whiskeydog
Active member
and you've done a pretty good job of avoiding addressing my answers to your chainsaw/cow/oil analogies. whatever is convenient, i guess...
MT Deregulation of the outfitting industry!
- Thread starter shoots-straight
- Start date
I think everyone should have to report if they harvested an animal; guided or not. IMO that'd provide some pretty useful data for the FWP. It's done here in IN through both an in person or online check in system. I checked both deer I shot this year in via the online system and it took about 5 mins total.
I'd think Eric would support this notion as that data would be pretty important for biological management...
I'd think Eric would support this notion as that data would be pretty important for biological management...
mtlion
Active member
IDK whiskey. From where I sit Buzz just owned ya.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,584
well, looks like whiskeydog is a true conservative...and I agree w/ most everything said, nice to see someone else consistent in their viewpoint, and not picking and choosing.
The outfitting industry is the most regulated industry in Montana. Most of the laws are archaic, and resulted from the OSL, which is now gone....so all the rules and regulations that pertained to it should be gone as well...fair is fair, ain't it????? or are we gonna pick and choose here????
274 does not do away w/ reporting acerage hunted on, or stop us from having to have permits on BLM, FS, CMR, ect....THAT DOES NOT CHANGE(now i wll go back to using my library voice again).
We would just not have to write down each dove/duck taken....but the clients info is still there(name, ALS #)....so FWP could call them and find out what they harvested.
I could even go for a compromise, and just report bucks/bulls taken...no problem w/ that..but when I can be cited for a guide forgetting to write down one dove? Not that I have been cited, but I know guys who have been..
Most of you do not have a clue about any of this, you just read what MSA's take on it is and figure that its gospel....it is their perception that you are buying into.
The outfitting industry is the most regulated industry in Montana. Most of the laws are archaic, and resulted from the OSL, which is now gone....so all the rules and regulations that pertained to it should be gone as well...fair is fair, ain't it????? or are we gonna pick and choose here????
274 does not do away w/ reporting acerage hunted on, or stop us from having to have permits on BLM, FS, CMR, ect....THAT DOES NOT CHANGE(now i wll go back to using my library voice again).
We would just not have to write down each dove/duck taken....but the clients info is still there(name, ALS #)....so FWP could call them and find out what they harvested.
I could even go for a compromise, and just report bucks/bulls taken...no problem w/ that..but when I can be cited for a guide forgetting to write down one dove? Not that I have been cited, but I know guys who have been..
Most of you do not have a clue about any of this, you just read what MSA's take on it is and figure that its gospel....it is their perception that you are buying into.
mtlion
Active member
You should be cited for every squirrel/moth/grasshopper/spider that your clients harvest and doesn't get reported.
Eric,
Did you read this post?
Eric,
You keep proclaiming the data isn't used or used for punitive measures. Begs the question "are you trying to get rid of it because you are getting caught?" Here is Quentin Kujula's phone number...1-406-444-5672. I have checked and you are full of it. Data is important. Once again, what is being hidden? If this is no big deal but paperwork simplification, what is the big deal? Your moves as MOGA have focused distrust on you folks. Thank MOGA and MAC.
Are you going to call or just go on pontificating?
You and Mac just keep heading down the road trying to run us over. By the way, along the same lines, have any of you MOGA folks apologized to Randy? If not, your character is once again revealed!
Did you read this post?
Eric,
You keep proclaiming the data isn't used or used for punitive measures. Begs the question "are you trying to get rid of it because you are getting caught?" Here is Quentin Kujula's phone number...1-406-444-5672. I have checked and you are full of it. Data is important. Once again, what is being hidden? If this is no big deal but paperwork simplification, what is the big deal? Your moves as MOGA have focused distrust on you folks. Thank MOGA and MAC.
Are you going to call or just go on pontificating?
You and Mac just keep heading down the road trying to run us over. By the way, along the same lines, have any of you MOGA folks apologized to Randy? If not, your character is once again revealed!
Not even close - try being in the hazardous waste removal business. If you think that Montana is archaic in some ways they do business, follow me around - along with OSHA, MSHA, city, county, State, Feds, and god knows how many Industrial Hygenists. Our industry keeps the domestic pulp and paper mills alive.
It's known as making work for/to justify your job. All Gov't agency paperwork is getting beyond rediculous.
How would you like to not to be able to start your work day until certain inspectors show up to oversee what you are doing - and then have to explain the procedure to them on top of that because they have no clue what your personnel or equipment can/should/shouldn't do.
Just having a little fun with you Eric - we all have our requirements and regulation hurdles to deal with.
devon deer
Well-known member
Off subject slightly but does this include fishing guides/outfitters as well?
