Neighbors son told us yesterday that there was leftover tags for sale in Montana. So a deer tag is six hundred????? And I can fish, bird hunt. Guess I'll stick to Wyoming

Being they sold out right away - must be a total rip off.

This^.....a bunch of somebodys think its worth it.

Wyo snuck a peek at the outside world....whoa, there, "it aint right."

Add me the "worth it" list.

It's definitely not worth it. You should hunt elsewhere.

Maybe the view from Sunlight Basin has gotten old for him....
There's great hunting right in his own back yard.
I count my blessings, but would enjoy a grouse hunt, upland game hunt up Montana way. Would definitely be worth it.

I forgot to log on until after lunch and missed the deer tags so ended up getting a big game combo for an extra $400. Very likely won't use the elk tag so I realistically paid $1k for a deer tag. Sure wish I'd have put a reminder into my phone.

I hunted Montana for the first time last year and it was worth the price of the tag. I logged on in the morning but hesitated because I'm waiting on Utah credit card hits which should be within the week. Guess I'm headed to Idaho for the first time if I don't draw Utah. Poor me.

It really is a ripoff, people are dicks, tons of private ground, deer aren't rutting, overcrowded, small deer, list goes on and on..... how the phucqe do they sell out???

Last time I checked Wyoming didn't give a discount to us from Missouri

600 is more than a NR pays for an AK moose tag, caribou tag, or three deer tags, or two black bear tags...

Can you hunt those DIY out of your pickup truck?

where it is a ripoff or not depends on how bad you want to hunt in a particular state

Montana NR tag prices are more than a ripoff, they are offensive.

Colorado is much more inclusive to easily offended peoples.

EASILY....

I fail to see how knowing the price up-front for something you may wish to purchase can be deemed a rip-off. I wish I could afford to hunt all other western states; but, I can't afford to. I don't feel they are ripping me off. The times at which I do decide I can afford to hunt other states, I pay the asking price. I'm not being ripped off. Do I wish I could pay less or do it for free? Absolutely. Am I being ripped off? No.

As a resident of the state of Montana and, then of course, the United States, I will say that both are constantly ripping me off based upon their haphazard and negligent use of my exorbitantly high and confiscatory tax rates. That, however, is another discussion.

Yes, you can, some quite easily.

Of course you might actually have to get out of the truck...

Geez. Here we go again. And from Wyoming no less. While I haven't checked WY NR tags lately about 10 years ago I could go there elk hunting for $1200. Of course at the time it was $600 here in MT for a NR.

You are right, my answer of easily was very much incorrect....hell you might even have to get off the damned ATV. LOL

Not a rip off,but all G&F departments,no matter what states wants to maximize the dollars coming in. They will continue to raise prices until sales start to drop off an then find some other way to make money.

In Colorado the CPW is looking at ways to bring in more money also. One such way, started this year, is that tags cannot be turned back in for a refund no later than 30 days before the season opens,except for medical emergencies and few other reasons.Plus there is now a fee to do so.

They also want to do away with the free senior fishing licenses.

Read the 5 year big game big game structure document all the way thru. Towards the end,you will see the prime objective it to make more money.It even overshadows sound big game management practices

That makes those hunts quite a bit more appealing. The added costs of bush planes or power boats or required guides makes some cheaper tags, not so cheap.

Great, now scheming on a caribou hunt....

600 smackers for a Montana deer tag is helluva lot cheaper than paying for mule deer to be transplanted in my home state.

BR, I think a lot of people get somewhat mislead by the large amount of guides/outfits in AK, thinking you need one for any sort of hunting, but it sounds like you already know that you can indeed go chase caribou, black bears, and moose totally solo. I was surprised by the amount of really solid hunting a guy could get in with no bush plane, or boat even, the first time I saw AK.

Tanner

A good hunting pard moved to the 'burbs of Anchorage and has since bemoaned the easy hunting access.

Hunting here is as easy as a GPS and gazetteer and a couple tanks of gas to go with a little boot leather.

I keep busting on him to find a good caribou or moose hunt we can do without a guide or boat.

I guess I will have to push a little harder...

There is enough hunters out there willing to drop 6 bills for the experience that they will keep selling out.

Yup....been hunting as a NR for well over 40 years,continent wide, and the constant drone is "NR Ripoff", add nauseum.

Someone is always complaining about it every year, but everyone ponies up and goes....if they want to hunt bad enough.

And if you don't,stay home or do what your pocket book allows until you can.

But quit bitching because it's never gonna change. Most licenses cost less than a Saturday night bender or a week end tryst with some floozy, or high end dinner with the wife and family

So quit your bitching and go hunting. Life is short.

