Free: Contests & Raffles.
Meanwhile, I finally finished that debate podcast and Newberg pointed out that there are 5 more bills in review trying to restrict where the money can be spent. One example was that an access fund could only be used to buy easement to public land through private if the private land owner was the sole leaseholder of the said public land. Basically it’s a bunch of citizens in Montana trying to use non resident cash to pay for their personal wishlists rather than pay for conservation or access programs.
Weren't we lead to believe it was to support the outfitters that were having a hard time making ends meet?
I have hunted Montana for deer for the last 12 years without missing a year. With the amount of applicants increasing and the way it is run now, I probably will have to start sitting out every other year or soon every three years. I'm 55 years old now and seeing that I wont be hunting or be able to hunt forever. I'm in pretty decent shape for 55 but the old bones/joints are starting to ache when they shouldn't be. Would I be willing to pay an extra $300 to increase my odds and hunt every year? You bet I would! With limited years left, I don't want to miss out on even one year! Do I like it? No! But it doesn't shock me at all that Montana is doing this. Simple business model. Raise the costs until applicant numbers and quota numbers become equal. If you were selling hotdogs for a buck a piece and you sold out every day before lunch was half over, what would you do? You would raise your prices to equal out demand and make you the most money for your time spent working. Its called Capitalism. Montana legislature and F&G do not answer to non-residents. There constituents are the citizens of Montana. Montana citizens should be demanding that they get top dollar for these tags to support the resource and to endure the pressure of non-resident hunters in the field. Another thing to think about, who supports the businesses and hospitality industries the most during the hunting seasons? The guy that packs his camper or truck and can barely afford the trip & tag or the guy with deep pockets and doesn't bat an eye on the cost increases?I don't like to see this anymore than the rest of you but its like asking, which family gets to go to Disneyland? and which family gets to go to the state park 10 miles out of town? I know this is going to tick off some of you and I understand, buts its just the way it is and there is not much we can do about it. We will have to belly up to the bar ($$$$) or choose other options or hobby's. All of the other states are doing the same thing or will be shortly. Montana has watched Wyoming do this and has seen how successful it is for them.[/quote Good post. Some points I agree with and a couple I would, lets say, tweak . Like you I want to hunt as much as possible, and IF the draw is going to run similar to WYO special, for the most part I would be for it. No different than having a raffle and the guy who spends more has better odds, but everyone can still afford to play the game.IMO your example of the hot dog stand is only partly correct, and is and you said not only simple, but very short sighted, something no game department anywhere should aspire to be. Your hot dog stand is booming purely due to current market strength. So yes, if your hot dogs are selling to quickly, one solution is to simply raise prices to increase revenue. However, if you stop there, sooner or later the market will weaken and you will be forced to lower prices again. In the meantime your hot dog supplier, who in this case you have little control over because he is managed by forces of nature beyond your control, AND you have no other option for another supplier, as this hot dog manufacturer is the sole proprietor, reduces the size and quality of the hotdogs your selling. Now all of a sudden hot dogs are cheap again, and your working twice as hard to sell them, and your customer is disgruntled because although your prices are cheaper, percentage wise its the same (or worse) hit to their pocket book, but now the quality is also less. The better option would be to increase the supply chain.... In this case by improving herd quality and numbers, thus being able to supply more tags, or increase the quality of product by actively securing access. Both of these however require more work, and the kicker.... Selfless work. Capitalism is awesome and I love it, but its not perfect. It does not lend itself well in environments where selflessness is the expectation, or where "acts of nature" are somewhat the norm for day to day operation. We are seeing some major changes to Western hunting systems across the West this year. Time will tell if these departments are just money hungry, or actually taking advantage of the current market strength to improve hunting experience for all the hunting public in the future as is their charge.
Quote from: Skyvalhunter on February 17, 2021, 06:40:13 AMWeren't we lead to believe it was to support the outfitters that were having a hard time making ends meet? sure were. The whole Newberg podcast was about how this was meant to stabilize the outfitter industry in MT.
