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

[100percent]

Ok! I have finally heard enough crying!
I hear all this bitching about MT legislature and mistreatment of the diy hunter but, nobody ever mentions that MT is 71% private land and 29% public. Should the private landowner not be represented in this equation? Should they not have a say in the management of game on their own land? MDF, RMEF and obviously the state representatives think they should! If they seek revenue from leasing to an outfit for purposes of hunting, would it not seem remotely fair that they should receive a proportionate share of the tags? This isn’t Nevada, Utah, Wyoming or idaho where the majority of land is public. These landowners and their outfits should be protecting their opportunities in the same way each and everyone of us should protect our own. Leftists I90 politics has created this thought that everyone should get a trophy while the landowners are footing the majority of the bill. These landowners, who absolutely matter, are outvoted and pushed in a corner by this movement and it has forced them to play politics due to ballot box game management that began with bill 161 in 2010. Thank the ever popular Buzz Haynes and cronies for that! Popular opinion is rarely wholly considerate of the facts and is rarely just. When you see legislative actions like this and it seems underhanded, it is usually where popular opinion and an impossible reality meet! Don’t blame the player—-blame the game!

 

[realunlucky]

Ok! I have finally heard enough crying!
I hear all this bitching about MT legislature and mistreatment of the diy hunter but, nobody ever mentions that MT is 71% private land and 29% public. Should the private landowner not be represented in this equation? Should they not have a say in the management of game on their own land? MDF, RMEF and obviously the state representatives think they should! If they seek revenue from leasing to an outfit for purposes of hunting, would it not seem remotely fair that they should receive a proportionate share of the tags? This isn’t Nevada, Utah, Wyoming or idaho where the majority of land is public. These landowners and their outfits should be protecting their opportunities in the same way each and everyone of us should protect our own. Leftists I90 politics has created this thought that everyone should get a trophy while the landowners are footing the majority of the bill. These landowners, who absolutely matter, are outvoted and pushed in a corner by this movement and it has forced them to play politics due to ballot box game management that began with bill 161 in 2010. Thank the ever popular Buzz Haynes and cronies for that! Popular opinion is rarely wholly considerate of the facts and is rarely just. When you see legislative actions like this and it seems underhanded, it is usually where popular opinion and an impossible reality meet! Don’t blame the player—-blame the game!

You can hate both.
Not only was the entire premise of the bill already placed on the ballot and voted on by Montana residents and changed to what they have now.
This very bill was beat down in committee tabled and brought back to life and pushed though with a minority opinion. The numbers documented against this bill are alarming. It's a disgusting example of pandering to money interests and not the public at large they are elected to represent.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[cgasner1]

Ok! I have finally heard enough crying!
I hear all this bitching about MT legislature and mistreatment of the diy hunter but, nobody ever mentions that MT is 71% private land and 29% public. Should the private landowner not be represented in this equation? Should they not have a say in the management of game on their own land? MDF, RMEF and obviously the state representatives think they should! If they seek revenue from leasing to an outfit for purposes of hunting, would it not seem remotely fair that they should receive a proportionate share of the tags? This isn’t Nevada, Utah, Wyoming or idaho where the majority of land is public. These landowners and their outfits should be protecting their opportunities in the same way each and everyone of us should protect our own. Leftists I90 politics has created this thought that everyone should get a trophy while the landowners are footing the majority of the bill. These landowners, who absolutely matter, are outvoted and pushed in a corner by this movement and it has forced them to play politics due to ballot box game management that began with bill 161 in 2010. Thank the ever popular Buzz Haynes and cronies for that! Popular opinion is rarely wholly considerate of the facts and is rarely just. When you see legislative actions like this and it seems underhanded, it is usually where popular opinion and an impossible reality meet! Don’t blame the player—-blame the game!

These people just bought and paid for tags is the issue they where out ahead of others because they where willing to pay the money that is not the way these tags should be going out if they are gonna do this they should just give everyone a tag if I was a applicant and didn’t draw and the state went and did this I would be on the phone demanding a tag since they are just giving them to people now. Then where does it end couple years it’s draw tags then turns into sheep tags


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[100percent]

The public at large couldnot find their ass with both hands most days... Do you really believe the people of Utah could make a good financial decision for you and your family that would have long lasting effects? if the effects were debilitating, would you not fight against the majority through legal means?

