PART II #6 



NO- IN JUST A VERY FEW SHORT YEARS, IT WOULD SHORTEN OUR SEASON FROM WHAT 

 IT IS TODAY, DOWN TO ONE OR TWO WEEKS. AND "TIME SPENT AFIELD" IS THE NUMBER 

 ONE REASON REAL ARCHERS HUNT. A CROSSBOW IS TO DEADLY ACCURATE AT TO GREAT 

 A DISTANCE TO EVER BE EVEN CONSIDERED IN ARCHERY SEASON. 



PART II #8-A 



I HOPE THE "EITHER/OR" SEASON WOULD BE ACROSS THE BOARD, EITHER HUNT EVERYTHING 

 WITH A RIFLE OR BOW BUT NOT BOTH. IT COULD BE SPLIT, HUNTING DEER WITH A BOW 

 AND ELK WITH A RIFEL OR VICE-VERSA, BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE NEAR AS EFFECTIVE. 

 IN FAVOR-REASONS: [A] TO REDUCE ARCHERY HUNTERS BY MAYBE 80%. 



[B] TO REDUCE RIFLE HUNTERS BY MAYBE 20%. 



[C] IF 80% OF THE ARCHERS QUIT, THE GAME LOSS WOULD DROP BY MAYBE 90-95% 

 BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT QUIT REALLY SHOULDN'T BE HUNTING WITH A BOW ANYHOW. 

 THE PEOPLE THAT STAY IN DON'T TAKE LONG SHOTS, ROAD HUNT, MEAT OR GLORY HUNT, 

 AND FOR THE MOST PART THEY KNOW WHAT THERE DOING, THEREFORE HUNTER FOR HUNTER 

 THEY LOSE MUCH LESS GAME, PERCENT WISE OR ANY OTHER WAY. 



[D] GAME LOSS, WEATHER BY ARCHERY, RIFLE, ROAD KILLS, POACHING, OR THE WEATHER 

 WILL TO SOME DEGREE ALWAYS BE WITH US NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, OR LAWS WE PASS. 

 THERE NUMBERS, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER WILL ALWAYS HAVE TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, AND 

 THAT MEANS IN WITH OR HARVEST NUMBERS. SO BY FAR THE GREATEST BENIFIT 

 [ALTHOUGH HIDDEN] IS THE GREAT REDUCTION OF ARCHERY LOSSES ON OUR BIG BULLS 



BY MAYBE AS MUCH AS 85-90% OF WHAT IT IS NOW. I TRULY BELIVE IF THE 

 NUMBER OF LOST BIG BULLS CAN'T BE LOWERED AND LOWERED DRAMATICALLY AS FAST 

 AS POSSIBLE, THEN WE WILL IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE LOSE OUR BULGEL SEASON. 

 [D] WHEN YOUR SURVEY IS COMPLETE AND THE NUMBERS TALLIED, I THINK YOU 

 WILL FIND THAT SOMEWHERE IN THE AREA OF 85-90% OF THE ARCHERY PERMIT HOLDERS 

 ANSWERED THE QUESTION OF THE EITHER/OR SEASON AS OPPOSED. OF THE FEW PEOPLE 

 I TALKED TO ALL WAS OPPOSED UNTIL WE TALKED IN DEPTH, THEN THEY CHANGE THERE 

 MIND TO, IN FAVOR. I THINK YOU COULD GO INTO A ROOM WITH A HUNDRED PEOPLE 

 THAT WAS OPPOSED AND EXPLAIN THE BENEFITS IN DEPTH, AND I'LL BET 80% OR MORE 

 WOULD THEN CHANGE THERE MIND TO IN FAVOR. A QUESTION LIKE THIS MOST PEOPLE 

 WILL ANSWER SELFISHLY AT FIRST, BUT IF SOMEONE EXPLAINS IT THOROUGHLY, MOST 

 PEOPLE WILL CHANGE THERE MIND. 



PART II-#13- I THINK MISSOULA DOES WHAT THEY CAN, BUT AT SOME HIGHER LEVEL 



THEY DON'T CARE AT ALL ABOUT THE QUALITY OF HUNTING, WEATHER ARCHERY OR RIFLE. 



THE ONE AND ONLY GUIDE TO THERE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS IS MONEY. 



MONEY IS THE ONLY REASON THERE IS 17,000 NON-RESIDENT PERMITS IN MONTANA, 



IT IS NOT BECAUSE IT'S BEST FOR THE GAME OR FOR THE HUNTERS. THEY SAY THAT 



THEY HAVE TO KEEP THE GUIDES & OUTFITTERS HAPPY, THAT'S JUST AN EXCUSE. 



WHY NOT CUT THE 17,000 PERMITS IN HALF TO 8,500 AND CHARGE DOUBLE. MAKE 



GUIDES MANDATORY FOR NON-RESIDENTS. THE GUIDES WOULD GET MORE CLIENTS, THE 



STATE WOULD LOSE NO MONEY, AND THE HUNTING WOULD BE MUCH LESS CROWDED. 



WILE WERE ON THE SUBJECT, I CAN'T SEE HOW THE FISH & GAME CAN GIVE THERE ALL, 



TO THE MANAGEMENT OF OUR GAME, AND AT THE SAME TIME CARE FOR ALL OUR PARK'S. ■ 





