New bill will greatly impact DIY nonresident hunters in Montana

[Stein]

I figured RMEF might want to look down at their shoes and hope it quickly resolves one way or another.  A big chunk of their mission is to obtain and enhance access to public lands, I would think it also assumes you need a tag to use the land, but I would guess they have board members sympathetic to the guide perspective but hopefully not the wealthy landowner that wants the land and tags for their personal use.

It's a very thin line to toe for RMEF, for sure.

[Skyvalhunter]

Ted Turners ranches come to mind

[Stein]

It's pretty inexpensive to buy a friend in Helena, many of the guys on the committee only raise $10-20k for campaigning.  Throwing $5k can get you heard loud and clear, peanuts for the guys backing this, I'm sure they have a big laugh about it when they get together.

[MADMAX]

Did this bill pass ?

[TooTallMike]

Keep up to date on it


http://laws.leg.mt.gov/legprd/LAW0210W$BSIV.ActionQuery?P_BILL_NO1=143&P_BLTP_BILL_TYP_CD=SB&Z_ACTION=Find&P_SESS=20211

[MADMAX]

https://www.billtrack50.com/billdetail/1286281

Thanks

[Limhangerslayer]

I figured RMEF might want to look down at their shoes and hope it quickly resolves one way or another.  A big chunk of their mission is to obtain and enhance access to public lands, I would think it also assumes you need a tag to use the land, but I would guess they have board members sympathetic to the guide perspective but hopefully not the wealthy landowner that wants the land and tags for their personal use.

It's a very thin line to toe for RMEF, for sure.

doubt it, look at the big ranches that RMEF owns and only the elite get to hunt.  One of the reasons I don’t support them

[dvolmer]

I figured RMEF might want to look down at their shoes and hope it quickly resolves one way or another.  A big chunk of their mission is to obtain and enhance access to public lands, I would think it also assumes you need a tag to use the land, but I would guess they have board members sympathetic to the guide perspective but hopefully not the wealthy landowner that wants the land and tags for their personal use.

It's a very thin line to toe for RMEF, for sure.

doubt it, look at the big ranches that RMEF owns and only the elite get to hunt.  One of the reasons I don’t support them

Totally agree with the above.  I know that RMEF local chapters do a lot of good things like fix elk fences and other good projects but I to have watched the RMEF outdoor TV shows and watched the uppity-ups in the organization hunt on prime RMEF lands purchased by donations and or gifted that none of the peasants (us folk) will never have a chance to lay foot on in our lifetime.  I don't support them either at the corporate level.  I have seen to much of the "Good Old Boys" club in some of their corporate doings.  Not to sure they would be a great advocate for the DIY non-resident hunter in Montana. They will follow the money wherever that leads them.  Just my two cents.

[Stein]

Yeah, I agree they do a ton of good stuff overall, probably more than any other organization or sum of all the other organizations but this is pretty hard to overlook.  I know Newberg isn't on the board any more, I haven't heard why - maybe he's just too busy.

I also quit watching their show years ago and don't subscribe to their e-mails as I just had zero interest in seeing Mr. Celebrity being guided on RMEF property.  Like any similar organization, there are people that pay $20 a year and people that pay $200k a year and the latter obviously speak a bit louder than the former.

It is hard to find organizations that are completely in line with my way of thinking, so it's usually a judgement call as to whether to support them or not.  I'm on the fence with RMEF now, if they come out with a clear position supporting it, I would be done with them as it doesn't matter how much habitat or public access exists if you can't get a tag.

[idaho guy]

Do you guys think there are enough people to pay for outfitters to use the 60%?  60% is 23,160 people hiring a guide for what $8-10k+?  If you have a great chance at drawing a tag, they could probably increase their prices expecting way more demand.

The bill also requires a $100 fee to apply for the outfitter tag in addition to the tag cost.   

I e-mailed the vice chair as I grew up in his district and hunt there and felt it would carry the most weight.  I tried to focus on heritage and supporting local small economies and reminded them many outfitters are out of state and the money wouldn't even stay in MT in many cases.

   

  I cant imagine there is that many hunters are using an outfitter in montana. That makes no sense but I have been wrong before

[Stein]

I almost think the 60% was thrown out there in the hopes that they could settle for 30% or some lower number.

[dvolmer]

Stein,  agree with both of your above posts.  Whatever the number may be, I Could see it being high.  This way they can message it the way they want too.  With a high number they can give the outfitters and the rich land owners all they want.  Whatever is left over, would then be thrown in to the normal non-res pool.  Like right now they have 2000 landowner deer tags but they only have around 1000 applicants.  I asked the FW licenser on the phone, what did they do with the other 1000 or so left over, she told me they just added the quota to the regular non-resident deer quota.

[dreamingbig]

This bill has made a crazy left turn.

Now $300 premium and no requirement for outfitter.

Need more popcorn!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skyvalhunter]

Is their a list saying how many Non Residents go with and outfitter in the past years for both deer and/or elk?

[ctwiggs1]

Newberg just popped a podcast a couple days ago where he is interviewing/debating the Executive Director of Montana Guides and Outfitters Association, Mac Minard. 

The both kept it civil and overall fairly friendly... But I think Mac Minard left with a few black eyes.