Montana Regional Caps and Limited Entry for Mule Deer.

[Forkyfinder]

I’d be more concerned about bringing in the same revenue. I’m not sure how the statute reads. Is the department required to issue 17k or is that just the max?

Point $ale$

 

[DFS]

I would cap nonresidents at 35% of the previous years resident mule deer harvest in each region. I would also exclude people hunting private land only or with an outfitter from the regional caps. Not sure if the math would work out to get to the number of nonresident tags needed. Maybe they could do a whitetail only tag to fill in the gaps. One thing is for sure there is a nonresident problem in region 6 and 7 and it needs to be addressed.

 

[Ben Lamb]

We could do the same as what Arizona does and have a non refundable $150 that you must buy to apply for a tag. Anyone know how many non resident applications are put in each year for each species?

This exists already at the base license.

The B10 & B11 are not obligated to be sold out. However, over 28% of those licenses' revenues are dedicated to hunter access programs and programs like Habitat MT (another 97K acres of long-term access was announced recently, btw). The issue with messing with the statutes relative to those licenses means you lose that protected, dedicated funding for cornerstone programs that provide over 6 million acres of access to residents and non-residents.

 

[brockel]

This exists already at the base license.

The B10 & B11 are not obligated to be sold out. However, over 28% of those licenses' revenues are dedicated to hunter access programs and programs like Habitat MT (another 97K acres of long-term access was announced recently, btw). The issue with messing with the statutes relative to those licenses means you lose that protected, dedicated funding for cornerstone programs that provide over 6 million acres of access to residents and non-residents.

So every non resident whether they draw or not is out $150 for the application already?

 

[Ben Lamb]

I would cap nonresidents at 35% of the previous years resident mule deer harvest in each region. I would also exclude people hunting private land only or with an outfitter from the regional caps. Not sure if the math would work out to get to the number of nonresident tags needed. Maybe they could do a whitetail only tag to fill in the gaps. One thing is for sure there is a nonresident problem in region 6 and 7 and it needs to be addressed.

Region 7 has also seen the lion's share in lost access through properties leaving Block Mgt.

You have more people on a smaller footprint, looking for fewer deer.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Are we more worried about hitting the 17k in tags or bringing in the same amount of revenue that those 17k brings in?

I’m only worried about the revenue. But, I can’t envision any scenario where FWP and the legislature allows for any less than the 17,600 tags sold. We’re already selling about 7000 deer and elk tags combined in excess of the 17,600 (actually 23,600. I misquoted) NR cap. Those are on addition to the extra hunters that come who buy a split up deer/elk combo that is returned.

A united front across all user groups to get the Legislature to cut all tags in excess of the NR cap and go back to 17,600 NR hunters with A tags in their pocket would be a huge help to address the felt pressure from NR.

Additionally, that would not provoke opposition from MOGA aince the vast majority of those NR tags in excess of the cap are being utilized by former residents hunting public lands.

 

[Ben Lamb]

So every non resident whether they draw or not is out $150 for the application already?

Pretty much yes.

Over 85,000 base licenses were sold to NR's in 2023, if I remember the math correctly. That doesn't mean 85K people are hunting in MT, it means that many applied for permits or went every where from the 3 day bird license to the big game combos.

 

[brockel]

Pretty much yes.

Over 85,000 base licenses were sold to NR's in 2023, if I remember the math correctly. That doesn't mean 85K people are hunting in MT, it means that many applied for permits or went every where from the 3 day bird license to the big game combos.

Guess I thought the base hunting license and conservation license was only $25 for a NR. Or are you figuring the 80% refund for not drawing into that $150?

 

[Ben Lamb]

I’m only worried about the revenue. But, I can’t envision any scenario where FWP and the legislature allows for any less than the 17,600 tags sold. We’re already selling about 7000 deer and elk tags combined in excess of the 17,600 NR cap. Those are on addition to the extra hunters that come who buy a split up deer/elk combo that is returned.

There continues to be a bit of a misunderstanding on the cap.

For decades now, there has been a cap of 17,000 B10 big game combination licenses. That hasn't changed.

Additively, there are 6600 B11 combinations, with 2,000 of them held for landowner sponsorship (which is very low in subscription, btw).

In 2013, a bill passed that allowed FWP to resell the deer portion of the B10 that gets turned in as a new B11. So in effect, the cap has never been breached outside of the free & reduced cost licenses that now number something like 20% of the total NR big game combos issues (I think Gerald has that number).

