Reduction in number of NR deer licenses

[El Jason]

The more I learn about what many other states do to collect data, proactively manage to get ahead of problems, and put the resource first(or at least not last), I’m kind of speechless how we compare.

Don’t forget how colossally screwed up the NR licensing process is, and how refusal to fix it continues to create problems. It’s probably the dumbest process in the western states.

 

[Gerald Martin]

But this isn’t even their constituents…so back to the money thing I guess.…

Maybe you can answer this (or I have to go to Ben). If the legislature created the “reissue” situation by law, how can the commission take it away like they did here? And can they take all the reissued tags away?

The Legislature gave the Commission the authority to sale the licenses by rule so they can choose to direct the Department to sell up to 5000 or none at all.

 

[8andcounting]

I think the cuts should be more drastic . 5000 less NR tags for deer , maybe less bg combo tags too. 0 NR b tags. 0 Resident b tags for Mule deer . Maybe a few whitetail b tags for R . That’s it . Tighten it up . Hope for some good winters . Get some numbers back.

 

[El Jason]

Hope for some good winters

When you hunt critters for six months, winters like the Bahamas isn’t going to make any difference.

 

[antlerradar]

It is interesting how this change is being viewed or reported on. It is a reduction of current numbers, but those current numbers were part of a plan to circumvent the statutory 17,000 NR licenses.

What is missing is history and details of the plan that was hatched to circumvent the 17,000 cap by adding 5,000 of the orphaned deer licenses of people who requested "elk only" as the option, rather than the standard elk/deer combination license. Many residents stated it would add 5,000 more pairs of boots in the hills, which it did.

Even with this change, it still leaves 2,500 orphaned deer licenses out there, which is still above the original 17,000 NR combination licenses so many like to claim is the NR cap in Montana. Add in the Full-Time College Student license, the Native Montana license, and the Come Home To Hunt Licenses, and we are well above the 17,000 we've always been told is the Montana NR number.

We are unlike CO, WY, NM, AZ, UT, NV, OR who all set the NR numbers as a % of the total tag quota for most species in their state. By law, Montana must offer that large amount of NR licenses, even if we only had 1,000 elk or 1,000 deer in the entire state.

When the legislature started finding ways to circumvent the 17,000 cap about 20 years ago, comments were made of what the impact would be. Those opposing the "workarounds" the legislature crafted asked that these new license categories be taken out of the 17,000. Nope, all these new NR license categories were additive, no compensatory.

This rolls back a portion of that, but the majority of those additive NR licenses are still going to be issued.

The NR caps set by the legislator have evolved into more of a suggestion.

 

[antlerradar]

But this isn’t even their constituents…so back to the money thing I guess.…

Maybe you can answer this (or I have to go to Ben). If the legislature created the “reissue” situation by law, how can the commission take it away like they did here? And can they take all the reissued tags away?

Selling more NR tags keep the Legislator from having to increase R prices, so it kind of circles back to their constituents.

 

[8andcounting]

Selling more NR tags keep the Legislator from having to increase R prices, so it kind of circles back to their constituents.

Huge part of the problem . If you raise the price for residents many will scream . Most will scream . God forbid .

 

[MTGomer]

Huge part of the problem . If you raise the price for residents many will scream . Most will scream . God forbid .

Yep. Just look at UPOM’s legislator, Jededih Hinkle’s, Facebook post.

 

[Gulf of America]

I just don't get the fear legislators have about people whining about tag increases. In this hyper-partisan age, exactly zero people are going to change their vote, even if tag prices double. Who cares if there's rumbling on FB, just ignore it.

 

[Hem]

I just don't get the fear legislators have about people whining about tag increases. In this hyper-partisan age, exactly zero people are going to change their vote, even if tag prices double. Who cares if there's rumbling on FB, just ignore it.

Gas prices go up..People still buy.
Lattes go up...people still buy.
Pretty ridiculous, just double the fee for starters.

 

[Tmbrgost]

I just don't get the fear legislators have about people whining about tag increases. In this hyper-partisan age, exactly zero people are going to change their vote, even if tag prices double. Who cares if there's rumbling on FB, just ignore it.

Agreed! FB whiners shouldn’t be apart of the groups anyone (especially Legislator's) listens to, but in all unreality, social media is now the voice by which most gauge their thoughts against.

 

[huntin24/7]

It’s pretty crazy how much extra we’re all paying for homes, property taxes, cars, food, etc. compared to 10 years ago, but the thought of an extra $10-15 for a deer tag makes people’s heads spin.

 

[Hem]

It’s pretty crazy how much extra we’re all paying for homes, property taxes, cars, food, etc. compared to 10 years ago, but the thought of an extra $10-15 for a deer tag makes people’s heads spin.

Another case of misconstrue, hunting is a privilege not a right.

 

[SAJ-99]

Most legislators don't pay attention to social media or public comments. The price of a tag is the equivalent of "bread and circuses". Large landowners have the most influence.

 

[cgasner1]

Yep. Just look at UPOM’s legislator, Jededih Hinkle’s, Facebook post.

I’m a pretty peaceful person haven’t been into a physical altercation in over 20 years. I will fight him in a cage for conservation. All the money can go to the MDF should get it trending #cagesforconservation

 

[Nameless Range]

Another case of misconstrue, hunting is a privilege not a right.

Definitely quibbleable with what the word "Right" means, but we kind of have a Right to an opportunity, and I don't think requiring a Montanan to pay more than a tank of gas worth of money, or less than 10% of their hunting season's beer budget, runs against that.

 

[Hem]

Definitely quibbleable with what the word "Right" means, but we kind of have a Right to an opportunity, and I don't think requiring a Montanan to pay more than a tank of gas worth of money, or less than 10% of their hunting season's beer budget, runs against that.
View attachment 395393

You know what mean..

 

[Nameless Range]

You know what mean..

I do. I'm not trying to be an internet sonofabi!# over here.

 

[Hem]

I do. I'm not trying to be an internet sonofabi!# over here.

Haha..well I'm sitting here with fresh stitches in my gut so dont make me laugh too hard.
Good day watching the wind blow.