Please comment - Montana changes to non-resident license allocation

[RidgeGhost]

Below is a link to a proposed bill in Montana that will require 60% of certain license holders to be guided by an outfitter. This will limit the amount of licenses available to DIY hunters.

I encourage you to submit comments, even if you never plan to hunt there. All of the small amendments and regulations add up to less hunting freedom in the long term.

THP also posted this information on their YouTube.

https://www.facebook.com/48440192506151 ... 759930550/

[KRONIIK]

Greedy outfitters using legislation to increase their profits.
It's really nothing more than corporate welfare.

[JakeB]

The western states could solve all of their issues if they banned outfitters from operating on public lands. The AZ trail cam ban is from outfitters, the Montana issue, Wyoming not letting non res in wilderness without a guide. Outfitter camps in OTC Colorado units, New Mexico outfitter draw. It’s all outfitter welfare. And while it may not affect guys hunting in their own state, it does affect them when they go OOS. It’s like no one wants to address it.

[RidgeGhost]

The western states could solve all of their issues if they banned outfitters from operating on public lands. The AZ trail cam ban is from outfitters, the Montana issue, Wyoming not letting non res in wilderness without a guide. Outfitter camps in OTC Colorado units, New Mexico outfitter draw. It’s all outfitter welfare. And while it may not affect guys hunting in their own state, it does affect them when they go OOS. It’s like no one wants to address it.

All the more reason to comment and encourage them to change their mind. That's the best tool we have aside from not buying tags.

[Swampbuck]

I saw this and I don't care for it for selfish reasons. But I'm guessing the OOS hunting numbers are steadily increasing so to keep the money coming in, yet limit the numbers in the woods they are proposing this. Keeping outfitters off the public land probably wouldn't change things so its either this or just limiting tags overall. They probably figure this provides more money overall to the state and it'll also probably reduce pressure overall. I was going to write them about it when I first saw it but I understand it from that standpoint. I would like to understand the rationale though to determine if its for conservation/hunting quality or politics.

[RiverBottoms]

I haven't read all of the nitty gritty details, but I am not too thrilled about the general direction of this bill. I hold multiple pref points in MT (not enough to draw 2021), so if this goes through it will sting. Hunted MT several times, and loved every minute of it. Nice people, beautiful lands (public) and game rich.

[218er]

Seems like a raw deal, but several western states look to gouge out of state hunters to support their budgets. Pretty much comes down to supply and demand. I’ve hunted montana diy a few times, it’s a phenomenal state. Their is so much public land it’s very possible for non resident self guided hunters to have success.

[RidgeGhost]

I saw this and I don't care for it for selfish reasons. But I'm guessing the OOS hunting numbers are steadily increasing so to keep the money coming in, yet limit the numbers in the woods they are proposing this. Keeping outfitters off the public land probably wouldn't change things so its either this or just limiting tags overall. They probably figure this provides more money overall to the state and it'll also probably reduce pressure overall. I was going to write them about it when I first saw it but I understand it from that standpoint. I would like to understand the rationale though to determine if its for conservation/hunting quality or politics.

They already limit the number of tags and the state has huge amounts of public land so the hunting should be more spread out compared to what we see in eastern states.

I'll admit I dont fully understand the motivation behind the proposal, but I do understand that my draw odds hit the dirt if it passes. And I refuse to go guided as long as I'm able bodied enough to do my own thing.

[rhagenw]

Any other way to participate for the non Facebook users?? Crap like this aggravates me and makes me happy with all the restrictions on MO CA lands

[RidgeGhost]

Any other way to participate for the non Facebook users?? Crap like this aggravates me and makes me happy with all the restrictions on MO CA lands

I dont have FB either. You can view the linked post without an account. From there just draft an email to the listed addresses.

[bigbuckhunter88]

I can't imagine all the small business owners are too keen on this bill either. Outfitters putting clients in a bunk house and feeding all the clients will put a dent in the wallet of some of those motels, bars, restaurants and gas stations that rely on that fall business.

[UntouchableNess]

Interesting legislative session for them so far, as HB 202 would make harvest of an antlered moose, ram bighorn sheep or a mountain goat once-in-a-lifetime. If a hunter drew but did not kill an animal, he or she could enter the drawing again. Everybody is going to say they were unsuccessful.

[Dewey]

I really hate to see DIY hunters being restricted for high dollar guided hunts. Montana is big enough with enough public land so I see no reason for the limits. Plenty enough to go around. They already charge really high for non-resident tags and sure that limits many people already. States keep eroding hunting opportunities like this and pretty soon only the rich will be able to hunt. Already is to that point in many countries and sure don’t want to see that here.

[Sailfish_WC]

The western states could solve all of their issues if they banned outfitters from operating on public lands. The AZ trail cam ban is from outfitters, the Montana issue, Wyoming not letting non res in wilderness without a guide. Outfitter camps in OTC Colorado units, New Mexico outfitter draw. It’s all outfitter welfare. And while it may not affect guys hunting in their own state, it does affect them when they go OOS. It’s like no one wants to address it.

Well it will affect in staters

What will happen is the large tracts of private land will now get bought (leased) by the big outfits. Thus reducing overall land availability to the locals, sending them to the already crowded state property.

This isn’t just about the greedy outfitters.
Look to your elected state officials who will be approving this.

Also, do you wonder why/how this got on the docket so fast and only have a couple days for public comments/input??


Hmmmm who is makin the $$$ here?

[Brian1986]

Yeah I saw the post Randy Newberg made about it. I emailed all the state senators on the game commission board asking them to vote no (all of their email addresses are posted on GoHunt.com if anyone would like to contact them). I question how it's even legal for Montana to do this. Anyone who purchased preference points for elk & deer did so in good faith based on the odds to draw in future years according to the rules at that time. Those odds and the costs involved will change drastically if this passes. It's not right. I have nothing against outfitters by the way. I just don't want to feel forced to get one if I want to hunt DIY. This has seemed to have gotten a lot of attention from numerous different high profile hunters/outlets. All who I have read comment on it are against the Bill. Hopefully our collective voices will be heard and they'll not pass it.