 

[Gerald Martin]

Eric has stated several times that the number of NR using outfitters has remained static at @ 7000 each year.

If the majority of those outfitted NR are hunting private lands, reducing the in excess of cap NR hunters who are gaining access to tags each year
by 3500 hunters who are hunting an average of 6.8 days is a significant reduction in hunter days/pressure on public lands. That’s a reduction of @ 24,000 hunter days.

 

[Gerald Martin]

@Ben Lamb , numbers are hard man…

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Guess I thought the base hunting license and conservation license was only $25 for a NR. Or are you figuring the 80% refund for not drawing into that $150?

I misunderstood, my apologies.

Yes, the Base License fee is kept. That jumps up to $50 this year. MT captures that $ from every NR hunter who hits the state, and not just those who purchase a combo or points. When you purchase your points, that is kept (obviously) as well.

The Conservation License (State lands, FAS, etc) goes towards a ton of other things, so I wasn't counting that as part of the overall issue for licensing.

 

[Gerald Martin]

By my best estimate we’re selling @ 7000 reduced price deer and elk licenses to about 3500 hunters each year. Those are additional to the 23,600 Ben referenced

 

[Ben Lamb]

@Ben Lamb , numbers are hard man…

Thanks for the clarification.

You're a contractor. You've never met a number you didn't want to inflate. C'mon man.

 

[brockel]

I misunderstood, my apologies.

Yes, the Base License fee is kept. That jumps up to $50 this year. MT captures that $ from every NR hunter who hits the state, and not just those who purchase a combo or points. When you purchase your points, that is kept (obviously) as well.

The Conservation License (State lands, FAS, etc) goes towards a ton of other things, so I wasn't counting that as part of the overall issue for licensing.

So those 85,000 people paying an extra $100 is bringing in $8.5 million more then. Probably a good start on being able to figure how many non resident mule deer tags could be cut back to and still maintain same revenue

 

[Gerald Martin]

You're a contractor. You've never met a number you didn't want to inflate. C'mon man.

Everyone wants everything for nothing…. unfortunately, I’m currently in the position of trying to get my subs to deliver what the customer wants for the budget that my boss set to land the job.

Only slightly less complicated than herding cats and changing hunting season structure in MT.

 

[Hunt West]

General mule deer season first 2 or 3 weeks of October. General elk late October/early November. General whitetail November. Non residents capped in each region and license quotas set according to a percentage of resident participation or harvest. Throw in some LE rut deer hunts with small quotas and you can’t hunt general if drawn for LE. I think this may be pretty similar to one of the proposals.

 

[Ben Lamb]

So those 85,000 people paying an extra $100 is bringing in $8.5 million more then. Probably a good start on being able to figure how many non resident mule deer tags could be cut back to and still maintain same revenue

You could eliminate the Orphaned deer licenses as they aren't tied to the funding, as well as the free & reduced cost licenses and eliminate around 14K NR licenses sold (7K for free/reduced, 7K for the orphaned share)

For the revenue, I think you're looking at between $5 & 8 million per year. Additive to that is the projected downward trend in overall funding from the agency, and the need for HB 568 which hopefully helps get the agency into position for a global fee increase next session.

 

[Elktrack]

And.here. we. go.
Didn’t take long to get back to “the problem is the NR hunters.” Until this mindset changes to one of it being a management issue by FWP, y’all are just rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship. Go ahead and charge more money, reduce NR tags, AZ model,etc.

Who’s going to be left to blame when there’s nothing left but Montanans fighting over the last few MD?

As has been said here before, just look next door. Wyoming has a model that could be adopted that would provide LE, general, and $ from NR.
The big difference is Wyoming actively manages their MD.

The problem isn’t how to do it. @cgasner1 is right. No one is willing to give anything up.

I’m out. Good luck to you guys.

 

[cgasner1]

View attachment 376791
And.here. we. go.
Didn’t take long to get back to “the problem is the NR hunters.” Until this mindset changes to one of it being a management issue by FWP, y’all are just rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship. Go ahead and charge more money, reduce NR tags, AZ model,etc.

Who’s going to be left to blame when there’s nothing left but Montanans fighting over the last few MD?

As has been said here before, just look next door. Wyoming has a model that could be adopted that would provide LE, general, and $ from NR.
The big difference is Wyoming actively manages their MD.

The problem isn’t how to do it. @cgasner1 is right. No one is willing to give anything up.

I’m out. Good luck to you guys.

I’m blaming myself for you sucking if that’s worth anything