an opportunity for the License advisory committee to come back and discuss moving forward. That discussion in 2015 lead to a decade of conservation finance success and should be brought back to give us another decade of solid funding.

 

[WVmike]

I'm from WV and I would love to be able to move to WY one day but having the family farm and other oblications is something I probably will never be able to fulfill but I do think that the residents of the state should have better odds/opportunity because they do live in that state, pay taxes there, raise their families, support the communities, etc more than nonresidents. We are all nonresidents in most states and it's an opportunity to hunt somewhere we don't live. I would like to hunt elk every year, but I live in WV and most of the people where I hunt look at me like I'm stupid when I say I'm going to shoot an animal the size of a two to three year old angus cow and put it in my backpack and hike 6 miles to the truck. Not many people want to go on a hunt like that because they want to sit in the truck overlooking a corn field from dark to dark. I also think the people in charge like most things nowadays are the root of the problem because they are the one making the rules to enforce something they may know nothing about. The wildlife agencies all over I would imagine do not have the budget that they should have because of the society we live in nowadays and guns being bad and we have to make sure no ones feelings get hurt. This was the same when I was in the military and you had to wait for someone thousands of miles away telling you what you could and couldn't do. So do I like paying alot more than a resident to hunt, no I don't and it limits what hunts you can do and I'm sure thats part of the process but the residents should have better chances. It will be the same when they open a season for elk in WV when the population is at the acceptable number. There will be piles of people applying, mostly out of state to come hunt elk in WV. Residents should be afforded the opportunity first.

 

[lynlan1819]

FWP is currently experiencing a downward trend in NR applications (per FWP). You can look at their latest quarterly report here: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...ne24-Q4-FY24/Section-C/52010-FWP-June2024.pdf

Their data indicates a convergence in terms of the Ending Fund Balance (EFB) and the expenditures, leading to deficit spending if some alterations aren't made in 2027 or 2029. It sounds like there may be an opportunity for the License advisory committee to come back and discuss moving forward. That discussion in 2015 lead to a decade of conservation finance success and should be brought back to give us another decade of solid funding.

Well that would make the residents very happy.

 

[Forkyfinder]

FWP is currently experiencing a downward trend in NR applications (per FWP). You can look at their latest quarterly report here: https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publicat...ne24-Q4-FY24/Section-C/52010-FWP-June2024.pdf

Their data indicates a convergence in terms of the Ending Fund Balance (EFB) and the expenditures, leading to deficit spending if some alterations aren't made in 2027 or 2029. It sounds like there may be an opportunity for the License advisory committee to come back and discuss moving forward. That discussion in 2015 lead to a decade of conservation finance success and should be brought back to give us another decade of solid funding.

Suprised to see the pay rate so low...

 

[Ben Lamb]

Suprised to see the pay rate so low...

Montana generally pays well below the national average for most professions, public or private. It's always been a place where your extra salary is made for by the "scenery tax."

It's also why public land hunters are fiercely defiant of attempts to privatize the resource. If your best benefit on your job is 2 weeks in elk camp, then god help the poor bastard that tries to take that away from the people.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Montana generally pays well below the national average for most professions, public or private. It's always been a place where your extra salary is made for by the "scenery tax."

It's also why public land hunters are fiercely defiant of attempts to privatize the resource. If your best benefit on your job is 2 weeks in elk camp, then god help the poor bastard that tries to take that away from the people.

28.85 better come with sweet benefits for a game warden.

But i hear you. All salaries are lower here.

 

[Ben Lamb]

28.85 better come with sweet benefits for a game warden.

But i hear you. All salaries are lower here.

You get:

A territory the size as some states

People shooting at you whether they know you are there or not

On call 24-7

People will complain if you get a new truck to replace the one with 179,000 miles - about 20% of which are from pavement, and only 20% of the remaining were on decent gravel roads.

Someone calling you to take care of the snake in their front yard.

Ticketing drunk college kids on the river (ok, maybe not the best, but not the worst benefit)

Nobody is ever happy to see you, unless they called you. Even then, it's 90% certain they'll be pissed.