 

[BuzzH]

The public at large couldnot find their ass with both hands most days... Do you really believe the people of Utah could make a good financial decision for you and your family that would have long lasting effects? if the effects were debilitating, would you not fight against the majority through legal means?

Landowners don't control anything with regard to wildlife, only their property.

They already have the means to profit from access, Block Management, leasing, or guiding themselves.

What they aren't owed is a living off a state asset. Game management and tag distribution should be handled by the MTFWP and Commission, using science and biology...not the whims of the Legislature. Certainly not handed to only those citizens that own land. Wildlife is held in trust for ALL citizens of the State.

If the legislature in Montana, etc. are going to circumvent the public process, ignore the role of the Commission and FWP, then don't be surprised if you find your job on the line. Don't be surprised if the majority seek to correct the absolute corruption of the Legislative process that has gone on by reversing that corruption via ballot initiative. What choice do the majority in Montana have when the Legislature ignores their wishes?

If the Legislature would act accordingly, letting the FWP Commission act as they should, they wouldn't be in danger of suffering the wrath of a bunch of pissed off Montana Resident hunters. Resident hunters who are flat tired of the bullshit that goes on in Helena every session to pad the pockets of outfitters, landowners, and defy the wishes of the People. The pissed off Resident Hunters who have the ultimate say in who represents them, or in this case, who ISN'T representing the wishes of the Constituents.

This latest crap outfitter welfare is going to cost some of these Legislators their jobs...and it should. They run on supposed Republican free capitalist ideals and then once elected, its straight to crony capitalism, shady deals, and political pay-offs. Those supporting that crap need to be shown the door.

The problems with Montana wildlife are 90% the actions of the Legislature...and that's a fact.

 

[realunlucky]

The public at large couldnot find their ass with both hands most days... Do you really believe the people of Utah could make a good financial decision for you and your family that would have long lasting effects? if the effects were debilitating, would you not fight against the majority through legal means?

Do you believe in being governed by the highest bidder? That's not the way anyone would fathom the system working except for a elitist.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[100percent]

I believe in private property and the Inherent rights and privileges thereof.

In today’s society of false narrative and rhetoric, it is becoming extremely difficult for the public to have a real understanding of both sides of any given issue. Therefore, I don’t believe in ballot box initiatives. Need I remind that Wolves, dope, same-sex marriages and other atrocities have recently passed on the ballot? It becomes a marketing race with the winner being the side who has the most exposure with the best message.
Rhetoric!!! look at that load above from buzz! Game and fish should manage the game. They were doing just that by allocating a certain percentage of tags to outfitters (landowners) and that was seen as a dirty deal by many who don’t own an acre and have no skin in the game. The result was managing game through the ballot box with 161. All that about revenue around block management... what if I don’t want the public on my private land for a multitude of liability concerns around livestock, fire, and other potential damages? Should I be penalized for my decision to lease my land to a honest reputable outfitter, who may be a neighbor and understands the intricacies of my place and respects my expectations around good husbandry?
Again, taxation without representation is not a sustainable model.

 

[realunlucky]

Again, taxation without representation is not a sustainable model.

Are you saying paying more equals a bigger voice in the process? Because now everyone is given equal representation at the ballot box, some might even go so far as saying it's the foundation of this country.

These tags aren't restricted to private land hunting until then don't use a land rights argument.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[100percent]

I stand by my posts! If you read them fully, you, as a moderator, wouldn’t be calling me out based on a snippet.

My intent is not argumentative but, an expression of a point of view that is sorely missing on this forum. It is all too clear that some here believe all game animals are born and raised on public ground and only reside on private land during the hunting season.

Your assertion that these tags are not exclusive to only private land and as such, I should refrain from expression is a clear indicator and demonstration of my point. 71% of the land in MT is private.

Question: Irrelevant of population, is 71% not a majority?

 

[100percent]

Landowners don't control anything with regard to wildlife, only their property.

They already have the means to profit from access, Block Management, leasing, or guiding themselves.

What they aren't owed is a living off a state asset. Game management and tag distribution should be handled by the MTFWP and Commission, using science and biology...not the whims of the Legislature. Certainly not handed to only those citizens that own land. Wildlife is held in trust for ALL citizens of the State.