Have to agree Bob....

moose444,

You could cut down on Montana hunting license costs considerably by moving to Montana. For instance, as a "senior citizen" of Montana, I can buy an annual license with a elk and deer tags, plus fishing and upland bird licenses, for around $60.

But then you'd be living in a state with of the lower average household incomes in the U.S.

I guess I don't care for having to spend money on several licenses that I don't want but are required to pay for to have a deer tag. Oddly I would like to hunt white tails just across the border from my home in Wyoming. Maybe next year I'll just spend the money and enjoy the hunt.

Idaho sets a quota on non-res tags. They cost about $300 for deer and 415 for elk. If the deer tags don't sell out, residents can buy them at the non-res price to use to take a 2d deer.
A non-res tag allows the hunter to use the tag on a bear or wolf, too.

Oh I make due... I throw my $$$ to 3-4 states a year, and some years, like this year I'll even throw some $$ away in Canada. Grin

It's really nice being able to buy a extra buck tag over there!!

Just getting a resident hunting and fishing license and Deer tags in California almost adds to most out of state costs. So quit bitching.

I haven't drawn a resident ND tag in 6 years. So to me its "worth it" to be able to go to another state and hunt.

Holy fudge, a sat night bender for me is a few ounces of Beam. Weekend tryst wouldn't happen other than with the wife so that would be free. And a high end dinner around here is going to cost me at the max 50 bucks.

LOL.

Funny watching how things are different across the US.

And we had a guy here that was going to put in a steak place with some kind of fancy meat, and infrared something grill.
Cost of one steak was to average 50 give or take. I told him he was nuts.

He went tits up BEFORE he opened that one up...

jeff it's an analogy....just making a point. We pay or we can't hunt.

With my free senior hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses the only thing I get to pay for here are drawing applications, tags for brown bear (where needed), muskox, and federal duck stamps.

Seen more than a few complain about it and end up never going. Also seen some of them grow old and wish they had when they were able.

The tag price doesn't pizz me off as much as how those tag prices got to be that high.

Dink

I've been buying non-resident tags for 35 years, sometimes multiple states in the same year. No one forces me, I see the price and I willingly go. I prioritize my funds and plan accordingly. At some point it'll become harder and harder to get out of that recliner or crawl out of your sleeping bag. After that, its pretty much all downhill.
When the day comes that I need a walker to get to the reloading room, I'll look back and say it was a "good hunt".

I always laugh when people complain about tag prices then come to find they own 16 "all-around" rifles

A lot of guys in my neck of the woods that fit this bill. Toss in the new truck every two or three years - same for four wheelers etc.

Last year I paid for 3 stupid CO non-resident fishing licenses so the CDW idiots could feel better about charging more for each tag.

The weather 3rd season doesn't exactly call out for me to stand by the stream even if my elk and deer tags were filled. Since I never fish anyway having 3 stupid license fees charged to me did piss me off.

Bringing home a fat cow and a buck on the other hand did get me to buy 2 more stupid fishing licenses this year. The total cost per pound of game meat was probably less than market value and I got some adventure and lots of exercise hauling the meat off of the hill on my back. All I need is a decent bull this year to make me buy several more stupid fishing licenses.

SKane,

My wife and I went waterfowl hunting in South Dakota a number of years ago with a landowner and some of his friends. We were all talking about hunting one evening (surprise!) and somehow it came up that Eileen and I had just gone on a 14-day African trip a few months before, 10 of it hunting and 4 touring.

One guy asked, "I'd love to do that, but how can you afford something like that?" Well, it turned out one reason he didn't think it was affordable was the brand-new 3/4-ton pickup he was driving, with all the bells and whistles. And after he bought it, his wife demanded an "equal" pickup.

We were driving a slightly older pickup, purchased with 50,000 miles on it for $18,000--and had paid cash for our compact car, which we bought brand-new but on sale at the end of the model year. Just his pickup alone cost more than both our vehicles, and his wife's cost three times as much as our entire price for the safari.

If you live in Cody, why would you want to hunt in MT?
Did you lose your WY hunting privileges? Were you claiming to be a WY resident and were not - then got caught?

Maybe I'm missing this whole hunting thing. I hunt for meat. I could care less about what state it comes from, how big it scores, how many points... I'm not on a quest to hunt in all 50 states, so I hunt where I live. If the opportunity presents itself to hunt elsewhere (AK is on my bucket list), I'll hunt there and pay the NR fees.

PS: I drive a 27 year old P/U and the 4 wheeler is about 15 years old

Montana is a bargain. No other state has the diversity of fishing and hunting opportunities that Montana has. The wild aspect of Alaska is unparalleled and I envy the remoteness that Alaska has, but Montana is more accessible and that makes the outdoors a bit more appealing without having to prepare for an expedition.

