Elkbelter and I were unsuccessful in drawing a nonresident elk tag in Montana for 2021. Had a contract in place with an outfitter from Jan 2021. Was told that MT legislation was changed to allow for tags to be awarded to those in our situation. MT FWP referred me back to outfitter and awaiting more info. Anyone else in similar situation and have any more info?
Montana nonresident elk tags
- Thread starter Toddesea
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Not yet on alternates list. Fwp did not instruct to do anything but to coordinate through outfitter. Montana west outfitters. We each bought one point. I have never not drawn for Montana in 3 previous tries each time with just the one preference point. Hopefully hear back soon!
They did pass the legislation but that's about as much as I know. You stated you had booked with an outfitter prior to the app deadline so you should qualify. IMO this was a garbage bill that was pushed through in the last hour that should have not gotten through because of it failed earlier in the legislative session. Good luck on your hunt this fall.
KSB209
Well-Known Member
I listened to the Meateater podcast yesterday and They were talking about this. Basically if you apply for a tag through the outfitter they get preferential treatment and are allotted about 40% of the non resident tags to guarantee clients tags who apply with outfitters. It's a money grab but they have some data to backup how much money is spent by nonresident hunters who hire outfitters. It's something like 5x compared to DIY hunters.
I knew nothing about this. Talked to our guide a year and a half or more ago and did it the old fashion way. Thankfully we drew, November can't come soon enough.
calling4life
Well-Known Member
Is it supposed to be a surprise that requiring people to spend more money means that they will spend more money?
DIY, $1k tag. Guide/outfitter, $1k tag and $5k + for the guide/outfitter... of course it's going to bring in more money.
Call them up and tell them they should reserve half the non-res. rooms in the hospitals for people that chopper in, because, you know, it brings more money in...
Non-resident, want to eat at our restaurants... well, we reserve half the tables for those staying in $3k/night hotel suites, so get your room and then get your table. Why, well, brings more money into the state.
Why not cut to the quick and just charge more money... instead of $1k for a tag, make it $3k
Geez I'm just looking for more information. Not trying to get.all the key board warriors in an uproar. I like lrh forums cuz people here are knowledgeable and willing to share openly. Thanks for any info about how this new process will work.
calling4life
Well-Known Member
Who's in an uproar?
Not to mention, sharing/commenting openly would also mean accepting if others dissent/disagree/feel differently. You sound like you want people to give you what you want, say what you want, or otherwise wish them silent, not like you're for "sharing openly."
The discussion of this law is relevant because you have power if you get to hunt because of the law, you could call up your outfitter and let them know that because you don't agree with said law, you'll not be going with them.
If enough people did this the law may be repealed.
If you do agree, well, then this was just a dissenting rambling and I hope you have a good hunt.
To be honest it was just musings brought on by a prior post for me, not sure how I feel about this one personally, don't know that it matters.
The point on just upping the tags seems to have more merit the more I think on it, at least the money would go back to the wildlife, and since they're paying for this with their lives, it seems rather relevant, more so than what seems to be subsidizing a business sector.
But outfitters can be good stewards for our sport as well... perhaps a six of one half a dozen of the other situation...
Not to mention, sharing/commenting openly would also mean accepting if others dissent/disagree/feel differently. You sound like you want people to give you what you want, say what you want, or otherwise wish them silent, not like you're for "sharing openly."
The discussion of this law is relevant because you have power if you get to hunt because of the law, you could call up your outfitter and let them know that because you don't agree with said law, you'll not be going with them.
If enough people did this the law may be repealed.
If you do agree, well, then this was just a dissenting rambling and I hope you have a good hunt.
To be honest it was just musings brought on by a prior post for me, not sure how I feel about this one personally, don't know that it matters.
The point on just upping the tags seems to have more merit the more I think on it, at least the money would go back to the wildlife, and since they're paying for this with their lives, it seems rather relevant, more so than what seems to be subsidizing a business sector.
But outfitters can be good stewards for our sport as well... perhaps a six of one half a dozen of the other situation...
That episode was over sb 143 not hb637. Both are garbage outfitters shouldn't get a jump in line for business. Parts of 143 got put into hb 637 second to last day. It's a one time deal and no 40% garuntee.
No doubt!
Troutslayer2
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2010
- Messages
- 756
I'm pretty sure they're just going to give all the tags, both resident and non to the highest bidders in 2022.
