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

[Wapiti1]

If you remember those days, as a resident you won't love this one. As a non-resident, a DIY hunter would lose opportunity and choice.

Private land/Public Wildlife implies a partnership to manage the herds for the good of all. This sort of thing limits that and puts management out of reach of many regular folks due to cost. Goodbye to access for shoulder season cow hunts. Youth hunts, nope, not without a big fee. Elderly, or mobility impaired, sorry, go hunt the wilderness.

Bill Text: MT SB143 | 2021 | Regular Session | Introduced | LegiScan

Outfitter bill would forever change Montana hunting - Seeley Swan Pathfinder (seeleylake.com)

Make your voice heard in Montana on this one.

Jeremy

 

[Wapiti1]

A couple of relevant changes in this bill:

60% of the 17000 B-10 (non-resident big game combo) licenses would be reserved for outfitter sponsored hunters. That leaves only 6800 licenses for EVERYONE else.

60% of the B-11 (deer combo) tags to the outfitters pool as well. Leaving

2000 B-11 (deer combo) would be reserved for landowner sponsored tags, i.e. Private Land Only deer tags. These do exist today, but only for the Landowner and their family, no selling, or sponsoring others (in my understanding of the current laws, please correct me if I am wrong)

Tag fees would no longer be fixed to the consumer price index. This is both good and bad as they can set fees at will, but likely would match other states.

Text straight out of the bill:

Section 8. Section 87-2-511, MCA, is amended to read: 18 "87-2-511. Sale and use of Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses. (1) TheExcept as provided in 19 [section 1], the department shall offer the Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses for sale on April 1, with 60% of each of the Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses reserved for applicants hunting with a licensed outfitter 21 pursuant to [section 1] and 2,000 of the authorized Class B-11 licenses reserved for applicants indicating their 22 intent to hunt hunting with a resident sponsor on land owned by that sponsor, as provided in subsections (2) 23 and (3) pursuant to [section 3].

I've seen this from both sides as a resident and a non-resident. It benefits landowners and outfitters and limits opportunity and choice for everyone. If you want to go DIY, do it. If you want an outfitter, no problem. Those outfitters should compete for your business with value and service and stay off the state sponsored welfare.

Off my soapbox. Read the bill, it's remarkably easy to read, and decide.

Please voice your opinion to these folks:

Here are the members of the Senate Fish & Game Committee:

Hinebauch, Steve (R) ‑ Chair
Brown, Bob (R) ‑ Vice Chair
Jacobson,Tom (D) ‑ Vice Chair
Blasdel, Mark (R)
Cohenour, Jill (D)
Ellsworth, Jason (R)
Flowers, Pat (D)
Hertz, Greg (R)
Howard, David (R)
Keenan, Bob (R)
McClafferty, Edie (D)

To find the email or phone number for your Senator, here is the link - https://leg.mt.gov/legislator-information/

(I pinched this from a Randy Newberg HuntTalk post on this, that way I didn't have to look them all up, thanks Randy!)

Jeremy

 

[Legend]

Just so everyone knows this bill is sponsored by Jason Ellsworth who serves the Bitterroot Valley.

I can see the benefit for outfitters, but I struggle to find the benefit for the game management, resident or non resident hunters, or for Montana. Let's hope this bill dies a quick death.

 

[Wapiti1]

I saw it coming after the republican's sweep in the Montana legislature and governor. This one and they will almost certainly start to attack stream access laws.

Jeremy

 

[Wapiti1]

Just so everyone knows this bill is sponsored by Jason Ellsworth who serves the Bitterroot Valley.

I can see the benefit for outfitters, but I struggle to find the benefit for the game management, resident or non resident hunters, or for Montana. Let's hope this bill dies a quick death.

It is an absolute net negative for everyone except the large landowners and outfitters.

Fly into Missoula, Bozeman, Billings, etc, the outfitter picks you up and you get dropped back at the airport when done. A taxidermist or butcher might also benefit, but many will use who that outfitter recommends further decreasing choice and competition.

So, mom and pop get none of your hunting tourism dollars. You don't stay in a motel, buy any gas or groceries, snag a burger mid-hunt because you had to go into town for fuel, or grab some sales tax free stuff while you are there.