The economic base in Montana's fish and game is supported by hunting/fishing license fees. To maintain a good population costs money. Of course there are inefficiencies, but the net effect is a game population that is healthy and more opportunities to hunt and fish on your own or with a guide.

If you think it is expensive to hunt in Montana, you ought to try living here...

I've been to Idaho a few times now. NC to Idaho is a long way. It costs WAY more to get there and back than the license and tag.

I WISH I could hunt a western state for 6 bills!

JB-
Yep - there are a lot of folks like that. I much prefer experiences over "stuff".

For sure!! "Stuff" comes and goes, not experiences..

I look at it differently. Montana doesn't require $50,000 trucks or a safe full of rifles to hunt there. But they do require I buy a $600 deer tag or a $1000 elk combo tag to hunt on land I already paid for.

Even a youth tag is $505.

I live pretty cheap and can afford to pay it but damn...it shouldn't cost me almost $1700 in tags just to take my boys on a public land deer hunt.

Hunting public land should not only be for the wealthy.

Dink

You, uhhh, ever taken a gander at what an Iowa deer tag w/hunting license costs?
Have you paid for any of that land?

Montana owns the animals and you didn't pay Montana anything already as a non-resident. You can come enjoy the public land any time you want, for free.

And if free still isn't good enough, you can move here and earn half what you are getting where you are living now and save yourself $600.00...

Yes I have.

Isn't most of the public land there state owned?

Montana couldn't own the animals with out them living on public.

Your back to saying only the wealthy can hunt wildlife on federal owned public land. If your not wealthy look at the flowers.

It's a lot like saying that paid into social security your entire working career but your retirement is so good that you can't draw your check cause someone else local that did not to work deserves your check.

Dink

Montana owns the animals, regardless of if they are on your own property, somebody else's, the federal land, or state land. It's regardless of how "wealthy" you are. You are not entitled to the animals for cheap, unless you are a resident. Those are the facts.

But if it's on FEDERAL lands, don't they belong to everyone?

Sure, the land does, and nonresidents can use it for free.

Precisely why states set the hunting regulations and not the feds

Even on Federal land that you have ownership, you can't just go on it anywhere and mine it or cut timber without answering to regulations, what gives you any right to hunt game at your leisure?

This right here.

This sums it ALL up!!

When I left my job in PA and moved this way, I was expecting a pay cut of about 25%. Turned out to be 55%. In 2013 in MT, I made the same amount I made in 1999, in PA. I don't know what they are making in PA now, but it is probably 50% more than here.

I am not saying I should get to kill game at leisure. But I should not be priced out of hunting because residents won't fund thier own game and fish department.

When that federal land is on fire it's not state money that puts it's out. When that federal land needs anything it's federal money that pays it.

Except game animals. They live on federal land, are supported by federal money and are sold by the state.

Dink

How much was that lease you had in Montana?

Face it, you will never be happy until you are empowered to change things to your benefit. That won't happen anytime soon and as a resident of the state of Montana, I will continue to appreciate what you don't. Amerca was founded on independence and state's rights. There isn't much left of what it started out to be, thank goodness what little there is left is keeping others with no vested interest in the property of the state of Montana, from exercising some illusion of equality that doesn't even exist...

No I am tired of western states wanting welfare type hand outs. Just look at some of the post in this thread, were poor, we don't make median income, wages aren't good, etc. I hear the same thing from people that get a check on the third of every month that they don't deserve.

Montana resident youth elk and deer tag cost $18. For a non-resident youth it cost $505. That's shameful.

Of course I read the residents were plenty mad when game and fish wanted a 20% increase a few years ago.


Resident don't deserve cheap hunting on federal lands anymore than any other US citizen. I pay my share of taxes just like everyone else.

Dink

Montana's residents won't fund their own Game and Fish department?? That's a pretty wild claim you're making. And I would suspect you're not very knowledgeable about the costs of a Game and Fish Department in a Western State. Go look at an atlas, see the terrain, acrage, the mountains, the lakes and streams, all of which your state has little or none.
Now you're talking just stupid. Special one, you are, and not being complimentary, to expect special consideration from a state that you don't even live in. Talking that kind of attitude wouldn't get you very far in Wyoming or Montana. best you stay back there in Misery.

The last time I checked I believe 80 something percent of Montana game fish budget came from non-resident tag sales.

I would think if less than 20% of their budget comes from residents that would be considered not funding it.

It's been a few years but I bet not much has changed.

Dink

If you lived in a state that had as much demand for NR tags as Montana, Wyoming, or Colorado you'd sing a different tune.

I'm sure the NR tags in Missouri are much cheaper. And there's a good reason for that.

And I'll bet that 20% is a larger number than what Misery's resident's pay for their F&G Dept. You got alot of Obama phone owners in your locale. Check those stats while you're at it.

