Election 2010: Access pits hunters against outfitters

It was last fall, after seven days of hard hunting, that Sydney Tucker Grant shot his first elk. The massive beast sported six points on each side. Grant heard it bugling and waited until the bull broke into the open. He took the shot at 175 yards.

It took him until midnight to make it back to camp in the Lolo National Forest.

“Easy part is pulling the trigger,” Grant said. “The hard part is getting them out of there.”

Grant is from Texas. When a friend who had recently returned from Iraq told Grant he wanted to go hunt elk, the two decided on Montana. They hired an outfitter, who provided horses, food, hay, tents – and all the planning. He also guaranteed them a big game license.

“Well, I’ve never been elk hunting before, and I knew that I needed someone who knew the land and how to pack,” said Grant, who planned the trip for months.

It might not be that easy in the future. An initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot would no longer set aside guaranteed big game licenses for outfitters. If Montana voters approve the initiative, Grant and other nonresident hunters will have to enter a lottery.

I-161, spearheaded by Kurt Kephart of Billings, would take the 5,500 nonresident tags set aside for outfitters and convert them to additional nonresident big game licenses. It would also increase the nonresident big game combination license fee from $628 to $897 and raise the nonresident deer combination licenses from $328 to $527.

The money generated would be used to expand access for all hunters and to improve habitat.

So far the arguments have boiled down to these: Kephart and his supporters hope I-161 will help the state persuade more landowners to open their property to hunting. Outfitters fear it will cripple their industry.

The debate has simmered for years. In 1993 Gov. Marc Racicot appointed a council of hunters, landowners and outfitters to ease friction over the issue. The result was the state’s Block Management Program, which pays landowners to allow hunters on their lands. It also recommended outfitter-sponsored licenses, which outfitters said they needed to ensure their industry’s survival.

I-161 would provide more money for block management while removing a system that supporters say has become unfair and corrupt and limits Montanans’ access to hunting grounds. If all the out-of-state game licenses are sold, the extra funding from I-161 could bring an additional 200 ranches into block management, they say.

Outfitters with steady business can, and do, negotiate exclusive leases with landowners, thereby locking up private hunting grounds or sometimes blocking access to public lands beyond.

Kephart said the state shouldn’t be subsidizing an industry that makes it harder for Montanans to find places to hunt.

“No one owes a person a living in this state,” Kephart said. “We certainly don’t owe outfitters a living.”

He said the measure’s supporters don’t want to see the state turned into a private hunting reserve.

“All the people I’m with are just average working stiffs who enjoy hunting and fishing,” Kephart said. “We don’t want to see (Montana) turn into another Texas.”

Outfitters fought unsuccessfully this summer to keep the measure off the ballot. Now they’re battling to tell their side of the story. They fear the initiative’s passage will not only gut their industry but hurt other tourism businesses that benefit from the money nonresident hunters spend.

With guaranteed licenses in hand, outfitters can not only assure nonresidents a chance to hunt, but they can book clients months in advance. If the initiative passes, nonresidents won’t know until June if they’ve won a license, giving them less time to find an outfitter and plan a trip.

“The thing is, when you hire an outfitter you need to know you’re getting a license – that you’re guaranteed – or the whole thing collapses,” said Rick Adkins of Frenchtown, owner of Wilderness Outfitters.

Joe Cantrell, of Joe Cantrell Outfitting in St. Regis, said that 98 percent of his clients put in for their vacations a year in advance.  His wife, Sue Ellen, said most clients save for years to go on a hunt.

Cameron Mayo, of Absaroka Beartooth Outfitters, said that nonresident hunters spend about $400,000 in Big Timber each year.  All that spending on meals, gear and other services hinges on the guaranteed license.

Outfitting may still exist if I-161 passes – the industry existed before 1992 – but the business would be much less predictable, outfitters said.

“They (out-of-state hunters) can still draw and hire an outfitter,” Mayo conceded.  “But if they choose not to, their chances aren’t as good and they’ll fall into conflict with resident hunters.”

Just this August, the Montana Outfitters and Guides Association filed a lawsuit to have I-161 removed from the ballot. The lawsuit, filed in Lewis and Clark County District Court, alleged that signatures for the ballot initiative were improperly gathered.

“They are trying to paint a picture for this fall’s election, and they’re trying to paint us as unethical,” Kep-hart said.

As Nov. 2 approaches, Montanans aren’t the only ones awaiting the outcome. Texan Sydney Grant hopes to return to Montana someday and hunt the Bob Marshall Wilderness. But Montana is three days of hard driving, and he has to plan his vacations a year in advance.

Would the passage of I-161 affect his choice?

“I think it would because I would rather plan my trip,” Grant said.  “(I) personally prefer that an outfitter got your license because it’s guaranteed.”

— — —

(Community News Service is a project of the University of Montana School of Journalism).