Montana FWP: Par For The Course

[OntarioHunter]

I reply to you because of your knowledge and experience. Let me know what I have wrong. The last 10yrs of politics in general, federal and local, have evolved to competition rather than cooperation. That is the core obstacle. For MT, I would like to start putting together a list of things we want for 2023 and see if we can get other groups like MOGA on board. Maybe we are willing to give them 30% of the NR licenses in an early draw if they support some things we want. Just speaking for myself, I am willing to come away with less than what I want if I get something of benefit in return. The impediment is that some clown in Helena can easily amend one thing in and strike something out in an 11th hour change and jam it down either groups throat. We have to agree not to allow that to happen. Maybe I am an idealist in my view, but if we work together we can get more done and all end up in a better place.

You got that right! This tailgate party you-vs-me mentality is getting the country and the state nowhere but flushed down the drain. People vote "conservative" or "liberal" just because of the name, not how the game is being played by any particular player. I don't get it. Why not use your brain instead of letting someone misuse it for you? When did Americans become so adverse to thinking for themselves and outside the box? Whatever happened to the famous (or infamous if you're a Native American) Frontier Ethic? I am baffled that Americans today can be so easily indoctrinated into not thinking for themselves ... especially via internet misinformation. We had Yellow Journalism in the 19th century and sensational muckraking in the early 20th century ... but the partisan BS people gobble up off the net today without a second thought is astounding. And shameful. Being stupid and being proud of it has become fashionable. WTF?

 

[Ben Lamb]

I think it makes sense to develop a package of bills that would be introduced. I would say that it's best not done in the spotlight just yet. You want some time to vet thoughts, research concepts, etc.

Never, ever negotiate like MOGA does, asking for the ridiculous then whine like a punk when you don't get it. Also don't negotiate down. Right now, they have the points system and it's a ticking time bomb that's going to blow up in their face. Don't take that away from them yet. Let them live with their actions. You have the high ground. Don't cede it out of misplaced romanticism for the industry that has helped create one of the most messed up licensing and management systems in the west. These people just proved that they have zero regard for what you think or believe and they proved that they'll use any means necessary to privatize wildlife for their own profit.

You have a moral duty to be honest and forthright in your dealing. You do not have to give in before the fight even starts.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I think it makes sense to develop a package of bills that would be introduced. I would say that it's best not done in the spotlight just yet. You want some time to vet thoughts, research concepts, etc.

Never, ever negotiate like MOGA does, asking for the ridiculous then whine like a punk when you don't get it. Also don't negotiate down. Right now, they have the points system and it's a ticking time bomb that's going to blow up in their face. Don't take that away from them yet. Let them live with their actions. You have the high ground. Don't cede it out of misplaced romanticism for the industry that has helped create one of the most messed up licensing and management systems in the west. These people just proved that they have zero regard for what you think or believe and they proved that they'll use any means necessary to privatize wildlife for their own profit.

You have a moral duty to be honest and forthright in your dealing. You do not have to give in before the fight even starts.

My thoughts as well. At this point I recognize that for the sake of a lasting agreement some consideration of outfitters needs is going to be expedient.

MOGA’s attitude during this cycle has me in a much less generous mood than I would have been had there been collaboration before some of this ridiculous legislation was presented.

 

[SAJ-99]

My thoughts as well. At this point I recognize that for the sake of a lasting agreement some consideration of outfitters needs is going to be expedient.

MOGA’s attitude during this cycle has me in a much less generous mood than I would have been had there been collaboration before some of this ridiculous legislation was presented.

Agree, but do we have a choice? Look at the stuff that was shoved down our throat. MOGA has little incentive to compromise after the victories. They also have the advantage of having a united front. As the article says, "...MOGA lit up the director’s office.” They didn't have to post to the MOGA web board and get opinions of members. It acted as a single entity. We are completely unable to do that right now. We have numbers on our side, but zero organization and commitment to the hard work involved in the task of building those relationships.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Agree, but do we have a choice? Look at the stuff that was shoved down our throat. MOGA has little incentive to compromise after the victories. They also have the advantage of having a united front. As the article says, "...MOGA lit up the director’s office.” They didn't have to post to the MOGA web board and get opinions of members. It acted as a single entity. We are completely unable to do that right now. We have numbers on our side, but zero organization and commitment to the hard work involved in the task of building those relationships.