Missouri has a sales tax for conservation department. They literally have more money than they can spend. They have no need for high tag prices. Residents fund them.

Dink

And your F&G have far less to manage. Hence you look for another state to hunt in. Of course.....

If you look at the number of individual welfare recipients, takers of federal subsidies, health insurance subsidies in your state, other states' individuals who actually pay Federal income tax, are paying for those subsidies. So the sales tax that welfare recipients pay for their purchased goodies, come from us taxpayers.
To a degree then, WE pay for your F&G Dept.

Come out and hunt upland birds with your kids.

Don't you run pointers?

That sounds like a success story to me, so why don't you stay home and hunt elk where you can afford it?

Or trophy mule deer, sheep, bear, antelope, moose, goats and lion .....

Your federal taxes don't do squat for the hunting out here, so don't try that old gripe.

The hunters out here are the ones funding game management and habitat improvement.

OK, here's an argument for you. Game animals belong to everyone, right? So, I'll cut a hole in your fence back there where there is little open public land and hunt on anyone's property, since the game also belongs to me.

Same as every one of these land threads.
Same disgruntled people, same arguments, same envy.

AFAIK most of Montana became part of the US with the Louisiana purchase in 1803, but damn if DINK and all the rest if these whiners didn't pay for it.

"em this was settled some time ago with the Supreme court ruling the wild animals belonging to the people of the state they reside in. Why do you keep beating a dead horse. You are not paying to hunt public land, but to hunt the animals on that public land. In WY you can't hunt wilderness areas without a guide, so there you might have a point, but not in MT.

These threads are fin hilarious......whiny A$$ out of state hunters crying about what they deserve....
Get real Dink.....you sound like a spoiled rich PRICK

Wrong. If you actually looked at anything, rather than repeating what somebody told you, you misinterpreted it. License revenue represents about 2/3 of the total revenue. Of that license revenue, 2/3 is from nonresident fishing and hunting license sales. To help you out, 2/3 of 2/3 is 4/9, or about 45-50% of the total revenue depending on the year.

So your state is coercing a whole bunch of residents and nonresidents who have no interest in wildlife, to subsidize you. Got it.

State Fish and Game don't consider hunting and fishing a sport, to them it is a business and they will charge what the market will bear. If people start going to other states to hunt the price of their license will come down but as long as people pay their prices the higher the license price with increase over time. Quit looking at these State Game organizations as a sport and start looking at them as a business and then you will understand the high cost of hunting there. It is all about revenue and nothing else. Pay the prices or hunt your own state, it is as simple as that.

Idaho is very similar to MT in all of this. Some years ago ID was forced to take on wolf management with all the funds coming out of the fish & game budget. If there was any federal money in the deal, I sure never heard about it. Easterners forced the wolves on us so they can pay the high non-res fees to support them.

Game and Fish departments have been paying their bills on the back of non-residents forever. The only way to change it, is to quit paying for the licenses. That will not happen because people don't mind throwing asinine amounts of money at them for some reason.

It sure has precluded a lot of people from hunting out-of-state, though. Hunting, like everything else it seems, is becoming a sport for the money endowed. I have been on a number of out-of-state hunts, but my ability to do so is definitely waning.

Also, if I want a whole safe full of rifles to play with, so be it. At least it is something tangible and not just throwing money at a vacation in the woods. That should not even be in the conversation about hunting out-of-state.

If I had to make a choice between hunting and buying a new truck, if my truck was old and worn out, it would be a no-brainer. You need a good vehicle to go into remote hunting areas, so as not to be stranded.

Being a resident of Colorado for the last 36 years, I think non-residents should have to pay a lot more for Colorado hunting and fishing tags.

Getting a new car registered in Colorado can cost you close to a $1000.00 a year (for a $40,000.00 car). In Ohio it costs about $30.00 bucks. So residents should get a break on something, since we are sure getting screwed on taxes and fees by the liberal legislators.

JMO

BH63

Too funny.

a vacation in the woods?

I've got to stop working my ass off hunting--vacation is getting back to work...:)

Desired anticipated experiences are a far rarer thing than a collection of tangible goods...we leave everything behind eventually.

The horns on the wall each tell a story back to me...shared with kids and friends, so much the better.

It is too funny.

No wonder it take 75 pages on here to figure out what caliber kills what...no body hunts.

I have talked about coming out and only hunting birds for years. It's something I should I have done years ago when my dogs were in their prime.

Like all boys my sons want to kill big game.

Dink

Prices still need to be raised more to keep out Southern/Eastern trash.

Feds should manage it, it's their lands. I can see why all the westerners love their welfare though.

That's right. I'm going to get my food stamps right now.

I forget, was any federal money used to rebuild after Katrina?