Quote from: dvolmer on February 16, 2021, 02:23:36 PMI have hunted Montana for deer for the last 12 years without missing a year. With the amount of applicants increasing and the way it is run now, I probably will have to start sitting out every other year or soon every three years. I'm 55 years old now and seeing that I wont be hunting or be able to hunt forever. I'm in pretty decent shape for 55 but the old bones/joints are starting to ache when they shouldn't be. Would I be willing to pay an extra $300 to increase my odds and hunt every year? You bet I would! With limited years left, I don't want to miss out on even one year! Do I like it? No! But it doesn't shock me at all that Montana is doing this. Simple business model. Raise the costs until applicant numbers and quota numbers become equal. If you were selling hotdogs for a buck a piece and you sold out every day before lunch was half over, what would you do? You would raise your prices to equal out demand and make you the most money for your time spent working. Its called Capitalism. Montana legislature and F&G do not answer to non-residents. There constituents are the citizens of Montana. Montana citizens should be demanding that they get top dollar for these tags to support the resource and to endure the pressure of non-resident hunters in the field. Another thing to think about, who supports the businesses and hospitality industries the most during the hunting seasons? The guy that packs his camper or truck and can barely afford the trip & tag or the guy with deep pockets and doesn't bat an eye on the cost increases?I don't like to see this anymore than the rest of you but its like asking, which family gets to go to Disneyland? and which family gets to go to the state park 10 miles out of town? I know this is going to tick off some of you and I understand, buts its just the way it is and there is not much we can do about it. We will have to belly up to the bar ($$$$) or choose other options or hobby's. All of the other states are doing the same thing or will be shortly. Montana has watched Wyoming do this and has seen how successful it is for them.[/quote Good post. Some points I agree with and a couple I would, lets say, tweak . Like you I want to hunt as much as possible, and IF the draw is going to run similar to WYO special, for the most part I would be for it. No different than having a raffle and the guy who spends more has better odds, but everyone can still afford to play the game.IMO your example of the hot dog stand is only partly correct, and is and you said not only simple, but very short sighted, something no game department anywhere should aspire to be. Your hot dog stand is booming purely due to current market strength. So yes, if your hot dogs are selling to quickly, one solution is to simply raise prices to increase revenue. However, if you stop there, sooner or later the market will weaken and you will be forced to lower prices again. In the meantime your hot dog supplier, who in this case you have little control over because he is managed by forces of nature beyond your control, AND you have no other option for another supplier, as this hot dog manufacturer is the sole proprietor, reduces the size and quality of the hotdogs your selling. Now all of a sudden hot dogs are cheap again, and your working twice as hard to sell them, and your customer is disgruntled because although your prices are cheaper, percentage wise its the same (or worse) hit to their pocket book, but now the quality is also less. The better option would be to increase the supply chain.... In this case by improving herd quality and numbers, thus being able to supply more tags, or increase the quality of product by actively securing access. Both of these however require more work, and the kicker.... Selfless work. Capitalism is awesome and I love it, but its not perfect. It does not lend itself well in environments where selflessness is the expectation, or where "acts of nature" are somewhat the norm for day to day operation. We are seeing some major changes to Western hunting systems across the West this year. Time will tell if these departments are just money hungry, or actually taking advantage of the current market strength to improve hunting experience for all the hunting public in the future as is their charge.Over the last 10-20 years as I have watched different states continue to raise their prices I have asked the same question. How will this work? Will people really pay these huge price increases? Will the market eventually fall out and the states loose revenue? Is the states greed you might call it going to backfire on them? etc etc etc. In every case and in every state for the last two decades the states have won and the applications still outnumber the quotas. About 10 or so years ago when Montana raised their prices substantially they had some left over tags after the draw but they still sold them all by the end of the hunting season by over the counter sales. Montana did go from a state that you had to wait about every three years to draw to a state you could draw every year and a lot of hunters have gotten used to that. Its just the last two years or so that the supply doesn't meet the demand and now under the current system a hunter will have to wait a year in-between hunting. Under the current system it soon will be every third year. When this happens it triggers the state to realize their prices can be raised without loss of tag sales.
I see your point, and no matter what we do there will always be tag increases. The cost of doing business is always going up, not down.I think what ticks people off is when the claim of a substantial increase is to help with access or provide stability to outfitters but it's essentially proven to be false advertising.
Yeah, the trend in the West is for state legislatures to cut funding to game agencies, so they have to be self sufficient which means raising prices. Residents hate increases, even a buck or two, so it falls 95% on NRs.One of the trends we are probably seeing and will likely to see more of is not everyone getting a tag. A group of 3 guys maybe used to hunt three tags every year may now only hunt 1-2 tags. Same thing with a family, maybe dad decides to not buy a tag and only the kid(s) carry a rifle.Last year, I hunted a doe tag for deer to save money because I had a goat tag I wanted to focus on. I might do that again this year, it's several hundred less and nearly the same amount of meat in the freezer.At the end of the day, hunting for a week out of state is ballpark similar cost to other out of state vacations like theme parks, skiing or whatever.
