Montana HB 907

[cgasner1]

View attachment 367812
@cgasner1 you could probably teach some folks a thing or two about muzzy season by the sounds of it.

I might be the minority here but I could give two chits about what was it 170 people getting a tag. Our nr draw odds are in the high 80s for the average person. Doesn’t seem like a war worth waging to me when the state is give tags out everywhere else also. Things besides outdoors stuff also happen during the session I’d wish they do something with property taxes but they appear to be to busy with this kinda bs legislation. Even with the extra bonus point big deal my odds as a resident would still be 4x higher than theirs in most rifle units

 

[Forkyfinder]

I might be the minority here but I could give two chits about what was it 170 people getting a tag. Our nr draw odds are in the high 80s for the average person. Doesn’t seem like a war worth waging to me when the state is give tags out everywhere else also. Things besides outdoors stuff also happen during the session I’d wish they do something with property taxes but they appear to be to busy with this kinda bs legislation. Even with the extra bonus point big deal my odds as a resident would still be 4x higher than theirs in most rifle units

Not just tag, permit. Theres a diffeerence.

A nr LO has a higher chance of drawing most pernits than a R LO by a big margin. Way higher than R, and NR especially. If 635 wasnt around - they could draw as often as they enrolled in BMA or had enough PP to get a gen license at all.

The landowners you and I know, get to hunt their own property less than someone from New York with money who read an advertisement about Montanas "game changing" law. That'll just never quite sit right, for me. That feels like something id watch in a cheesey sitcom about Montana being "sold out."

If thats not selling the state out to you, youre entitled to that opinion. But i think the nuance, numbers, and other bullshit detract from whats bolded.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Even with the extra bonus point big deal my odds as a resident would still be 4x higher than theirs in most rifle units

Nope

 

[cgasner1]

Not just tag, permit. Theres a diffeerence.

A nr LO has a higher chance of drawing most pernits than a R LO by a big margin. Way higher than R, and NR especially. If 635 wasnt around - they could draw as often as they enrolled in BMA or had enough PP to get a gen license at all.

The landowners you and I know, get to hunt their own property less than someone from New York with money who read an advertisement about Montanas "game changing" law. That'll just never quite sit right, for me. That feels like something id watch in a cheesey sitcom about Montana being "sold out."

If thats not selling the state out to you, youre entitled to that opinion. But i think the nuance, numbers, and other bullshit detract from whats bolded.

What’s the % of that 170 you think are getting to hunt their land more than residents? Like I’ve said before with things of this nature I think people way over analyze this because they wanna screw the nr over and even more so when they are a land owner. If I had the money I’d be hunting off the interest made instead of owning a ranch and dealing with that headache

 

[cgasner1]

View attachment 367831View attachment 367830


View attachment 367832

I get more pist off about people playing the lo system and applying thru the loophole that don’t actually own anything. If this was a fight I didn’t feel as @Elky Welky would say I’m neutral on I would approach it as this is another carve out and needs to go away to bring us closer to our nr cap and not as a landowner can go pound sand

 

[Forkyfinder]

What’s the % of that 170 you think are getting to hunt their land more than residents? Like I’ve said before with things of this nature I think people way over analyze this because they wanna screw the nr over and even more so when they are a land owner. If I had the money I’d be hunting off the interest made instead of owning a ranch and dealing with that headache.

Better than a Residents? Or Resident landowners?

Better than a R, absolutely every time - and to be clear - ill admit theres a case for that. Better than a R lo, almost everytime - i havent found much for an acceptable arguement why thats good.

 

[cgasner1]

Better than a Residents? Or Resident landowners?

Better than a R, absolutely every time - and to be clear - ill admit theres a case for that. Better than a R lo, almost everytime - i havent found much for an acceptable arguement why thats good.

When you read thru this thread this entire thing was crafted like shit. @Gerald Martin pointed some stuff out and everyone argued with him. Later turns out he was right and it wasn’t meant to be crafted that way. Until the state puts their foot down and takes us back to the nr cap not really anything to do about it. The fact that people have to be on here arguing about interpretation of this is ridiculous.

 

[cgasner1]

Better than a Residents? Or Resident landowners?

Better than a R, absolutely every time - and to be clear - I’ll admit theres a case for that. Better than a R lo, almost everytime - i havent found much for an acceptable arguement why thats good.

I’m not gonna try and be the gate keeper for the resident landowners. If they are fine with lower draw odds as your stating then they should show up. The numbers are there for them to see.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I’m not gonna try and be the gate keeper for the resident landowners. If they are fine with lower draw odds as your stating then they should show up. The numbers are there for them to see.

I get your perspective there but i dont agree.

This shits so stupid and complicated, even the ones who hunt probably dont know or realize it. And i dont mind showing up for people whos interests are beyond my own.

When you read thru this thread this entire thing was crafted like shit. @Gerald Martin pointed some stuff out and everyone argued with him. Later turns out he was right and it wasn’t meant to be crafted that way. Until the state puts their foot down and takes us back to the nr cap not really anything to do about it. The fact that people have to be on here arguing about interpretation of this is ridiculous.

Whether or not *someone who can clearly afford it* spends 1k on a license was short sighted to even discuss. Theres something that doesnt matter. I shouldnt have even addressed it because it doesnt at all matter relative to whats been bolded or unanswered.

