If You're Wanting to Come Hunt in Montana.....

wind gypsy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
4,860
Not 40 percent of a resource. Thats what already goes with outfitters. 161 didn't change that number

I've yet to see any proof that 40% is actual historical use with data but whatever the % was for the past decade, it was that based upon free market economics the way it should be. 143 tried to forgo that free market.

But yeah, 143 with whatever outfitter allocation being private land only would have been better than where it ended up. 1 or 3 thousand NR hunters on public still isn't really moving the needle compared to what could be accomplished if MT residents held their legislature and FWP accountable for actually managing the resource with it's best interest in mind.
 

Deadfall

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
962
I've yet to see any proof that 40% is actual historical use with data but whatever the % was for the past decade, it was that based upon free market economics the way it should be. 143 tried to forgo that free market.

But yeah, 143 with whatever outfitter allocation being private land only would have been better than where it ended up. 1 or 3 thousand NR hunters on public still isn't really moving the needle compared to what could be accomplished if MT residents held their legislature and FWP accountable for actually managing the resource with it's best interest in mind.
I agree with that. If MOGA wouldn't of been so dang greedy something liveable probably could of been ironed out. Instead we got this craziness that just got under table done.
143 would of put alot more money in the land programs. But here we are.
 

Deadfall

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
962
I've yet to see any proof that 40% is actual historical use with data but whatever the % was for the past decade, it was that based upon free market economics the way it should be. 143 tried to forgo that free market.

But yeah, 143 with whatever outfitter allocation being private land only would have been better than where it ended up. 1 or 3 thousand NR hunters on public still isn't really moving the needle compared to what could be accomplished if MT residents held their legislature and FWP accountable for actually managing the resource with it's best interest in mind.
We no doubt have some goofballs in our legislature. Its better then what it was. Dang sure better then alot of other states.
 

antelopedundee

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2020
Messages
152
And other states don’t have admin fees? If I recall correctly there’s a processing fee I paid in Wyoming last year while applying for elk. Idaho I believe just increased rates as well. If ya don’t like it go somewhere else. Just be glad your able to apply here for these species theres states that don’t allow NR to apply for their elk tags. This will only make it more difficult for NR.
WY charges a $15 application fee which is non-refundable. IIRC this fee goes into a fund to help landowners/tenants who suffer crop damage due to wildlife. There is no fee to apply for leftover tags in the leftover/second chance draw.
 

daziggle

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2016
Messages
10
Location
Minnesota
Hunting has become a big business and there is no need for it to be a fair field for all the participants.
 

Latest posts

Featured Video

Stats

Threads
211,607
Messages
2,179,767
Members
52,875
Latest member
Dcr54682
Top