Oh, and you guys with preference points. Your odds of drawing went from 90+% with 2 points to at best about 25%. Of the 6800 left for you, only 5100 can go to preference point holders, the other 1700 (25%) go to 0 point holders.

issue 75% of the Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses made available for purchase pursuant to 87- 27 2-505 and 87-2-510 by drawings in which the licenses are awarded to applicants in the order of which applicants have purchased the greatest number of preference points. If the number of licenses to be issued 67th Legislature SB 143.1 - 5 - Authorized Print Version – SB 143 1 under this subsection exceeds the number of applicants who have purchased preference points, the remaining 2 licenses must be added to the licenses issued pursuant to subsection (6) (5)(b). 3 (6)(b) The department shall issue 25% of the Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses made available for purchase pursuant to 87-2-505 and 87-2-510 by drawings in which the licenses are awarded to applicants who have not purchased any preference points. If the number of licenses to be issued under this subsection 6 exceeds the number of applicants who have not purchased preference points, the remaining licenses must be 7 added to the licenses issued pursuant to subsection (5)(a).

Help the Montana residents. Non-residents have a voice too and fund a ton of the conservation efforts in the state.

Jeremy

 

[BBob]

This sounds like what happened in New Mexico years ago. It went from being able to hunt there regularly to almost never overnight unless you bought an expensive landowner tag or hired an overpriced guide. I'll bet you have outfitters lobbying your rep to push this, one such outfitter in NM was almost solely responsible in pushing this through in NM. Good luck, doesn't sound good for the DIY community.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

I emailed Mr. Hinebach. I would encourage everyone else to do the same.

“
Mr. Hinebauch,

I’m emailing you in opposition to SB 143 that would reintroduce outfitter licenses for non residents.

I’m not a Montana resident, however I am a long time lover of the State and the outdoor recreation activities the state offers.

I hunt as a non-resident as often as I am able in Montana. Though I feel outfitters provide a valuable service, I much prefer the freedom, savings, and independence of “do it yourself” hunting. I feel like I am hardly alone in this, and many like my self still bring millions of dollars in both wildlife funding through non resident sales, but also in the economic benefit of using restaurants, gas stations, hotels, etc during my stay.

Would SB 143 pass, it would severely limit my opportunity to enjoy your great State and as such feel as though it would be the wrong move for the collective interest of Montana.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Respectfully”

 

[MattB]

It is an absolute net negative for everyone except the large landowners and outfitters.

Fly into Missoula, Bozeman, Billings, etc, the outfitter picks you up and you get dropped back at the airport when done. A taxidermist or butcher might also benefit, but many will use who that outfitter recommends further decreasing choice and competition.

So, mom and pop get none of your hunting tourism dollars. You don't stay in a motel, buy any gas or groceries, snag a burger mid-hunt because you had to go into town for fuel, or grab some sales tax free stuff while you are there.

Oh, and you guys with preference points. Your odds of drawing went from 90+% with 2 points to at best about 25%. Of the 6800 left for you, only 5100 can go to preference point holders, the other 1700 (25%) go to 0 point holders.

issue 75% of the Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses made available for purchase pursuant to 87- 27 2-505 and 87-2-510 by drawings in which the licenses are awarded to applicants in the order of which applicants have purchased the greatest number of preference points. If the number of licenses to be issued 67th Legislature SB 143.1 - 5 - Authorized Print Version – SB 143 1 under this subsection exceeds the number of applicants who have purchased preference points, the remaining 2 licenses must be added to the licenses issued pursuant to subsection (6) (5)(b). 3 (6)(b) The department shall issue 25% of the Class B-10 and Class B-11 licenses made available for purchase pursuant to 87-2-505 and 87-2-510 by drawings in which the licenses are awarded to applicants who have not purchased any preference points. If the number of licenses to be issued under this subsection 6 exceeds the number of applicants who have not purchased preference points, the remaining licenses must be 7 added to the licenses issued pursuant to subsection (5)(a).

Help the Montana residents. Non-residents have a voice too and fund a ton of the conservation efforts in the state.

Jeremy

Question, where do you think the outfitter will buy groceries and gas and with whose money?

 

[Heath Hansen]

Question, where do you think the outfitter will buy groceries and gas and with whose money?

It doesn’t matter. The financial impact that outfitter has on the economy is minimal compared to a DIY non resident. The DIY guy will potentially have a hotel/food nightly/fuel/ and potentially a beer or two throughout a week of hunting. The outfitter probably helps out the local grocery store (more like Costco) and the DIY Hunter helps a bunch of small businesses.

