Non-resident outfitter license (MT) Bill is up for hearing 2/2/2021 (SB 143)

[Big Shooter]

The lines have been well established: Sportsman groups vs FWP, Landowners and Outfitters.

I don't belong to any sportsman group, I am not a landowner, an employee of FWP or a guide, yet I hunt and fish for most everything in Montana. There will never be a treaty signed to the satisfaction of both sides, but I still think Montana provides great opportunities to all of these groups.

I don't believe in a campfire, holding hands and singing Kum-By-Ya, but there is still plenty for everyone. It is tiring to see this constant battle with so much vitriol toward the 3 groups that don't fit the model of Sportsman's groups.

The last line in the above quote seems to set the tone for the type of hunting that the sportsmen want to see in Montana and it is as selfish as the opposition is accused of.

I hunt public and private ground and find game every year. I enjoy hunting for a myriad of reasons, not only for trophies. I still like to get trophies and have been successful at that, but I still like hunting and shoot does and non-trophy bucks and elk.

The constant complaining of the deterioration of quality big game is only as relevant as the the guy that wants to hunt for those animals. Go to a taxidermist shop and you will still see great animals being killed every year, testifying of the good animals that still reside in Montana.

Montana, as poorly organized and ruined by FWP, outfitters and landowners as it is, is still a fantastic state that allows me to do what I want, when and where I want. I understand the attempt to improve circumstances around this precious resource, but the continued arguing has created a division that doesn't need to exist.

The others that feel this way remain silent because they don't want beat up by outspoken people against their personal views, I don't really care because I will continue to hunt and fish with or around all the people mentioned here, some friends and some that are not...

Well said!

 

[Big Shooter]

50/50 this an Albus burner account.

Doubt it.

 

[sacountry]

Some of us are hopeful our future hunting isn’t reduced to shooting cows a rancher can’t get to the corral.

I think we already have this. It's called Bison hunting.

 

[Mtnhunter1]

I disagree with that.....again! The extra 3000.....probably more like 2000....will fill the void on said private property, that outfitters had planned on taking anyway but their clients couldn’t draw. This is not above and beyond what they had planned on taking. If you look at the stipulations on this, the client had to be booked “prior” to April 1.

Wow, now you're just playing with us dummies!

From you and Eric's latest posts, I gather that you are feeling very good about this latest WIN. I have zero doubt that the Gov will sign the bill and you guys will be laughing all the way to the bank, back slaps all around.

One question, what do you guys have planned for 2023 or will the final 2021 client numbers set the baseline for what will be "requested"?

QUOTE:"probably more like 2000....will fill the void on said private property".....oh brother...laughable!

 

[timmy]

It’s laughable how much people on here hate outfitters. Do you think the private land is going to magically open up without them? They serve a purpose but if you want to screw the outfitter work on changing the season structure. Let’s all get behind that. Wait that might take opportunities away though... that might not be popular.

 

[Big Shooter]

This is only true for the big game combos. Lot of elk and deer tags for Nonresidents aren't capped at a specific number.

Your half right.

 

[Big Shooter]

Wow, now you're just playing with us dummies!

From you and Eric's latest posts, I gather that you are feeling very good about this latest WIN. I have zero doubt that the Gov will sign the bill and you guys will be laughing all the way to the bank, back slaps all around.

One question, what do you guys have planned for 2023 or will the final 2021 client numbers set the baseline for what will be "requested"?

QUOTE:"probably more like 2000....will fill the void on said private property".....oh brother...laughable!

Please....prove me wrong. Why in the Hell would we be fraudulent and book more people?

 

[Big Shooter]

It’s laughable how much people on here hate outfitters. Do you think the private land is going to magically open up without them? They serve a purpose but if you want to screw the outfitter work on changing the season structure. Let’s all get behind that. Wait that make take opportunities away though... that might not be popular.

Let’s do that.

 

[Big Shooter]

The 17K is for the B-10 deer/elk combo.

The B-11 has 4600 of which 2000 are landowner set-asides.

In 2011 or 13 (I can't remember) there was a switch to allow for the turned in B-10 deer portion to be resold as the B-11 combo, vastly increasing the number of B-11 licenses that are sold, outside of the statutory cap.

Add on to that the decreased pressure from Come Home to Hunt, MT Native, and other free or reduced cost licenses and you see mission creep exponentially to increase the number of NR licenses available.

Almost all of those sideways increases in NR tags came from MOGA, or were lobbied in support of by them btw.



Someone has to make the first move but I think for right now, the best thing to do is calm down and let folks think for a bit before doing anything. The session just ended. Mother's Day Caddis & salmonflies & golden stoneflies are about to pop. Folks should get out and chase spring bear, hunt turkeys & fish. Go enjoy what you fight for, gain some perspective and then plan for the future.

Your wrong. 4600 B-11.....plus 2000 Landowner Sponsored. Get your s%^t in a pile....you are supposed to be a leader on here.

 

[Big Shooter]

So says you. You need to know you aren’t the king of all things outdoors, just a loud noise some consider “white noise”

I hope that meets your approval, you have been needling me for a long time, I have been quiet, but you are your biggest fan, most outspoken against Montana and it’s management and yet you continue to take advantage of Montana’s so-called poorly run programs.