The right for them to purchase the license (if they enroll in bma under 907, or just have a pulse with 635) and circumvent the other NR with PP is whats entirely relevant.

 

[cgasner1]

I get your perspective there but i dont agree.

This shits so stupid and complicated, even the ones who hunt probably dont know or realize it.


Whether or not a billionare spends 1k on a license was short sighted to even discuss. Theres something that doesnt matter. I shouldnt have even addressed it because it doesnt at all matter relative to whats been bolded or unanswered.

The right for them to purchase the license (if they enroll in bma under 907, or just have a pulse with 635) and circumvent the other NR with PP is whats entirely relevant.

I think the term “billionaire” doesn’t help this at all it’s just another talking point. Need proof why do they keep using it in the missoulan. If they actually broke all those numbers down I think you’d be surprised how little effect this has on anything. When 80% + of the general nr can get a tag I just don’t really care and until people wanna start talking about ways to bring nr numbers back to the cap this kinda stupidness will have to continue. These carve outs will be what eventually tips the scale for that to happen in my opinion

 

[Forkyfinder]

I think the term “billionaire” doesn’t help this at all it’s just another talking point. Need proof why do they keep using it in the missoulan. If they actually broke all those numbers down I think you’d be surprised how little effect this has on anything. When 80% + of the general nr can get a tag I just don’t really care and until people wanna start talking about ways to bring nr numbers back to the cap this kinda stupidness will have to continue. These carve outs will be what eventually tips the scale for that to happen in my opinion

I dont mean to villify anyone for having money. But i dont agree that 80% of NR get a tag. About half do.

 

[cgasner1]

I dont mean to villify anyone for having money. But i dont agree that 80% of NR get a tag. About half do. View attachment 367836

Is that just deer or elk? I thought the combo had odds around the 80% range.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Is that just deer or elk? I thought the combo had odds around the 80% range.

Thats the combo. If im using fwps website right.

FWP :: Drawing Statistics Search

 

[cgasner1]

Thats the combo. If im using fwps website right.

FWP :: Drawing Statistics Search

GOHUNT put it at 57% I thought the number was higher. Honestly I still don’t really care. The way the tags are cut isn’t taking one out a resident pocket the % are set. Does it suck that last year nr landowner may have had the tag I didn’t ya it does but I could always buy some land. What does piss me off is people having deeds to buy to qualify and not actually buying the land and using the system as a loop hole

 

[cgasner1]

Im more pist about sb 514 getting tabled and I don’t even bird hunt. That was a good deal for the residents that do.

 

[Labman]

GOHUNT put it at 57% I thought the number was higher. Honestly I still don’t really care. The way the tags are cut isn’t taking one out a resident pocket the % are set. Does it suck that last year nr landowner may have had the tag I didn’t ya it does but I could always buy some land. What does piss me off is people having deeds to buy to qualify and not actually buying the land and using the system as a loop hole

SB235 will end that if it goes all the way through.

https://docs.legmt.gov/download-ticket?ticketId=cedb797f-38ff-46ee-8472-15f0f2541413

 

[Eric Albus]

Something to add to the discussion is that all NR
B-10’a given to Block Management Enrollees are in excess of the 17,000 cap. Last year 220 participated.


Without giving NR LO enrollees the B-10 license, 907’s incentives are not that attractive.

Giving NR LO enrollees the B-10 and opportunity to buy an extra permit has a high potential to add additional NR on the landscape at a time when we already have too many NR.


These are some of the reasons that on the whole, when weighed against the alternatives 635 is actually not a bad bill. I am still in favor of leaving it in place and working within the current structure of 635 to foster relationships with landowners to increase public access along the way.

I’d like to know how many BM NR’s “ranches” are even “good hunting ranches”? If they enroll for a free tag they should only hunt their own ranch

 

[Labman]

I’d like to know how many BM NR’s “ranches” are even “good hunting ranches”? If they enroll for a free tag they should only hunt their own ranch

Residency status of the actual owner is somewhat irrelevant. Example: I know a Resident LO with a great property in Block Mgt, he gives his free license to a NR family member. If the NR family member doesn’t draw a special permit he donates the free license to FWPs military veteran donation program. Tough for me to say anything bad about that.

Personally, I don’t think much is broken with the free license for Block Management cooperators, or the ability to gift it to a family member. What is broken is the advantage NR LO’s can gain with the extra Bonus Point not afforded to R LO’s in an access program.

Now, SB235 while it closes a loophole I think another still exists. Probably going to just shift from having a property “under contract” to TV personalities being hired as “consultants” and poof - you’re now an “employee”.

 

[Eric Albus]

We ended that game here on the house floor the other day. Hopefully it gets 26 & 1 now.
51-26-1. 51 house votes, 26 senate, 1 stamp from Gov

 

[Badlandcat]

For deer yes.

In ND for Elk the LO can hunt the whole unit. And it isn’t 1x in a lifetime. No access incentive. If I lived in ND I’d probably have a bit of an issue with the way that system operates.

A NR landowner can't get a ND elk tag. I do know that for a fact, because I am a NR landowner with a LO elk permit eligible ranch.