If the legislature in Montana, etc. are going to circumvent the public process, ignore the role of the Commission and FWP, then don't be surprised if you find your job on the line. Don't be surprised if the majority seek to correct the absolute corruption of the Legislative process that has gone on by reversing that corruption via ballot initiative. What choice do the majority in Montana have when the Legislature ignores their wishes?

If the Legislature would act accordingly, letting the FWP Commission act as they should, they wouldn't be in danger of suffering the wrath of a bunch of pissed off Montana Resident hunters. Resident hunters who are flat tired of the bullshit that goes on in Helena every session to pad the pockets of outfitters, landowners, and defy the wishes of the People. The pissed off Resident Hunters who have the ultimate say in who represents them, or in this case, who ISN'T representing the wishes of the Constituents.

This latest crap outfitter welfare is going to cost some of these Legislators their jobs...and it should. They run on supposed Republican free capitalist ideals and then once elected, its straight to crony capitalism, shady deals, and political pay-offs. Those supporting that crap need to be shown the door.

The problems with Montana wildlife are 90% the actions of the Legislature...and that's a fact.

In a state managed for opportunity, I’m batting 12 for 16 on mature 171-196” bucks on mt private land. Do you think many public land hunters could say the same? Your rhetoric about landowners not “managing” the states assets is ridiculous! Go pet your wolves!

 

[BuzzH]

I stand by my posts! If you read them fully, you, as a moderator, wouldn’t be calling me out based on a snippet.

My intent is not argumentative but, an expression of a point of view that is sorely missing on this forum. It is all too clear that some here believe all game animals are born and raised on public ground and only reside on private land during the hunting season.

Your assertion that these tags are not exclusive to only private land and as such, I should refrain from expression is a clear indicator and demonstration of my point. 71% of the land in MT is private.

Question: Irrelevant of population, is 71% not a majority?

Doesn't matter how much is private and how much is public...wildlife is held in trust for the Citizens of the State no matter where its found. Private, State, BLM, USFWS, doesn't matter, still a state asset.

With that being a fact, the Montana Citizens will have the say in its management, and that includes tag allocations, seasons, cost for those tags, and every other regulation to do with those assets.

I don't believe anyone has said that there is wildlife that is born, live, and die without leaving private...sure it happens.

We don't vote based on land mass, we don't manage wildlife based on land mass either.

That wouldn't change if only 1 acre is public and the rest private, wildlife would still be a public asset. Hell, if it was 100% private, the wildlife is STILL held in trust for the Citizens and landowners would be bound by what the citizens want in regard to wildlife.

You can cry all you want, but the Citizens of Montana decide what's best for wildlife. If that means repealing bad legislation via ballot initiative...that's what they'll do. If that means changing regulation, that's what they'll do. If they want to shorten a season it applies to everyone.

I can help it if you don't understand the basics of wildlife, who its held in trust for, and who gets a say in its management.

 

[Montana Slim]

How many Montanans own that 71% you keep talking about? So the more land you own, the more representation you should receive.....?
Seems you would prefer a European-style system of game management?

 

[BuzzH]

In a state managed for opportunity, I’m batting 12 for 16 on mature 171-196” bucks on mt private land. Do you think many public land hunters could say the same? Your rhetoric about landowners not “managing” the states assets is ridiculous! Go pet your wolves!

They don't manage anything but access to their property, improve their private land habitat, maybe control predators in the area...but that's it.

Who issues the tags? Who sets the seasons? Who decides how much to charge for those tags? Who decides if the areas are limited entry or general? Who decides what weapons are legal? Who sets quotas?

Its not landowners...that's all done by the Commission via the wishes of the Citizens.

Not a hard concept to grasp...

 

[100percent]

No misunderstanding , here!

 

[100percent]

Doesn't matter how much is private and how much is public...wildlife is held in trust for the Citizens of the State no matter where its found. Private, State, BLM, USFWS, doesn't matter, still a state asset.

With that being a fact, the Montana Citizens will have the say in its management, and that includes tag allocations, seasons, cost for those tags, and every other regulation to do with those assets.