 

[Wapiti1]

Question, where do you think the outfitter will buy groceries and gas and with whose money?

Just like the taxidermy and butcher services, it will be limited to a certain locale. Good for there, maybe, but not for the fly over country.

The number of folks the dollars touch is much smaller.

Jeremy

 

[hobbes]

I emailed them all in opposition to it.

I'm not even sure the outfitters here can support that number of outfitted hunters. Considering that these license holders would end up with outfitters, I may see less pressure on some of the public land that I hunt. However, I've no interest in taking opportunity away from the everyday DIY nonresident hunter. If you want to hunt, outfitted or not, draw a license like everyone else.

 

[Wapiti1]

I emailed them all in opposition to it.

I'm not even sure the outfitters here can support that number of outfitted hunters. Considering that these license holders would end up with outfitters, I may see less pressure on some of the public land that I hunt. However, I've no interest in taking opportunity away from the everyday DIY nonresident hunter. If you want to hunt, outfitted or not, draw a license like everyone else.

It will also kill any access to cow hunts during the shoulder seasons for residents and non-residents. Outfitters won't stand for free hunting on their leased hunting land.

Block management will take a hit. More money and someone else takes care of the issues for you. Sign me up.

Residents will lose more than non, IMO. Access will suffer. That's was a big reason residents killed it years ago.

Jeremy

 

[hobbes]

It will also kill any access to cow hunts during the shoulder seasons for residents and non-residents. Outfitters won't stand for free hunting on their leased hunting land.

Block management will take a hit. More money and someone else takes care of the issues for you. Sign me up.

Residents will lose more than non, IMO. Access will suffer. That's was a big reason residents killed it years ago.

Jeremy

I think you are correct. I think it could be detrimental to the BMA program. I rely a lot on BMAs.

 

[AlaskaMark]

We're in a worse boat here in Alaska cuz of our "must-be-guided" law, which is essentially a subsidy to the guide industry, and allows too many bad apple guides to stay in business. It's hurting our sheep populations and certainly hurting Alaska resident hunters. It's gone too far in Alaska and hoping to change that. I know many nonresidents in the lower 48 agree; if you're an experienced hunter you should not be forced to hire a guide to hunt sheep, mtn goat, or brown bear at a cost of $20K plus. Many would still hire a guide, and they'd base it on that guide's experience and reputation, which is as it should be. Money and its influence should not be the primary way we manage our wildlife and allocations.

 

[TheCougar]

I wrote emails to every single member of the committee. I also talked to a buddy of mine who does some part time guiding and he was adamant that everyone is against this and it has zero chance of passing. I sure hope so!

 

[JoshB94]

[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]


To make it easier to copy and paste emails...

 

[Mt Al]

Question, ....with whose money?

The money would come from the same place most other service providers' money comes from: customers who pay them because they have earned it through their competitive practices, customer satisfaction and performance. That would be in contrast to, say, the government giving one chosen industry almost guaranteed business. That would be the opposite of free market practices that conservatives voted for - but right in line with Montana's Republican party bizarre non sexual (?) crush on outfitters and land owners. No surprise here, we were waiting for it, I voted for it and look forward to the R's potentially losing their base over idiocy like this. No one is stopping anyone from paying outfitters, outfitters leasing private land, land owners making money off of access or hunting.

 

[Public_hunter]

When are they supposed to vote in this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Packin_packout]

60% of the licenses would allocated to outfitters.

B-10 licenses are combo licenses.
B-11 licenses are general deer. It increases the number of overall licenses from 4600->6600 but then gives 60% to people hunting with guides...so you are down to 3960 licenses for the draw assuming that you don't have 2000 licenses for residents to sponsor a non-resident w/o getting any financial payment...so now you are down to 1960 license for the general public.

Not to be rude but this I have zero tolerance for this type of outfitter driven nonsense.

 

[cgasner1]

I wish that the democratic republicans thing could be left out of this and people would just start looking at the right and wrong of these things. This thing is wrong it takes away a equal opportunity for everyone and makes it more friendly for people with cash our entire country is going that was and it’s wrong no matter the party doing it look at the keystone pipeline or this stock market deal all of these people are just out to make money from us average people in one way or another we need to come together to get this kind of stuff to stop like the boys on Reddit are doing to the wall street trash at this point all these people are just one big party paying each other


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk