Possible changes for Montana....

[bearpaw]

I wrote some legislators and have already gotten some feedback, some of them are very concerned about the impact I-161 may have on the state, they are getting letters from all over the country about the increased price, I expect some steps to be attepted legislatively to help ease this.

On a different note: I paid a pretty good sum of money to purchase my outfitting business in Montana from a resident. Now my investment has taken a 2/3 loss when the voters passed this law as 2/3 of my approved client use was for the oputfitter sponsored tags which have been eliminated. I still have time to try and somehow rebuild my business, but what about the Montana outfitters who are ready to retire and need to sell their business in order to retire. The voters pretty much just took away their whole retirement.

I also pointed out that the voters pretty much took away any incentive any other non-resident businessman would have for investing in a Montana hunting business. I know that I certainly would have invested in a Wyoming or Clorado business had I known the Montana voters could take away my business the way they did.  

While some people are rejoicing, others are wondering how they will earn a living or ever be able to retire. What has this country come to?

Ok, OK, gonna play a bit of the devils advocate here.  Bearpaw, I like you and respect you, you seem like a good outfitter and that you do a lot for the hunting community, let's get that out of the way from the start.  But let's get one other thing straight as well, no other business in Montana has a GUARANTEE of business like the outfitters had, something my father did not have when he was outfitting and his business did just fine.  He didn't lease property and he guided on public ground and back then there were no guaranteed tags he had no problem filling his bookings.  Outfitters having guaranteed tags is no different than when a NR drives into Montana he is then directed to a specific hotel to stay at because all the Hotels are guaranteed a certain amount of business. Many, many outfitters did just fine for a long, long time before there were guranteed tags.  

Second, I would be willing to bet most if not ALL of your Montana clients were initially in the public drawing for tags, then when they didn't draw they bought the outfitter guaranteed tags.  These guys were drawing tags that I didn't draw to be able to go home and hunt with my family, then when they didn't get that tag, then and only then did they purchase their license through you.  I would only agree with the guaranteed tags if your business had to purchase them up front for five years.  No ands, if's or butts about it, these guaranteed tags allowed outfitters to lease property that normally would have been either hunted by the general public for nothing more than the price of asking. Also, you haven't necessarrily lost any clients at all, you've only lost the ones that don't happen to draw a tag.  There was no law passed saying you can't take just as many hunters as before, the law simply removed your ability to guarantee as many clients as you want that they will get tags.  With that loss of ability to guarantee as many clients as you may wish to take, your bets have to be hedged a bit more when it comes to just how much property you pay leases on up front.

Bearpaw, I in no way wish to see your business suffer, that is not what I am hoping for, being the son of a former outfitter I also have no qualms with guided hunters or with outfitters.  But the guaranteed tags goes against any and all forms of free trade in a marketplace that is not socialist.

Goldtip everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, I do feel you should have all your facts straight before you speak so strongly about an issue.

1.  In Montana hunters had to choose to apply for the outfitter license or choose to apply for the draw tag by Mar 15. You could not buy the outfitter after the draw unless their were undersubscribed outfitter tags. Most years that did not happen.

2.  The MT outfitter tags did not guarantee us business. Customers still had to choose to hunt with us and not with another outfitter. All it did was guarantee a tag for those who wanted to hunt with us and were willing to pay the high price that supported the block management system for other hunters to enjoy.

3.  The Montana Outfitters Board has very strict limits on the number of clients an outfitter can service. FYI - I attended an extended learning course two years ago put on by the licensing board. The director told us that outfitting industry was the most regulated industry in Montana.

4.  Idaho has an outfitters quota and landowner tags. Utah has landowner tags, over the counter tags, and governor tags. Washington has governor tags, some landowner tags, and unlimited over the counter tags. That is quaranteed business for anyone choosing to hunt with us. Montana now has the worst system for outfitters thanks to those voters who did not understand the issue. In Montana there is no way for a non-resident to get a gauranteed license unless they buy a governor tag. I almost forgot, I think landowners are quaranteed at least one non-resident license, is that going to be the next licensing issue for jealous voters to mess up. I am sure there are hunters on HUNTWA that get landowner permits, what do you think about scrapping that program?

5.  Goldtip, are you telling me that the hundreds of tax accountants are not guaranteed business by the state and federal government.  (just one example)

While I appreciate your opinion I hope you will try to get your facts straight in future posts. No ill intent meant with my remarks and none taken from your post, but I do think you have your facts a little mixed up on this issue.
Best Regards, Dale