Cheers
Richard
Cheers
Richard
HB 274 "THE OUTFITTER AND GUIDE UNACCOUNTABILITY ACT"
HB 274 strikes the requirement that outfitters report every year how many acres of land they’re leasing for commercial hunting operations. Currently this report is available to the public in the form of a map showing the locations and acreage of leases.
HB 274 strikes a requirement on page 5, lines 1-3, that outfitters “have demonstrated a respect for and compliance with the laws of any state or of the United States and all rules promulgated under those laws related to fish and game, conservation of natural resources, and preservation of the natural ecosystem without pollution of the ecosystem.”
HB 274 strikes the requirements for guides that they hold a valid wildlife conservation license. This means a guide could be convicted of poaching and still have a job in which he or she makes a living off a public resource. Montana is one of more than 30 states in a wildlife compact that has consequences for fish and game violations in other states and a Montana game warden can get that information by checking a person’s conservation license.
HB 274 strikes language on page 6, lines 8-18 that outfitters give detailed information about the places he or she is operating, including the owner of a ranch, name of the ranch, proposed services, portions of rivers, etc.
HB 274 strikes requirements of the examination to become an outfitter including a knowledge of “practical woodsmanship, general knowledge of big game, field preparation of trophies, care of game meat, knowledge of area and terrain, knowledge of firearms, knowledge of first aid,” among others (page 7, lines 11-17, 19, 22).
HB 274 would loosen the regulation that an outfitter cannot be convicted of any game or fish violation, but rather must have a felony conviction or multiple misdemeanor convictions to lose his or her license (page 9, lines 26-28).
This bill is being sold as a simple paperwork cleanup and is nothing of the sort. Why would any professional want to so water down the standards for their field so as to allow poachers and people with no substantial qualifications to practice the craft?
HB 274 strikes the requirement that outfitters report every year how many acres of land they’re leasing for commercial hunting operations. Currently this report is available to the public in the form of a map showing the locations and acreage of leases.
HB 274 strikes a requirement on page 5, lines 1-3, that outfitters “have demonstrated a respect for and compliance with the laws of any state or of the United States and all rules promulgated under those laws related to fish and game, conservation of natural resources, and preservation of the natural ecosystem without pollution of the ecosystem.”
HB 274 strikes the requirements for guides that they hold a valid wildlife conservation license. This means a guide could be convicted of poaching and still have a job in which he or she makes a living off a public resource. Montana is one of more than 30 states in a wildlife compact that has consequences for fish and game violations in other states and a Montana game warden can get that information by checking a person’s conservation license.
HB 274 strikes language on page 6, lines 8-18 that outfitters give detailed information about the places he or she is operating, including the owner of a ranch, name of the ranch, proposed services, portions of rivers, etc.
HB 274 strikes requirements of the examination to become an outfitter including a knowledge of “practical woodsmanship, general knowledge of big game, field preparation of trophies, care of game meat, knowledge of area and terrain, knowledge of firearms, knowledge of first aid,” among others (page 7, lines 11-17, 19, 22).
HB 274 would loosen the regulation that an outfitter cannot be convicted of any game or fish violation, but rather must have a felony conviction or multiple misdemeanor convictions to lose his or her license (page 9, lines 26-28).
This bill is being sold as a simple paperwork cleanup and is nothing of the sort. Why would any professional want to so water down the standards for their field so as to allow poachers and people with no substantial qualifications to practice the craft?
CabinFever
Member
I think everyone should have to report if they harvested an animal; guided or not. IMO that'd provide some pretty useful data for the FWP. It's done here in IN through both an in person or online check in system. I checked both deer I shot this year in via the online system and it took about 5 mins total.
I'd think Eric would support this notion as that data would be pretty important for biological management...
I agree, seems it would be much more constructive and efficient than taking the time/cost to call a percentage of license holders to inquire what they killed and how many days they spent where. As is, it seems incredibly inefficient in MT and they struggle to get results compiled in time for the next years application deadline. However, maybe there'd be an issue with people not reporting their own kills?
I am nearly 100% sure that some deer in IN go unreported. However, there are some ways to enforce that. In IN a meat processor or a taxidermist cannot accept a deer with out the check-in number or transportation tag. For those folks that do their own, this is easy to get around. However, I think that there are more that abide the laws than purposefully break them and this one would have little impact on the hunter and would be very easy to do. Utah has a similar program for swan tags. If you don't report your hunt results, successful or not, you are not eligible for a tag the next year without paying an extra $50. You wouldn't stop folks from lying, but you could incentivize it to the point they'd turn in the report. I think most would be honest in their reporting.