MT is 49th on the list when it comes to wages.


Come live here and then start bitching about the welfare(and the fuucking weather......whiny soft, puzzies anyway).


It's actually quite lower than most other states.

Hell, there's probably more people on welfare in Louisiana than the entire population of Montana.

Other than the rare massive forest fire I think MT is a pretty low maintenance state.

Yeah, it's not like the Corps of Engineers had to spend $15 billion to keep your largest city from flooding.

DINK,

Here's you, on this thread: "The tag price doesn't pizz me off as much as how those tag prices got to be that high."

So would you be happy if Montana rolled the non-resident license price back to, say, 1969?

That's nice.

BUT...

Missouri has 6 million residents to Montana's 1 million.

Montana is 147,000 Square Miles to Missouri's 70,000.

Soooo, Missouri has 5X's the population and less than half of Montana's landmass.

Not to mention Motnana's Big Game species are significantly more diverse and difficult to manage.

And you think yours is an intelligent argument?

Obviously you can see why as you took full advantage of it when you were in AK.

Like wise......

Yep, but last I checked you could buy a burger or stay at a hotel for the same price that someone living their could do.

I know, it's difficult for you to comprehend.

Sure, they didn't ass rape you on tags. I always love how many bitch about wolves being introduced, but people in NYC have as much say over Federal Lands in MT as you do. As it should be.

You can buy a burger or stay in a hotel for the same price out west too.

That's obviously impossible for you to comprehend.

Since the game apparently belongs to the Feds I would like to know where to send the bill for road ditch clean-up and crop damage.

PO Box 1027
Poplar, Montana 59255

Snorting.


Poplar(?), these are Wolf Point deer.

But isn't the sovereign's capital in Poplar?

"If I had to make a choice between hunting and buying a new truck, if my truck was old and worn out, it would be a no-brainer. You need a good vehicle to go into remote hunting areas, so as not to be stranded."

Brilliant.

I don't mind the prices they charge for tags. It's expensive but where else are you going to go to hunt Elk, Mule Deer and Antelope. I have paid the price to Hunt Elk in Colorado for 10 years or more and have never bitched. And will again. My only idea on this is If I have to pay $600 bucks to hunt in Colorado then if people from Colorado or other states come to Missouri to hunt whitetail that they have to pay the same to hunt out deer. We get a lot of out of state deer hunters because our tags are cheap and we have large deer and many of them or we did have till the last few years. And they dont have to draw tags.

I love hunting out west so I will continue to pay what they ask as long as I can afford it. I wont complain.

Not sure if you're basing the ass-raping sentiment on an absolute value or resident-nonresident ratio, but the times they are a changin'. Maybe AK should've started the ass-raping a while ago. Fees are going up if signed by the Gov. Nonresident hunting license is going to $130, deer to $300, and elk to $600. Click on Full Text at this link to see all the new fees.


HB137 increases fees to offset cuts and preserve programs

The Alaska Legislature approved a bill to update certain fees for hunting and fishing licenses for the first time in nearly two decades. It’s been 17 years for nonresidents and 24 years for residents since some fees have been increased.

House Bill 137 is in response to the State’s fiscal situation, and ensures the Dept. of Fish & Game can continue its duties with as little effect on programs as possible under the State’s current revenue climate. Representative Dave Talerico sponsored the bill after sportsmen groups and individuals came forward in support of the idea.

“We really collaborated to tackle this bill, which will go a long way toward making the Department more self-sufficient,” said Talerico, R-Healy. “The idea of raising costs was tough to swallow, initially, but I’m glad we were able to bring this measure forward with the great support of all the user groups and my colleagues here in the Legislature. We recently reduced the ADF&G budget by more than $10 million and I want to make sure that programs that have positive results and increase hunting and fishing opportunities are maintained. HB137 has the benefit of also leveraging 3-to-1 federal matches for each license and tag fee we increase, meaning we can better support the Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation divisions.”

A list of fees up for increase under the bill in its current form is available here.

HB137 passed the House last session. It now heads to the Governor for signature.

You got it. Just as soon as MO gives me an exemption on sales tax because we don't have one in MT.

Dont worry we wont charge you sales tax for your cheap deer tag.

Tag prices are so high because of I161. Which was voted in by the residence of Montana.

It was voted in because of jealousy. A lot of hunters in Montana are jealous of guys that will dedicate time and money to hunt out of state.

I met several guys in eastern Montana that weren't dedicated enough to drive to central or western Montana to hunt elk.

If game and fish pooped on non-residents by raising tag prices that's one thing but this was voted in.

Dink

$600! Man that's a lot of scratch. Surprised all those tags instantly sold out. Thanks for spending all the time and money in MT. Happy to pick up the scraps.