Then extend the same courtesy you were given: 48 hours before the hearing.

 

[BenInMT]

Something tells me that a great percentage of people who are outraged by this will again vote for the very same candidates who are making it all happen. Because derp derp guns, blah taxes and mah rights. The wool is pulled tightly over their eyes and they’re not going to wake up until there’s nothing left to bicker over.

 

[RobertD]

I have limited insight to offer into these Montana-specific issues, though I am learning a lot from users on this site. This includes many of those who have already commented on this thread. I appreciate all of your knowledge.

If I can add anything, it's just that seeing the pace and tactics that Montana's current political regime has employed to reshape major aspects of Montana wildlife management is really frightening.

But it isn't isolated to the immediate results of whatever hijinks they have been up to and will be up to in future sessions; I am more concerned that this becomes part of the ugly political dialectic we already see in other areas of our nation's political landscape.

I hope the message that can come from this, the one that resonates with Montanans and sportsmen and women more broadly, is not to look to "counter" this administration or even to work to avoid polarization in wildlife policy. I hope the message can be oriented towards seeking less political influence over wildlife management in general.

Obviously that horse is out of the barn in most id not all states, I just hope that people can remember that there are more than two choices regarding who manages wildlife and other natural resources.

 

[brockel]

Hey man, just plant pike and walleye in every body of water in Montana and call it a day...

More opportunity and easier to "manage".

What a joke Montana has become.

Some great "leadership" by the Director as well...

Throw some perch on your list and you’ve got a deal

 

[RobG]

I reply to you because of your knowledge and experience. Let me know what I have wrong. The last 10yrs of politics in general, federal and local, have evolved to competition rather than cooperation. That is the core obstacle. For MT, I would like to start putting together a list of things we want for 2023 and see if we can get other groups like MOGA on board. Maybe we are willing to give them 30% of the NR licenses in an early draw if they support some things we want. Just speaking for myself, I am willing to come away with less than what I want if I get something of benefit in return. The impediment is that some clown in Helena can easily amend one thing in and strike something out in an 11th hour change and jam it down either groups throat. We have to agree not to allow that to happen. Maybe I am an idealist in my view, but if we work together we can get more done and all end up in a better place.

There's more money in fighting than winning.

 

[Sytes]

Obviously that horse is out of the barn in most id not all states, I just hope that people can remember that there are more than two choices regarding who manages wildlife and other natural resources.

Wish both party's kept this in mind.... Unfortunate though it is telling, MT went almost completely red this past election. Maybe instead of the D's blaming the "other side" they need to take a look in the mirror.

 

[SAJ-99]

There's more money in fighting than winning.

I agree that there are people that make money from the fight, but I don't agree totally with the most recent scenario. MOGA only benefitted from the win. They paid for the fight and the lobbyist makes money regardless of the result, but you might look to change lobbyist if you keep losing. WE don't even HAVE a lobbyist. Maybe that needs to change? If we want to play offense it is better to think about this stuff now than in December 2022.

 

[Ben Lamb]

There's more money in fighting than winning.

That's the old lobbyist credo (There's no money to be made in solving the problem). But from the perspective of sportsmen's organizations, it's not true. Those groups were the ones for the last 25 years standing up against all of this, while trying to push some legislation forward. The typical response was a fast hearing & quick tabling, or the bill would get hijacked and turned into some thing stupid.

Knowing what your vote count is remains a critical piece of knowing how to pass a bill. The votes haven't been there to do much of anything up until 2019. And since the Senator from Beaverhead County made it clear in his floor speech supporting the hijacking of 637 that it's time for hunters & anglers to bring their own solutions forward, then I think it makes sense to take him up on that.

A reform package, whether it's licensing or something else, calls that bluff. If the legislature, after once again blaming resident hunters for all of the evils of the world, refuses to take up their efforts and give them the same consideration & empathy they give outfitters, then we know it's all just bullsnot and perhaps the legislature needs it's wings clipped via initiative.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Maybe instead of the D's blaming the "other side" they need to take a look in the mirror.

Understood. However, it is naïve to be in denial that R's are not much less concerned about conservation, hunting legacy, public access, public lands, and wildlife.