I do think the information could be used to better management and I think it could be set up in a way that is very easy and more efficient that random phone calls. But, then again I'm just an NR with an idea to "fix" Montana...
Wapiti Warrior
New member
What is the big deal on reporting what your clients harvest? I just don't see it. Take a few minutes after the hunt and report what your clients harvested.
Wow that was hard....
I would not object to having mandatory harvest reporting for all hunters in Montana.
John
Wow that was hard....
I would not object to having mandatory harvest reporting for all hunters in Montana.
John
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,584
pierre..
1. does not, we still have to file an L-1 form w/ the state, whic lists the landowner and every acre we operate on, and activities that take place on the private land
2. how are you going to legislate that one...you want me to give a demonstration? phoo-phoo language is all that is being struck.
3. that should not be stricken...keep the conservation license requirement....(see we can agree on somethings that make sense)
4. REDUNDANT::: we already have an L-1 on file, declaring each acre and what we are doing on those acres, and who the landowner is....
5. you are reaching here...are you really worried about that? come on. in order to take the test you must have 100 days guiding in... i would think that most anyone would accidentally learn those things during the course of a couple seasons guiding....much better there than from a text?
6. that is in Sec. 12....and it clearly states, "grounds for suspension, denial, ect....One Felony, or multiple misdemeanors"... what is the problem here?? Nothing was changed...look it up...
1. does not, we still have to file an L-1 form w/ the state, whic lists the landowner and every acre we operate on, and activities that take place on the private land
2. how are you going to legislate that one...you want me to give a demonstration? phoo-phoo language is all that is being struck.
3. that should not be stricken...keep the conservation license requirement....(see we can agree on somethings that make sense)
4. REDUNDANT::: we already have an L-1 on file, declaring each acre and what we are doing on those acres, and who the landowner is....
5. you are reaching here...are you really worried about that? come on. in order to take the test you must have 100 days guiding in... i would think that most anyone would accidentally learn those things during the course of a couple seasons guiding....much better there than from a text?
6. that is in Sec. 12....and it clearly states, "grounds for suspension, denial, ect....One Felony, or multiple misdemeanors"... what is the problem here?? Nothing was changed...look it up...
Fact is, you are passing this off as a paper work clean up. We don't see it that way. Anything in here that you are trying to remove or move from statute to rule is unacceptable. Unaccountability is the problem. Should we just blindly trust MOGA. I think there is ample discussion here about the merits of that exercise.
You have an image problem...no denying that. Is this bill really that important just to "clean up paper". I am having a tough time buying that. This bill is doing major damage to your image and accountability. Is it worth it?
The public you serve deserves the best of services and guarantees as to your abilities. Their lives are in your hands...often in remote places. The attempt here is to remove all requirements for guides? I can't even find where guides need a first aid card.
If passing this bill is worth having your continued level of competence and accountability attacked, then go for it. Don't expect anything but confrontation. Have you convinced a single one of us "fringe groups" as your website describes us? You folks go on trying to bull the game. You reap what you sow.
You have an image problem...no denying that. Is this bill really that important just to "clean up paper". I am having a tough time buying that. This bill is doing major damage to your image and accountability. Is it worth it?
The public you serve deserves the best of services and guarantees as to your abilities. Their lives are in your hands...often in remote places. The attempt here is to remove all requirements for guides? I can't even find where guides need a first aid card.
If passing this bill is worth having your continued level of competence and accountability attacked, then go for it. Don't expect anything but confrontation. Have you convinced a single one of us "fringe groups" as your website describes us? You folks go on trying to bull the game. You reap what you sow.
bow-n-head
New member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2013
- Messages
- 13
I like simple.....It should be against the law to profit from game animals that belong to the public.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,584
pierre/sam,
You have such distrust and are such a rabid hater of outfitters that I believe MOGA could sponsor a bill to do away w/ outfitting and you would oppose it.
To answer your question at the top, "am I trying to get rid of it because I am being caught"...No, I just want to be rid of useless, redundent paperwork. However, you beg the question, "are you trying to slander my reputation, or make an accusation"?
The "fringe group" comment must have hit a nerve. You can call me a member of a "fringe group" and I promise it will not hurt my feeling(i only have one, so it is singular).
I tried calling Quentin....but he has not called me back...
*I bet he is busy in Helena going over all the information about wildlife managment that is in my client log...perhaps trying to glean the secret of successful wildlife managment that I hold*....i am kidding about the lines in between the * *'s....figured I had best explain myself...helps keep the undies from gettin' bunched.
