USO's next target "Montana"

[Nofear4]

These quotes came out of the Billings Gazette.com website, it's a battle of all the west against USO! And a possible solution in the last paragraph for all to view!

Quote:

The Arizona plaintiffs already have visited Montana officials, Lane said, but they stopped short of saying they would sue. They specifically suggested Montana change the way it issues big game licenses, he said.

U.S. District Judge Robert Broomfield ruled July 13 that by limiting nonresidents to 10 percent of available licenses, Arizona violated the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.

A commercial hunter from New Mexico sued the Arizona Fish and Game Department. He said the state's rules deprived him of an equal opportunity to obtain elk and deer heads and antlers, which can be worth thousands of dollars to collectors, and Broomfield agreed.

Lane said Montana legislators could pass a law next session making it illegal for anyone to sell the hide, head or antlers of a game animal, and that could address the commerce issue of the Arizona case

 

[dwalton]

Montana made a deal with the devil several years ago when they made the price of the non-resident guided licenses dependant upon what the market would bear. With market-based prices (based on demand vs. supply), the Montana case will be easier to win than the Arizona case. USO also has the legal precedent from Arizona on their side

I would just like to add that I have no affliation with USO, nor do I know anyone employed by that outfit, so please no replies running me down, or how I just don't understand. Nevada looks to get hammered by this decision, so I will be effected.

 

[Randy11]

Montana's biggest industry is tourism (which is mainly hunting), so you cant blame the state, who's economy is greatly struggling, for trying to milk their biggest industry. its bad enough that we dont even tax out-of-staters.

 

[Bowpony]

Uso seems to me is a bigger threat to hunting than PETA is. Family hunting and the tradition of hunting is at stake. I encourage all Montana resident hunters get involved now with this issue.

 

[NeMont]

I am curious to see how have the market regulate the price of tags is a bad deal? How else do you determine the value of any other thing in the world? If the price is set by the government then it is either artifically high or low.

Why then are there so many people willing to pay what the state is asking? If using the market to determine the costs of tags is bad thing then it must be bad to use the market to determine the cost of homes, cars, food, clothing, gas, rifles etc., etc.

Why would that be an easier target for the lawyers. I think the only real restrictive thing that Montana does is limit NR tags for some of the highly desireable sheep hunting units. You can always go to a guaranteed tag through an outfitter.

Nemont