If DINK wanted bad enough to take his boys to Montana to big game hunt, he could have a yard sale or two, or his kids could get summer jobs cutting lawns etc and save up. People make choices, like its been said by others in this thread.
Its based on what their priorities are. So instead of admitting that your priorities didn't include saving for a Montana hunt for your boys, Dink has to throw several kitchen sinks into the discussion.

Awhile back, I had complained that hunting licenses and fees were getting expensive for me in my own state, as now I live on the somewhat fixed income of a senior. I got some excellent feedback on how I view my priorities. If hunting and fly fishing aren't figured into my budget, then it doesn't happen. Got to decide what's necessary and what's important to me. Got to budget for it, or find a way to get the money for it. So I go without some things, and make do with less, and sometimes sell stuff, so I can afford to get creek time with the fly rod, and get in the mountains for some hunting.

LOL, this whole thread is about non-residents whining that they can't hunt Montana for the same price as residents.

It's obvious who's jealous of who.

I can't think of a bigger disaster in the making, than the Feds controlling game populations. What's equitable gets defined at the federal level?

The states can run their tags up to the point of not selling them, to non-residents. What the market will bear. It doesn't have to be "fair".

We all know how "fair" works out, compliments of the current regime.

If non-residents are scrambling to get tags for certain Western hunts, yeah we do know how its working. They want to hunt those states, and are willing to pay for it.
If you want to drive an Escalade, bad enough, you'll be willing to pay for it. Its already been said that, and is a common fact to those of us that live here, people take a huge cut in wages, just to live in these beautiful hunters' paradises, because its a priority in their lives.

The problem with this is that people have become so influenced by government that they have lost touch with ingenuity. Because government always wants more programs to fund, it is always looking for more money sources to fund these projects and rather than live within it's budget, government increases taxes. As a result, people are influenced by the same reasoning and when something they want costs more than they have, it needs to be lower priced or it isn't fair.

I'm not too old to remember that if I wanted to go to the Dairy Queen for an ice cream cone, I needed a dime. If I didn't have a dime, I didn't go. I never thought I should go to the Dairy Queen and tell them their prices were too high and expect a lower priced ice cream cone...

Well, where I grew up, we didn't even have a Dairy Queen.......

I doubt jealousy played a part into the voting as much as the fact that some out of state hunters think just because they buy a tag that they can be grade A @$$holes.
I wish they'd double the price of out of state tags......especially for those like Dink.

Over the 26yrs or so of living in Wyoming, I've had the extreme pleasure of meeting and sharing a coffee with many nonresident hunters in the field. Many offered and did help with pulling game out of the field with me. Folks from all over.

That said, I do have an ex-husband, who lives back East out Dink's way, who shares some of DINK's attitude. I have seen the ex and old in-laws hunt my neck of the woods from time to time. I've seen them tear up the roads like maniacs, the 2 tracks winding down mountains, without care or regard for others. It irked the hell out of me. But having been married to that mentality of a man, and knowing their capacity for booze, I wasn't surprised.

Then, one day, as I was coming down a dirt road, after some hunting, sure enough, there was their vehicles parked near a "Hunter Management Area". And there, was a Game Warden, who had just finished dragging a doe out of a farmer's beet field. And there was the bunch of my ex-husband's family standing by the Game Warden, NOT looking too happy. I surmised that someone had shot that doe on private land. If that is what happened, I wouldn't be surprised. Attitude of entitlement eventually gets people in trouble. Time reveals all. Some hunters think they DESERVE a deer or elk, because they paid all that money for a nonresident tag.

Interesting, I did not see the "EX" or his extended "litter" hunting out my way, last year, or the year before.

Quoted for awesomeness. I have yet to meet a Montanan that is jealous of NR hunters.

I have met quite a few that were tired of outfitters shenanigans, however.

Been watching this thread and have read most of it, I think. What bothers me the most is the entitlement attitude most western residents have about the federal land. They think that their hunting opportunities should be funded by the rest of the the citizens of the United States. They then try to badmouth people that hunt on private land, especially Texans. OK, let the bad mouthing begin. miles

milespatton,



Interesting. I read the whole thread and didn't see this attitude anywhere. Would you quote post, please?

I ain't reading through this whole mess again. You read it, or not. miles

DINK,

Once again, you're FOS.

When I was in high school back in 1969, the non-resident combination license was $150. I can't remember anybody complaining back then, and one of my hunting mentors was an outfitter. Many of his clients brought a kid or two.

Guess what? With inflation, $150 in 1969 is just about $1000.

What did it cost you to hunt Arizona total? Or New Mexico?

I know you have a son a little older than mine have you been taking him out of state every year?

You think as much of your son as I do of mine and there is only one reason you ain't taking him hunting all over the west. It's simply to costly.

