Is Big Fin trying (key word is trying) to make money off of publicly owned game animals. The answer to this question is "Yes"...yes he is trying to profit off of publicly owned game animals. That is a fact and you cannot argue that fact.
Shooter: Remember when we had this discussion on this site last spring. If you recall, I never denied that my business model depends upon making money by paying large fees for the right to hunt on public land. And, I told you at that time, I hope every outfitter in MT can make large fortunes in the free market, without government subsidy. Not sure why they would fear operating in a free market, void of government interference.
As Shoot Straight said, it is not about the public wildlife issue, as you keep referring to. It is about a business climate free of government giving subsidy to one party to the detriment of others.
I don't have a state forcing any of my non-resident customers to use me for their chosen activity. Probably would help the business model, but not something I expect, or would be able to defend.
Some of you are the most biased people that I have ever argued with (and believe me, I have argued with a lot of people) but this is BS when you cuss some outfitter or land owner for trying to make some money off of publicly owned game animals when your hero or mentor is doing the same thing.
If I am anyone's hero, they need help. For the three hundredth time, at least for me, it is not about the public wildlife issue, as you keep confusing. It is, and always has been, about a subsidy that funnels a huge amount of commercial activity to a chosen group, allowing that group to use that economic activity to the detriment of others.
When Big Fin made the comment about the businesses in Broudus complaining about loss of revenue due to outfitters and their tags..........he is full of chit, because I know for a fact that it is not right. He might be right in his own mind, but in reality he is out in left field. Big Fin, go talk to the motel owners and ask if they are full all season...the answer is yes. Unless they were going to build an addition, they could not handle any more. The outfitters buy gas, so that point is out, and the restaurants still feed plenty of outfitter clients.........so... yeah that is a mute point as well.
I used Broadus as an example. We will never agree on this one. I have monthly financial statements, over long periods of time, that show the October and November months have decreased for many of our Eastern MT business clients, even though October and November are still good months in their business cycle. Not nearly as good as they once were.
Using your highly scientific method, I just walked down to the Broadus Motel office. It is the Friday before the weekend of peak mule deer rut. Guess what, there are vacancies. I just counted the rooms - 22. I then counted how many were occupied - 6. Hmmh. No need to build an addition tonight. I just asked two of them if they were guided or non-guided. Guess what, they were non-guided, just as I suspect the rest of them are.
And, just got done dropping a hundred dollars for dinner at the Powder River Stockman's Club. Guess how many people were there at 6:30 on this Friday night? Two parties of hunters. I visited with them, and they were non-guided hunters, not guided hunters. No need for an addition to that building either. Place was so desolate, the Prime Rib special might have to be carried over to Saturday.
I am being truthful in those observation and yes, sarcastic. But I find your lack of numbers to support your claims to be a function of your biases. At least I am making claims based on actual results. Maybe you own some of these business and can make such assertions going back for the many years I have business records for. If so, let me know what businesses those are and I will patronize them.
You can all have your little circle jerk and tell each other what you want to hear, but I live out here and I know what the general attitude is when it comes to business owners and landowners........they don't mind it at all.
Maybe landowners don't mind it, but many business owners would prefer it to be back how it was. They sure like non-guided hunters, and they would like more non-guided hunters.
Again, this is an access issue and a jealousy issue. Hey Big Fin......if you want to be an outfitter I am sure that you could with all of your experience. I don't know a lot about it but someone with this much knowledge should be able to do anything.
Like I said, when the state funnels many millions of dollars to one small group, who uses that money to acquire access, it does become an access issue. Not a jealousy issue. Still can't figure where outfitters continue to get this jealousy notion from.
I suspect that if you cannot defend the handouts being provided, based on any rational economic policy, it is time to start throwing out terms like jealousy.
I have enough public land to hunt, so to me it is not an access issue. And, when I stop doing this TV show, I have lots of private land to hunt, so for me, it is not an access issue.
Why would I want to be an outfitter? No thanks. I can think of a million things I would rather do than that. I want to have fun while hunting.
People, don't kid yourselves.....he is making money off of your "publicly owned game animals" just like any outfitter or landowner.
I am paying fees for every hunt I film. If I posted the total of filming fees I paid in the last two years, would you be willing to tell how much you, or any outfitters you know, paid in fees to shoot a whole lot more wildlife than I did? I bet you I paid more than any outfitter in Montana for my use of public lands. In fact, I will buy you as many beers as you can drink here in Broadus.
I will also put those public land use fees up against any operator grazing on public lands in Eastern Montana. I list the fees I paid, you list the fees you, or they paid, and lets talk about the fair market value of the impacts each of us had on the resource. I think we had this discussion last spring, also. You probably don't want to go there.
But, whether my endeavor succeeds or fails, I know it will do so without the government handing me a huge amount of economic activity. My businesses (all three of them) operate in a market not subsidized by government. I don't think the outfitting industry can say that.
For the final time, please defend why you think your industry (whatever that might be), the outfitting industry, or any industry, should be subsidized by the government.
I have to get ready to go hunt whitetails on the public land in the morning, so I hope to read your answer to that question when I get back tomorrow night. And hopefully we can talk about it over a beer. I am buying.
But... I still have an opinion.