 

[Nameless Range]

If the legislature, after once again blaming resident hunters for all of the evils of the world, refuses to take up their efforts and give them the same consideration & empathy they give outfitters, then we know it's all just bullsnot and perhaps the legislature needs it's wings clipped via initiative.

Would such a clipping be an initiative that says something to the effect of "All Fish and Game laws and authority lie with the commission, and the legislature may not alter them," or some such thing?

I really want to clip wings. Maybe burn them off. Anything really.

 

[SAJ-99]

Wish both party's kept this in mind.... Unfortunate though it is telling, MT went almost completely red this past election. Maybe instead of the D's blaming the "other side" they need to take a look in the mirror.

The simple fact is Republicans (as a party) view everything on its ability to be turned into money. Forest is only valuable it it can be logged, grass is valuable if it can be grazed, public land is valuable if it can be mined or drilled, elk and deer are most valuable if NRs pay $6000 to hunt them. Every piece of wilderness would be changed to allow for these things if it could be done without a barrage of lawsuits. Democrats have their own problems, but if your perspective is for public land that should remain wild, that isn't one of them. Most of the reasons people in Montana don't vote D is because they are scared of change and have been scared into believing the change is going to be bigger and more extreme than it really is. Eventually they will realize they are getting screwed over enough to listen to what candidates have to say rather than looking at the letter next to their name.

 

[Stone_Ice_1]

The simple fact is Republicans (as a party) view everything on its ability to be turned into money. Forest is only valuable it it can be logged, grass is valuable if it can be grazed, public land is valuable if it can be mined or drilled, elk and deer are most valuable if NRs pay $6000 to hunt them. Every piece of wilderness would be changed to allow for these things if it could be done without a barrage of lawsuits. Democrats have their own problems, but if your perspective is for public land that should remain wild, that isn't one of them. Most of the reasons people in Montana don't vote D is because they are scared of change and have been scared into believing the change is going to be bigger and more extreme than it really is. Eventually they will realize they are getting screwed over enough to listen to what candidates have to say rather than looking at the letter next to their name.

This is all true, except your last statement. I've seen enough of it and listened to enough people spout off about things they aren't even close to being educated about to know this will never happen. Ignorance is bliss for too many.

 

[Sytes]

Understood. However, it is naïve to be in denial that R's are not much less concerned about conservation, hunting legacy, public access, public lands, and wildlife.

Agree, as is evident in this wick wacked legislative session(s) - that is where *I believe, the extremes on both sides have made our state's management bi-polar. Micro managed FWP flips now based on the ideals to "correct" the other's "folly"... and now the voting has swung the pendulum the other side and now we face the pissed extremes of the "other side"...

 

[RobertD]

Agree, as is evident in this wick wacked legislative session(s) - that is where *I believe, the extremes on both sides have made our state's management bi-polar. Micro managed FWP flips now based on the ideals to "correct" the other's "folly"... and now the voting has swung the pendulum the other side and now we face the pissed extremes of the "other side"...

Then when it gets real fun, is when one "side" evolves from "correct the others folly" to "ram everything we possibly can through while we have the chance" because they know they're alienating voters as it is, so might as well shoot for the moon - before the other guys take control via the same frustrated middle ground voters that put them in office.

It's a effed up see-saw and wildlife management needs to be kept out of it.. like we've established though, that horse is now out of the barn, and not just in MT

 

[RobG]

First they came for our elk...

Whoa... those rainbows are a huge threat to the native populations starting at the headwaters, especially the Lamar where the creek dumps in. My daughter and I camped in the meadow many years ago. There's nothing but dinky rainbow in water that big cutthroat would thrive in.

The concern from the "wilderness" group is asinine. For example, they rehabilitated Woodward lake in the Bob Marshal. There is already an outfitter camp up there so it's not like an occasional recreational camper is going to affect things. If nothing else, the infestation of grizzly bears will keep the people out.

This project was supposed to happen this summer but they have managed to delay this project by a year, meaning those rainbows will have another year to hybridize out of existence the famous Slough creek cutthroat. And that assumes that the project goes forward against the will of the group of ****wads that wants to rip through everything about the heart of Montana that I value.