Dink

Is not that I can't afford to take my kids out west.

A mule deer buck or any animal standing on federal ground should be worth the same amount of money to any American. No matter what state he is from.

I can't buy just a muledeer tag in Montana. I am forced to buy a fishing license, state lands permit, base camp something or another, etc.

It's kinda like buying a new truck and being told you have to buy a compact car too because it's better for you to drive.

Dink

I'm still pissed how bad Montana gypped me last year!! 1 1/2 days of hunting, hunting ground that anybody can, no trespass fees... Damn place anyhow.






[img]http://i695.photobucket.com/al...-A5DD-3D8DF04187A0_zpsn7x99ifc.jpg[/img]

[img]http://i695.photobucket.com/al...-A5DD-3D8DF04187A0_zpsn7x99ifc.jpg[/img]

I moved out West from the other side of the Mississippi river, back in the mid 80's. I was recently divorced again, and still needed to complete my college education. Culture shock was big, in spite of my great desire to live in the West. It took me a long time to realize, that out West, the common principles of self- sufficiency, common sense, live and let live prevails. Just some observations.

That means simple stuff like don't drive through a flooded stream or pasture or snow bank, or up a bog mud hill unless you must in an emergency and you have the right equipment. You don't go out in 30 below zero weather without the right equipment. If the chain law is in effect, or a road is closed due to a blizzard, you follow the law. You Do Not tresspass private land. Slowly I got some common sense. I still need more, but being from the East, I actually wasn't taught how to survive.
And I didn't have common sense.

Point being, I think sometimes nonresidents misinterpret a big eyed look or comment from Westerners as condescending, when a nonresident is doing or says something truly nonsensical. They don't realize the stupidity of their own actions or words. A Wyomingite usually won't tell you you're gonna get stuck if you try that trail after a heavy soaking rain, because they usually don't meddle in anothers' affairs. But I've seen many residents step up to help someone AFTER they got stuck. Then, a nonresident should expect the big eyed look and accept it.

I didn't see any resident attitude of entitlement when I got here or since. Yes, I've seen pockets of zenaphobia and clannish types. You find that anywhere there's low population and miles of isolation. But live and let live.

What bothers me most is other people thinking I should be concerned about what bothers them most.

I love all this non resident BS. A lot of it is sour grapes.

I have hunted on a lot of private land out west, in various states, mostly unguided and free of charge, and of 40+ years. I paid the "outrageous" non resident fees for license, my transportation and miscellaneous hunt costs.

Just to emphasize, I frequently offered to pay for the trespass privilege...mostly I was refused.

i was not the only one hunting in many cases and MOST of the other guests were non residents.I have spoken with many landowners of large blocks,asking why more resident hunters were not allowed to hunt their property. The answers were almost always the same.

The non residents generally tended to be more respectful and appreciative of the privilege, behaved themselves, followed instructions,closed gates, stayed out of limited areas,kept an eye on the security of the place and , if they had hunted the place a lot, knew who was supposed to be tree and who wasn't and kept the landowner informed. Come ground up and shipping, they pitched in and lent a hand.

The residents, OTOH, felt entitled by citizenship to get hunting privileges for nothing,frequently trespassed and generally made a royal PITA of themselves. I have turned some in for trespassing myself. They feel entitled to hunt and frequently "sneak on", shoot something, and do a fast exit if they don't get caught, i.e....they poach.

Anyone who thinks it's all non residents doing this stuff is naive, stupid, or lying to advance an agenda.

The landowners have to take time out from busy schedules to patrol their property during hunting season and that strategy has to be as well planned on a big spread as the actual hunting......"We're out looking for trespassers!!"

Hint: It isn't ALWAYS the non residents.

I have seen this crap all the time, listened to the wailing of the Residents who don't get to hunt. Many of them are so rude and offensive, the landowners don't watt them on the property.....at all. Many have reputations and are repeat offenders.

So when I heard all this Non resident BS I LMAO. I pay the non resident fees and bask in the fact that i get more privileges from 2500 miles away than the guy who lives 50 miles from my host.

I say you don't want to pay your non resident fees, too bad, Don't hunt. Your choice. You're entitled to nothing in life. Go earn it.

That is strange Bob,being a resident here in CO,for 40+ years I have found the opposite to be true. NR's seem to think since they pay that big tag fee,it entitles them to do all and every thing necessary to fill their tag.

Come out and sit at the top of Loveland Pass 2-3 days before elk season and you will see a steady stream of out of state trucks pulling ATV's.Frequent the areas where they are used and you will see 50%+ going off road where not permitted.Then there is the common theme of "I will take any shot to to kill an elk because I paid for this tag and it wasn't cheap"

I cant begin to count the number of times NR"s come into my camp and want me to pack their elk out with my mules because they didn't figure it would be all that hard to carry it out on their backs. I try to tell them I wouldn't do it for free,but it is illegal for me to charge because I am not an outfitter. So they cuss me out as being a selfish resident and the their friendly 4-5 days preceding this turns sour.

