"Keeping the public on public lands & waters"
Donate via PayPal |
Initiative 161 - Outfitter Guaranteed LicensesQualifies for November BallotBallot initiative I-161 would reduce pressures to commercialize wildlife and wildlife access by eliminating the guaranteed outfitter sponsored nonresident licenses. It was announced in late July that about 26,972 signatures and 37 qualified house districts were tallied - well above the minimum required. It will now appear on the November ballot. PLWA believes a number of the road closures encountered in recent years were related to outfitters or landowners with outfitter connections, who use sequestered public land and guaranteed licenses to the detriment of public land access. PLWA is not opposed to legitimate outfitter functions, but believes that when outfitters, rather than FWP, become the managers of game populations and access to game, the situation needs to be corrected . Although fees from the sale of these guaranteed licensees fund a portion of Block Management access programs, I-161 would actually increase funding by adjusting the non-resident fee structure. Big outside money will probably come in an attempt to defeat the initiative: ********************************************************************************************************************* PLWA PRESIDENT JOHN GIBSON SPEAKS : We support of Initiative 161 which would take away the ability of outfitters to sponsor several thousand non residence hunters with a guaranteed big game license. Strictly from the standpoint of access to public land, I oppose the Outfitter Sponsored Licenses because I am aware of a number of roads to public land that were closed by outfitters and landowners seeking to control public land and wildlife for profit. The guaranteed income from these licenses obviously provide incentive and funds to carry out many of these closures. But there are a number of other valid reason why these licenses should go into the regular draw like all the other non residences big game hunters. (1- 161 does not reduce the number of non-resident big game licenses nor does it reduce the funding for Block Management) Here are some other consequences of the guaranteed client base these licenses provide…,. Large ranches can operate in a manner much the same as programs such as Ranching for Wildlife do in states such as Utah, Colorado and New Mexico where tags and licenses are issued by landowners. The landowner can recruit on line or at big sport shows and, thru an outfitter, guarantee a licenses to all those willing to pay up to $14,000 for a bull elk.. The same is true for ranches that have been subdivided with lots being sold to non resident hunters. These lot owners can all be guaranteed a license any year they chose to hunt in Montana. It’s also true for hunt clubs from out of state that lease or buy a ranch in Montana for hunting purposes. An outfitter can sponsor any and all club members who wish to hunt on a given year. Under the OSL program our wildlife is for sale and money, rather than a fair and equal draw, is dictating who can hunt Montana’s biggest and best wild game animals. A great example of public wildlife for sale is shown at a website, www.arnaudoutfitting.com I, for one, do not believe this is the way our wildlife should be managed. JOHN GIBSON - PRESIDENT ********************************************************************************************************************* VOTER INFO GUIDE AS IT WILL APPEAR ON THE BALLOT: Please vote YES on I-161. In Montana, hunting is a family value. We treasure our wildlife, our hunting heritage, and Montana’s proud traditions that offer equitable public hunting opportunities. Our wildlife is a public resource whose protection and lawful harvest is the responsibility of Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks. As the trustee of our wildlife, and as required by state law, FWP must manage wildlife primarily for the benefit of Montana residents. Hunting by fair chase is the only acceptable means of harvesting wildlife, and we reject all forms of wildlife privatization. It is our intent that Montana’s wildlife remains wild, free ranging, and under continued public domain. I-161 seeks to modify three elements of current law: 1.) Abolish guaranteed hunting licenses for nonresidents using an outfitter 2.) Raise nonresident deer and elk hunting license fees 3.) Increase and stabilize revenue for hunting access and habitat programs Historically, Montana had a quality outfitting industry which provided legitimate services, equipment, and knowledge to their clients. Since the inception of Outfitter Sponsored Licenses (OSL’s) those traditional service oriented operations have diminished in number, replaced by operations that promote exclusive access and high kill rates rather than fair chase hunting. Outfitter Sponsored Licenses (OSL’s) facilitate the commercialization and privatization of wildlife. This privatization is unacceptable and a violation of the public trust. I-161 eliminates OSL’s, and allocates all non-resident big game licenses through an equitable drawing. I-161 does not eliminate outfitting or guiding services. Any licensed resident or non-resident hunter may still choose to use an outfitter. Providing a stable and increased funding source for public access is at the heart of I-161. I-161 will increase fees for nonresident deer and elk licenses. This fee increase will leave Montana’s nonresident licenses priced second lowest among Western states for comparable licenses. And, according to state fiscal analysts, I-161 will raise significant additional revenue for access programs as well as habitat preservation and restoration, a sharp contrast to the loss of public access revenue reported through OSL sales in 2009 and again in 2010. Montana residents will not see any fee increases as a result of I-161. In 1896 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled “Control of wildlife is to be exercised as a trust for the benefit of all people, and not for the government, as distinct from the people, or for the benefit of private individuals as distinguished from the public” The outfitter sponsored license conflicts with this ruling. Vote yes for increased public access. Vote yes for I-161. 161 is good for small business: A comprehensive study showed non-guided hunters spend multiples more in communities versus guided hunters. • I-161 will provide more funding for public access according to the fiscal analyst. Guaranteeing clients to outfitters who provide exclusive leased access will end, thus reducing pressure on landowners to exclude general public hunting. • I-161 is good for Fish Wildlife & Parks revenues. OSL revenues have declined from 6.1 to 4.6 million dollars from 2008 to 2009. A decline exceeding 1 million dollars is expected for 2010. I-161 provides more licenses to the existing drawing which consistently sells out. Non-resident fees will still be second lowest in western states for comparable licenses. • Montana hunters won’t compete with more non-residents. Availability of non-resident licenses will not increase. • Allocation of non-resident hunting licenses is not a private property right. Landowners using OSL in their business shows this system has created a dangerous commercialization of wildlife. • Opposition to I-161 comes from a select group of organizations and individuals with strong ties to the outfitting industry. • Support for I-161 is broad among Montana resident hunters because they are frustrated with the actions of Outfitters using guaranteed licenses to privatize wildlife held in the public trust that should be available to all hunters…. Montana hunters want to preserve fairness in their hunting heritage. PLEASE VOTE YES ON I-161 This website is paid for by the Public Land/ Water Access Association, Bernie Lea Treasurer, Postbox 80987, Billings , MT 59108 I-
|  Beneficiary of the Public Trust |
Citizen Initiative 161 is sponsored by Montana resident hunters, tired of battling negative impacts caused by the current law guaranteeing Montana hunting outfitters 7,800 non-resident clients. These impacts include the loss of hunting access and the privatization of our wildlife.
Sixteenmile Creek Acquisition Project Needs Support and Comment. Two members of Public Land/Water Access Assoc.
