I fully support outfitters being able to outfit on public lands. I have no problem with those business enterprises operating on public lands any more or any less than other businesses. Pay the fee, fill out the permit, make sure you comply with the rules, don't interfere or impose on public hunters, and get on with it.
I completely understand where some of the tone of this thread has come from. Having been involved on the legislative front for many years, there is no love accumulating between resident hunters and the outfitting lobby/MOGA, a group I view differently than the individual outfitters themselves.
I voted against I-161, as it seemed pretty obvious that is was fraught with problems, many of which are expressing themselves now. But, I fully understand the frustration many of my hunting friends have/had and why they voted for and supported I-161.
And now, I-161 is being used as the supposed reason for all the legislation MOGA is pushing the last two sessions. As some outfitters will tell you, outfitting has benefited greatly from the passage of I-161, so using the passage of I-161 as some sort of battle cry seems rather disingenuous and a poorly veiled cause of retribution.
To this point of outfitting in the Sweetgrass Hills, or on any public lands for that matter, I personally have no problem with it. If we believe in multiple use of public lands, it seems hard to carve away outfitting from those public land uses.
When the big blow up happened with me and MOGA over my appointment to the RMEF board, many MT outfitters called me afterwards and personally expressed their disappointment for what had transpired. One outfitter actually sought me out in person, visited with me for some time, and apologized for whatever MOGA did to instigate that issue. That was Rich Birdsell, the applicant for this outfitting permit in the Sweetgrass Hills.
I'm not sure how to start soothing some of the wounds that exist and build some sort of working relationship with MOGA. MOGA as an institution, as compared to their individual members, is a completely different animal. I have no respect for those running the operation at MOGA. Those running things in the MOGA Helena office cannot be trusted and so long as the status quo exists in MOGA's management, I expect this kind of distrust among hunters and MOGA to grow, not subside.
Hunters spend countless volunteer hours protecting and improving hunting and access. Many MOGA legislative efforts are contrary to the work of those hunter-volunteers. And when MOGA could make a difference to help with really bad legislation, MOGA, their leadership, their lobbyists, and most unfortunately, their individual members are a complete no show.
That's a pretty hard one to swallow from the perspective of a volunteer who is there for hundreds of hours, spending thousands of their own dollars, all for the benefit of wildlife. And, when an industry whose financial model benefits from abundant resource stands pat and is a no show on bad wildlife bills, it does nothing to help these already strained relations.
A big difference exists in the operating procedure and the perspective of the hunter groups and MOGA. MOGA is an industry lobby, with paid staff, and resources to influence legislators. MOGA is going to do whatever they can to make the economic model of outfitting better, and at times, it seems some of the positions and legislative efforts by MOGA might be of short-term benefit, but of long-term detriment. I get that notion and I accept it as part of how things work, though my positions will often be counter to MOGA positions. Yet, even though "I get it'" the legislative actions/inactions of MOGA don't necessarily build much sympathy for that organization.
The hunting groups are a ragtag bunch of immensely dedicated souls who have a primary focus on what is best for hunters of today and those who come tomorrow. Economic issues of making a living from this public resource do not even make the "Top 100" list for this dedicated group of volunteers. Given their perspective, the legacy they see entrusted to them, and the way they see access disappearing, such is completely understandable for resident hunters and their volunteer leaders to feel that way.
I would never criticize a single one of these volunteers, as they do more for hunting each morning than many of us do in a year. Without them, the marvelous hunting and opportunity we have in Montana would not be nearly what it is today. My default position, not only as a hunter, but as someone who admires the "guy in the arena" and fighting for the cause of others, puts me as a supporter of these guys.
None of this happens in a vacuum. None of it; from the passage of I-161, to MOGA feeling empowered as a lobbying machine and trying to destroy anyone and anything in their way, to resident hunters protesting outfitter applications on public land, to ......
I wish I had answers. I think a start would be for hunters and individual outfitters to meet. Not MOGA, not our hunting groups, but the people themselves. That is how relationships can be reconstructed and hopefully from that comes a level of trust and understanding. Meeting face to face with someone is a lot different than circling the wagons around our perspective camps and lobbing artillery at the other guys.
I would recommend this topic go to PMs and private emails, phone calls, or better yet, personal visits. Not much can be gained by beating on each other in the world of an internet forum, though things can be made worse.
I make my offer that I will meet with any and all Montana outfitters, if they think benefit could come from such. I refuse to meet with MOGA lobbyists or their Executive Director, knowing nothing good can come of that.
I know many outfitters in MT and I refer a lot of clients to outfitters. With few exceptions, not more exceptions than I find among the resident hunters, I enjoy visiting with these outfitters and learn something from their perspective. And, I hope they gain some insight from my side of the fence. I find outfitters to be good guys who are serious hunters. And though they have taken their joy of hunting to a level of making a living from it, I can set that aside and know we might disagree on some topics, while still considering ourselves to be friends.
With that, I think this thread will be locked. Time to invest our efforts in something more productive. We have too much at risk and too little resources to continue in such a non-productive manner.