Don’t be so two-faced, shut up or quit coming here.

BOOM! Well put!

 

[Randy11]

Your half right.

Yes, and my other half left.

 

[Mtnhunter1]

Please....prove me wrong. Why in the Hell would we be fraudulent and book more people?

Like I said, "Your feeling good".

I didn't say anything about "Fraudulent"? I am basing my "laughable" from the numbers that you guys requested last year that went to the Gov's desk but did not get signed. Then add in the fact of the 2021 draw having record numbers....and bingo.....your +2,000 becomes "laughable".

 

[Big Shooter]

Lot's and lot's of good dialogue on this HB637 issue. It's too bad this can't go into some sort of mediation process between MOGA, BHA, MWF, FWP, and others. I'm confident a solution could be found if we remove the politicians. I still think there is room for an outfitter to buck up some coin to buy a "certified outfitter" license. That license may cost $100k one time, but with it comes 25 guaranteed NR combo tags every year (those NR combos still have to be purchased annually by the NR hunter mind you).

On their website, MOGA boasts about 100 deer/elk outfitters from across the state. Cap the "certified outfitter" license to 100 outfitters, after which no more are sold. Those who own one, can sell their license to another outfitter that is pre-certified by the state and with it go the 25 NR combo tags. Since a certified outfitter license is restricted to 25 NR combos, you'll never have more than 2,500 guaranteed NR combos available in any one year. All I want in return as a joe-schmoe Montana resident hunter is to have every dollar generated go towards the Block Mgmt program. Collectively we need to figure out how to make this program more attractive to land owners. IMHO, it needs more funding. I have no qualms about using our wealthy NR guests wallets to fund resident and less wealthy NR hunting opportunities through the Block program

This model would not restrict noncertified outfitters from outfitting, they just can't obtain the guaranteed NR tags....but they can still guide the NR lottery winners. There are other market oriented solutions to this problem, mostly quota based systems for commercial harvesting of natural resources, but this one seems more equitable and allows all parties to benefit without the risk of wildlife exploitation.

Prior to I-161.....the money did go to Block Management. Ask a few on here as to why they carried the torch for it to go away.

 

[Big Shooter]

Since landowners can guide hunters on there own land without and outfitters license, is there anything to stop a landowner from declaring themselves an outfitter and then being able form a hunt club in which all nonresident members are now able to buy two preference points? Can the Wilks brothers declare themselves outfitters and then be able to buy two preference points for themselves and anyone that they invite can also buy two preference points?

No

 

[Big Shooter]

Right, and lots of outfitters "over-book" to make sure they have enough clients.

Albus told me he sends his over-booked clients elsewhere.

Been at this too long to listen to your BS...its all about the money and everyone knows it.

Also, there isn't a biological justification for another 3000 NR tags to be issued to hunt either private or public.

I can honestly say that I DON‘T over-book. That will just get a person in a bind.

 

[Eric Albus]

@Eric Albus - Eric, I have a few questions if you don't mind answering? Trying to understand things from the outfitter side a bit better. Also, apologies if you've already answered any/all these, as this thread has gotten long. Additional apologies if these questions are too prying into the financial structure of your business.

I get that a substantial portion of outfitter business comes from repeat customers, as in customers you see annually. How difficult would it have been for you to start booking say, two rotating groups of biennial repeat customers? So, a group hunts with you this year, does well, and says "see ya in 2023!" Then the 2022 group says "see ya in 2024!" and so on. Would the market have existed for such an arrangement? Do you think you could have gotten your clients used to the fact that they could only hunt with you every other year? Also, if you don't mind me asking, what percentage of clients that you book are annual repeats?

I recognize that those questions are moot if the new legislation gets signed into law, but am curious as to how your market demand worked prior to HB 637.

Good questions! I’ll attempt to answer best I can.
I could’ve survived easily on an every other year approach. But it would’ve changed my client’s mindset

Arguing with you is like wrestling a girl. There’s no sport in that and all you have beaten is a wimp. Thump someone else’s stump and leave it at that. You are a loser and though you might have some friends, if most Montanans agreed with you, they would have made more of a stir about this and they would hunt somewhere else because the hunting has got to be better there, wherever there might be...

i believes u has done figgerd out old buzzard. Shrapnel; you’ve been very unbiased and called out inequalities as you see them. Thanks for consistency

 

[Eric Albus]

Doubt it.

What’s a burner account

 

[WIbiggame]

@Eric Albus do you overbook at all or is this an unfair assumption that outfitters overbook to make sure they have clients?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Your wrong. 4600 B-11.....plus 2000 Landowner Sponsored. Get your s%^t in a pile....you are supposed to be a leader on here.

Thanks for the correction, Comrade.

THat's an extra 2,000 welfare tags that should probably go away, eh?

 

[Big Shooter]

Thanks for the correction, Comrade.

THat's an extra 2,000 welfare tags that should probably go away, eh?

How are they welfare tags in your opinion?