I don't believe anyone has said that there is wildlife that is born, live, and die without leaving private...sure it happens.

We don't vote based on land mass, we don't manage wildlife based on land mass either.

That wouldn't change if only 1 acre is public and the rest private, wildlife would still be a public asset. Hell, if it was 100% private, the wildlife is STILL held in trust for the Citizens and landowners would be bound by what the citizens want in regard to wildlife.

You can cry all you want, but the Citizens of Montana decide what's best for wildlife. If that means repealing bad legislation via ballot initiative...that's what they'll do. If that means changing regulation, that's what they'll do. If they want to shorten a season it applies to everyone.

I can help it if you don't understand the basics of wildlife, who its held in trust for, and who gets a say in its management.

That wouldn't change if only 1 acre is public and the rest private, wildlife would still be a public asset. Hell, if it was 100% private, the wildlife is STILL held in trust for the Citizens and landowners would be bound by what the citizens want in regard to wildlife.

keep digging... this is exactly my point....

 

[BuzzH]

I believe in private property and the Inherent rights and privileges thereof.

In today’s society of false narrative and rhetoric, it is becoming extremely difficult for the public to have a real understanding of both sides of any given issue. Therefore, I don’t believe in ballot box initiatives. Need I remind that Wolves, dope, same-sex marriages and other atrocities have recently passed on the ballot? It becomes a marketing race with the winner being the side who has the most exposure with the best message.
Rhetoric!!! look at that load above from buzz! Game and fish should manage the game. They were doing just that by allocating a certain percentage of tags to outfitters (landowners) and that was seen as a dirty deal by many who don’t own an acre and have no skin in the game. The result was managing game through the ballot box with 161. All that about revenue around block management... what if I don’t want the public on my private land for a multitude of liability concerns around livestock, fire, and other potential damages? Should I be penalized for my decision to lease my land to a honest reputable outfitter, who may be a neighbor and understands the intricacies of my place and respects my expectations around good husbandry?
Again, taxation without representation is not a sustainable model.

Wrong.

First of all its not the GF, its the MTFWP. Secondly the Commission was not allocating anything, the were bound by Legislation to give those tags to NR's prior to I-161. If all it took was a regulation to change that allocation, we could have done that through the commission. It wasn't so, you have to change it via ballot initiative, which isn't as easy as you make it sound.

There's nothing wrong with ballot initiatives, its a checks and balance to ensure that the Legislature is not going rogue, representing special interests rather than the will of the People.

Its no more "wrong" for the citizens to reverse bad legislation, than those that run to the Legislature in the first place. The correct way to make changes to Wildlife related issues, would be to work through the Commission.

Nobody said that anyone was required to enroll in Block Management, its a choice and I don't give a shit either way. Private property rights are a fundamental right...sell it the hippies down the road, enroll it in block, outfit it, lease it, or don't hunt it at all. Makes no difference to me.

Nobody is trying to "punish" anybody in regard to who or even if you want to lease.

But, what the Citizens do have a say about is the allocation and process of issuing tags...get over it, its the way its done.

 

[BuzzH]

No misunderstanding , here!

There's no understanding, you're out in the weeds.

 

[BuzzH]

That wouldn't change if only 1 acre is public and the rest private, wildlife would still be a public asset. Hell, if it was 100% private, the wildlife is STILL held in trust for the Citizens and landowners would be bound by what the citizens want in regard to wildlife.

keep digging... this is exactly my point....

Take a guess who controls Whitetails in Texas?

Take a guess who still has to purchase a State License to hunt whitetails in Texas?

Take a guess who sets the seasons to hunt whitetails in Texas?

You have no point, its the way game is managed here in the US, land ownership and wildlife ownership are mutually exclusive.

As to digging...when you find yourself in a hole, like you're in here, best to quit.

 

[100percent]

Funny coming from someone who doesn’t hunt his home state because the commission has the game population so screwed up???

 

[BuzzH]

Funny coming from someone who doesn’t hunt his home state because the commission has the game population so screwed up???

Haven't missed a season in Montana since 1979...so wrong again. Bought OTC NR tags (thank you corrupt Legislation/self serving Legislators) for this fall too.

The reason the game is screwed up is about 90% because of the meddling via Legislation and Legislators...if only obviously.