You have such distrust and are such a rabid hater of outfitters that I believe MOGA could sponsor a bill to do away w/ outfitting and you would oppose it.
To answer your question at the top, "am I trying to get rid of it because I am being caught"...No, I just want to be rid of useless, redundent paperwork. However, you beg the question, "are you trying to slander my reputation, or make an accusation"?
The "fringe group" comment must have hit a nerve. You can call me a member of a "fringe group" and I promise it will not hurt my feeling(i only have one, so it is singular).
I tried calling Quentin....but he has not called me back...
*I bet he is busy in Helena going over all the information about wildlife managment that is in my client log...perhaps trying to glean the secret of successful wildlife managment that I hold*....i am kidding about the lines in between the * *'s....figured I had best explain myself...helps keep the undies from gettin' bunched.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,584
dang, Quentin just called...and much to my surprise he was not going over my client logs stealing my model for better wildlife managment strategies....you've no idea how disappointed i am...
He did sell me on keeping track of bucks/bulls/does/cows., harvested though. As he told me, "it's not being used for much right now, but in the future it may be used to help manage"....good enough for me.... however, I would still like to do away w/ keeping track of birds...it's a pain...
He did sell me on keeping track of bucks/bulls/does/cows., harvested though. As he told me, "it's not being used for much right now, but in the future it may be used to help manage"....good enough for me.... however, I would still like to do away w/ keeping track of birds...it's a pain...
Eric,
Once again, I am not an outfitter hater. Many outfitters have my respect. I will admit that the inaccurate and misleading info coming from Mac and Paul Ellis has made my opinion of MOGA lower than a snake's belly, and deservedly so. Certainly you can see I am not the only one here. MOGA and Mac have a real image problem....that isn't particularly earth shattering...you reap what you sow.
You are the one who mentioned the data being used punatively...thus my question. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about. Right?? And neither do other outfitters. Right?
The "fringe group" statement shows MOGA's lack of respect for Montana Resident Sportsmen. It is as accurate as nearly all the crap Mac spews. So, is that lack of respect working for you? It seems MOGA thinks they are above the need for honesty and cooperation.
Seems when I first signed on here, (you remember when you folks attacked Randy Newberg), names weren't used so I followed suit. If it is killing you and you'd like to attack Sam Milodragavich like Ellis did a week ago IN COMMITTEE, you will be disappointed.
Joe L. Perry, Conrad Mt.
Once again, I am not an outfitter hater. Many outfitters have my respect. I will admit that the inaccurate and misleading info coming from Mac and Paul Ellis has made my opinion of MOGA lower than a snake's belly, and deservedly so. Certainly you can see I am not the only one here. MOGA and Mac have a real image problem....that isn't particularly earth shattering...you reap what you sow.
You are the one who mentioned the data being used punatively...thus my question. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about. Right?? And neither do other outfitters. Right?
The "fringe group" statement shows MOGA's lack of respect for Montana Resident Sportsmen. It is as accurate as nearly all the crap Mac spews. So, is that lack of respect working for you? It seems MOGA thinks they are above the need for honesty and cooperation.
Seems when I first signed on here, (you remember when you folks attacked Randy Newberg), names weren't used so I followed suit. If it is killing you and you'd like to attack Sam Milodragavich like Ellis did a week ago IN COMMITTEE, you will be disappointed.
Joe L. Perry, Conrad Mt.
From the MOGA website:
The MOGA Hunter/Angler Defense Fund (MHADF) was established to ensure that non-resident sportsmen will continue to have the opportunity to hunt and fish in Montana.
Trophy hunting and sport fishing, particularly by non-residents, is under increasing pressure in Montana from radical groups both within the state and animal rights activists outside of the state. Although these groups differ in their composition and tactics they both seek the same outcome; reduced hunting and fishing opportunity. The in-state contingent, who purport to be “sportsmen” seek to fracture the hunting and angling community along lines of residence and then significantly restrict non-resident hunting and fishing opportunity. The anti-hunting group just seeks to reduce hunting opportunity and will take what gains they can. In both cases, success is measured by a net loss in opportunity in Montana. Unfortunately they are both making gains.
The anti-hunting pressure from the “anti-everything” organizations is strong and well organized. They have unlimited resources and are using new strategies and building alliances to lobby their agendas. Their relentless efforts to prevent delisting of wolves and grizzly bears and thwart effective and professional management for these species are but one example.
Fringe groups, led by the Montana Wildlife Federation, believe that outfitting services equate to the commercialization of wildlife and profess it to be the same as the outlawed practice of market hunting of years ago. They claim that fees paid for Outfitter services, leasing of land for quality hunting and fishing access, and the purchase of outfitters services for fishing constitute a breach of the Public Trust and that jeopardizes the publics opportunity enjoy the natural bounty of Montana.
