I am against guaranteed tags for those with coin in their pocket.
Me too.
With the passage of 161 they may continue to draw every year (time will tell), but they are not a leg up on the DIY hunter that would rather not use an outfitter. Did 161 overprice what the market will bear for the common man? Maybe, once again, we shall see.
Maybe not a leg up via the statute that provided the old OSLs, but it seems like we have given them a leg up on the DIY guy, by increasing the price on the DIY guy and lowering the price on the outfitted guy. But, maybe not.
Also my opinion, I don't think RMEF really cared that much about the hike in NR prices. Do you think if the price of a NR wasn't adjusted they would have been for the Inititive or stayed out completely?
I am pretty sure if it was not an initiative, but rather a bill in the legislature, they would have stayed out of it completely. If it had not increased the price of the DIY NR, I think they would have stayed out of it.
I say that, having been in on a phone conference about the topic as they were seeking input from many people about what decision they would make. From that phone conference, I gathered they were not excited about initiatives, they were not happy to see the fee increase on DIY NRs, and they did not see that it would help with the access problem that it was stated to solve.
I really don't know how they came to their final decision, but could see where they are coming from. Since it was not written the way you mention above, we probably will never know.
They do get money from the hunts donated by outfitters. I don't think anyone will deny that. And, over 90% of their members are DIY guys, the majority of whom live outside of MT. So, I suspect when they made the final decision, they looked at all of it in the eyes of all their members - their largest section of members, DIY guys, took a hit, and a group that does help them raise money took a hit. Seems like a logical explanation for them not supporting the initiative as written.
I don't care for the welfare aspect of it. You shouldn't be guaranteed a deer/elk tag every year just because you have the extra money for tags and outfitters.
Agreed, completely. Both on the welfare aspect and on the "preferred access due to financial resources" aspect.
We won't be changing each other's mind.
Probably not, 'cause I don' think our minds are very far apart on the idea.
Only thing we probably disagree on is whether one's opposition against I-161 represents being a "big supporter of guaranteed outfitter tags," as you stated. Or, is such vote a vote to say that you think (only time will tell if any of us "thinked" correctly) that the initiative causes more problems than it will solve, if in fact it will solve any.
I certainly see why MT folks are upset for RMEF coming out against it. But, the majority of their membership being DIY guys and NOT being from MT, are pissed that it passed.
I heard plenty of complaints from DIY NR guys at these shows this winter, asking why we felt so compelled to raise their prices, and lower the guided hunter prices. I don't have a good explanation for them. Since I am known as a promoter of DIY hunting and these guys know I am from MT, the NR guys who see me don't let many opportunities pass without asking for an explanation from me.