Originally Posted by
beech18
Please re read my post, I said its like comparing apples to oranges between the 2 states. not apples to apples. But why is a elk in NV worth more than in MT. Nevada has some great bulls (Ive drew there tag before so I can personally relate and debate that subject as well), Montana has great hunting as well. Muley brought up a great point, and thats why you will not likely see resident prices go up, Montana ranks 49th per capita. The money lost generated from the outfitter tags has to come from somewhere....
As said prior I voted against 161 and all this non sense. But it passed and this is what we all have to work with.
in my opinion the biggest reason 161 passed, jelous people. People were jelous of the outfitter and jelous of people leasing lands up. Salukipv1, your jelous of the resident hunter paying a lesser dollar. People need to stop being jelous of each other. Life isnt fair. You want the price of a resident hunter, move to a western state. Live, work, and become a resident of another state. Why do you live where you do now? Must have a reason why you live where you do?
I think you are right about a lot Beech, but I honestly think I-161 passed because of the ballot language. The line "increase funding for wildlife habitat" on the ballot was a killer. The folks I have run into were appalled when they realized what they had voted for. It needs to be revisited.
The iniative process is a form of government that needs to go. Our founding fathers established a consitutional republic and rejected the notion of democracy. A states wildlife should not be controlled by a voting public, with 30 second sound bites for special interest leading the charge.