They see reducing the guided non-resident opportunity as a means to enhance their personal opportunity at the expense of others. They ignore the huge contribution to Montana’s wildlife and fisheries management system that non-residents make and the vital economic contribution they sustain. Their tactics of misinformation and fear mongering fracture and weaken the overall hunting community; jeopardizing funding for effective management of natural resources in Montana.
Unfortunately, much of the public are misinformed or under informed. As hunters and anglers, we must be vigilant and diligent about relaying the benefits of hunting and fishing to the 70% of people who sit “in the middle”. MOGA will continue to take the lead in supporting sound, scientifically based resource management, and our members will continue to serve as active stewards of Montana’s natural and cultural heritage.
So Eric, Is this working for you? Mac and Paul Ellis have lied about MSA a number of times and have called us "a shadowy fringe group". Ask a legislator how fringe we are!
The MOGA Hunter/Angler Defense Fund (MHADF) was established to ensure that non-resident sportsmen will continue to have the opportunity to hunt and fish in Montana.
Trophy hunting and sport fishing, particularly by non-residents, is under increasing pressure in Montana from radical groups both within the state and animal rights activists outside of the state. Although these groups differ in their composition and tactics they both seek the same outcome; reduced hunting and fishing opportunity. The in-state contingent, who purport to be “sportsmen” seek to fracture the hunting and angling community along lines of residence and then significantly restrict non-resident hunting and fishing opportunity. The anti-hunting group just seeks to reduce hunting opportunity and will take what gains they can. In both cases, success is measured by a net loss in opportunity in Montana. Unfortunately they are both making gains.
The anti-hunting pressure from the “anti-everything” organizations is strong and well organized. They have unlimited resources and are using new strategies and building alliances to lobby their agendas. Their relentless efforts to prevent delisting of wolves and grizzly bears and thwart effective and professional management for these species are but one example.
Fringe groups, led by the Montana Wildlife Federation, believe that outfitting services equate to the commercialization of wildlife and profess it to be the same as the outlawed practice of market hunting of years ago. They claim that fees paid for Outfitter services, leasing of land for quality hunting and fishing access, and the purchase of outfitters services for fishing constitute a breach of the Public Trust and that jeopardizes the publics opportunity enjoy the natural bounty of Montana.
They see reducing the guided non-resident opportunity as a means to enhance their personal opportunity at the expense of others. They ignore the huge contribution to Montana’s wildlife and fisheries management system that non-residents make and the vital economic contribution they sustain. Their tactics of misinformation and fear mongering fracture and weaken the overall hunting community; jeopardizing funding for effective management of natural resources in Montana.
Unfortunately, much of the public are misinformed or under informed. As hunters and anglers, we must be vigilant and diligent about relaying the benefits of hunting and fishing to the 70% of people who sit “in the middle”. MOGA will continue to take the lead in supporting sound, scientifically based resource management, and our members will continue to serve as active stewards of Montana’s natural and cultural heritage.
So Eric, Is this working for you? Mac and Paul Ellis have lied about MSA a number of times and have called us "a shadowy fringe group". Ask a legislator how fringe we are!
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,584
My apologies to Sam for confusing you...or to you for confusing you w/ Sam.
Fringe group status....should apply to most any and all of us....when a "group" represents a few dozen, or hundred it should qualify for "fringe" status...I readily admit that MOGA is a fringe group, representing a couple hundred outfitters.. if we MOGA represented a "few thousand" then I would have to say that we are not a fringe group.....but we do not, hence we are also relegated to "fringe status" in my opinion.
You stated "are you trying to get rid of it because you are getting caught"...that is pretty accusatory language....and No, I am "not getting caught"....I just have a strong dislike for anything that is inefficient and useless... but Quentin kind of sold me on keeping track of bucks/bulls/does/cows....mainly for the reason of self defense against attacks by opposition.
Fringe group status....should apply to most any and all of us....when a "group" represents a few dozen, or hundred it should qualify for "fringe" status...I readily admit that MOGA is a fringe group, representing a couple hundred outfitters.. if we MOGA represented a "few thousand" then I would have to say that we are not a fringe group.....but we do not, hence we are also relegated to "fringe status" in my opinion.
You stated "are you trying to get rid of it because you are getting caught"...that is pretty accusatory language....and No, I am "not getting caught"....I just have a strong dislike for anything that is inefficient and useless... but Quentin kind of sold me on keeping track of bucks/bulls/does/cows....mainly for the reason of self defense against attacks by opposition.
