Landlocked State Trust Lands

I accept your acknowledgement that you post bullshit numbers.
want to talk about the 1000s of elk your puppet master peddled?

He's still stuck thinking that the law that says FWP has to manage for citizens of state means only resident hunters, because he doesn't think landowners or outfitters are citizens either.
No - i just try to speak for R hunters.

Looks to me like folks like you have provided plenty of voice to nr landowners and outfitters.
 
If you compare what Marty & Co are saying in this oped to the actual numbers posted, your bullshit peaks through again.

Those are the base licenses sold.
For eithersex deer/elk it looks to me, if my 'rithmatic is correct 33,056 total NR licenses in 2024.

Yet forky is making it sound like there's double that.
 
From 2019-now the number of NR applicants has sky rocketed . As a result the number of base licenses (required to apply for bg license or upland ) has skyrocketed but the number of deer and elk tags actually in NR pockets has stayed about the same . Hell look at the uproar on socal media by forum administrators after they cut the number of total deer tags a R can hold from 8 down to 3 . People won’t survive the world is ending type of comments from residents
 
I tried to go back through old threads where one of our real no nonsense numbers guys broke down resident license sales and annual funding from nonresidents and provided the actual cost increase necessary to eliminate the NR crowding issue and it was a negligible increase i would gladly pay.
It’s a real shame there’s so many threads about this same argument that I couldn’t find that post!
 
For sure.

1000s of elk?

P.s. - i dont get paid or get to make up fake non profits for my advocacy.

Based on you current level of understanding and your general lack of people skills, I wouldn't hire you either. There's a funny thing about people in some aspects of conservation in Montana where they think that if you make a living in the conservation world, you must be corrupt. That is really why so many of the good and competent staff of those organizations are gone now - when the people you seek to serve think you should work for free, you don't stick around long and you end up with trust-funders and trophy spouses who can afford to be pure. Sad, but I guess that's where some of the conservation movement is now - which is inherently funny when you consider the 6 figure salaries those ED's make.

I didn't make the statement about 1,00's of elk, but yes, 1,000's of elk. I know of one ranch that had over 350 taken this year alone from free cow hunters (this is the 5th or 6th year of this level of harvest), another that's over 200. With thousands of ranches in MT offering some kind of free access outside of an FWP access program, it's tough to know how many are harvested so we've asked ranches to keep better records so we can show skeptics what these ranches are offering for access.

Other ranches are starting their access programs because they've either changed hands recently or they've had negative experiences in the past (the ranch with 200 cows taken pulled out of block mgt due to trespass issues and lack of ethics from hunters) or they were never in an access program and just focused on friends and family. We're even working with ranches across the state to bring them in to the access discussion by starting slow and showing them that access is a great tool for their operations. Others still are setting up enhanced hunter education courses with us, and hosting both kid classes and adult classes which also come with the opportunity to hunt on those properties while also getting you into the list for opportunities as they arise (all Master Hunter Grads are on this list as well). We started that pilot program this year, with 4 Master Hunters taking 5 cows on a ranch north of Helena. Based on their feedback and the feedback of the ranch manager, we're looking at expanding that and we now have about 10-15 ranches looking at us as a way to develop access programs.

So, there's that.
 
And here I thought a four month old resurrected thread was gonna be about inaccessible state trust lands.

View attachment 404977

True.

So here's something that's more on track:

In the last 7 years, around 1 million acres of landlocked public lands have been opened up through Block Mgt and PAL act leases. PAL is partially funded through Pittman Robertson dollars and the extra preference point for outfitted NR's, and Block mgt is primarily funded through NR license sales.

The DNRC tool would be a tremendous asset for folks who wanted to work with landowners who were looking at land swaps at the state level to help find spots to trade that were either truly land-locked for better access to public lands or would create much better recreational opportunities in access deserts (like the Jefferson or Musselshell, etc). The State Constitution helps ensure that the public always gets the better end of the trade, and it could be a way to help consolidate management for DNRC and landowners.
 
I tried to go back through old threads where one of our real no nonsense numbers guys broke down resident license sales and annual funding from nonresidents and provided the actual cost increase necessary to eliminate the NR crowding issue and it was a negligible increase i would gladly pay.
It’s a real shame there’s so many threads about this same argument that I couldn’t find that post!
Try getting some legislation passed to double the price of Resident deer and elk tags...report back how that goes.

Laffin'...
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
118,737
Messages
2,204,434
Members
38,629
Latest member
RipDog
Back
Top