The only land owners who have not let me hunt are the ones that have their land leased to outfitters or private hunting parties. I enjoy being able to hunt over 100,000 acres for antelope and over 10,000 acres for deer,and have done so for 20 years. Yet in the next unit to the east where I hunt antelope, every ranch is leased and the cheapest trespass fee I found was $800.The NR's complain about the high cost of tags,but they are the ones that will hunt those leased ranches for $2000-$7000 + tags depending on the quarry. If they didn't,you would not see all that land tied up in leases. They made that a big business,not the locals

I agree it isn't all NR's,but I think you paint the nasty residents with too wide a brush stroke.Sort of like all the comments we hear about those evil ranchers.

I'm not at all against NR"s. Thru the years,I have had many in my camps where I supplied them with a mule to ride and we packed out their game out to boot. All at no charge. On this forum alone, I have given free advice to many members on where to hunt,how to get there,etc. Most go home with a punched tag.

This year I am in the process of helping one young fellow from Nebraska and another fellow w/son from a different state with hunting locations. In early August,I am meeting the young fellow down near Gunnison and taking him in to show him where to hunt and camp.

saddlesore you live there. I visit. So I won't second guess you...


But I KNOW what i have seen and have relationships with landowners going back 30-40 years.

Like MOST NR hunters, most Resident hunters are ethical and law abiding. But if people think the NR hunters are the only problem they are mistaken IME.

The tag price on the elk combo price was $600ish prior to I161. The residents voted to do away with the outfitter tag because they wanted to be mean to the outfitters.

Tag price now if you apply online is $1057. It's only this price because of residents were/are jealous of outfitters.

The state did not just raise tag prices on non-residents. Residents pooped on us.

If you want to call names I'm all for it but the facts are residents are jealous of a lot of things.

Dink

I don't plan to hunt New Hampshire or Missouri. I don't think anyone from my area of the West is jealous of those that do. You rant that people are jealous of this and that, and folks you've never met, in another state have plotted to deny you a cheap nonresident tag.
I think someone here is projecting.....and Montana residents want to be MEAN to outfitters? A bit outlandish claim don'tcha think?
And why would anyone from Montana consciously poop on you?
You might want to keep that paranoia in check there, with that kitchen sink approach to the so called unfairness of it all.

I think you are "out there flappin'."

Wyo, I wouldn't worry about the posts on residents being jealous. Those posts are just not-very-well-disguised attempts to insult by someone who's left with very little else to say.

Like the one about residents being jealous of NR's who are willing to put in effort to hunt. Some of the most hard-core hunters from this forum are from MT, and I'd love to see dink try to outwork someone like greenhorn, or the others that post here.

That would be downright funny.

JB, per always, is right on the money.



Crux:

One of the better lines in all of this thread, thanks Smoke.

Well that's not fair!

$600 and $1000 for deer and elk respectively? Good lord...
I have no dog in the fight, don't give a [bleep], I love and hunt ID and AK.
But that is expensive.
One can hunt dall sheep or mnt goat in Ak with next of kin for far less.

At least one state is trying to capitalize on it's resource, can't blame MT.

Smokepole, thanks for explaining his less than insightful jealousy comments, to this old bird, me. I'm not worried... honest.

That's not the least of it. When they finally did put in a Dairy Queen, they put it two miles from my house, and it was uphill both ways.

Dink,

I-161 was like any ballot issue. Some people understood the initiative and some didn't. It was supported heavily by sportman's groups that, indeed, have an issue with outfitters and the fact that the state allowed them 5,000 of the 17,000 out of state permits to be guaranteed to outfitters while the rest were open to the lottery.

The supporters of the initiative felt that taking those guaranteed permits would take some of the private land leased to outfitters and open more land to resident hunters. This was indeed a selfish power play to hopefully recover hunting opportunities lost to leases.

It didn't work as far as resident hunting opportunities as that land and the leases did not become available to the rank and file hunting community. Another thing people don't realize is that the outfitting industry doesn't have a totally negative impact on game and hunting opportunities. Like it or not, outfitters have a legitimate business in the state of Montana and they are as responsible to operate in accordance to law as any other business.

Outfitters don't have any more control on the fees for non resident hunters than any other person or group in the state does. The legislature decides those fees gained from input of all those parties that respond to fish and game meetings around the state that are open to the public for review.

That said, I am not an outfitter and I am not in the pocket of the fish and game, mistakes are made and leverage is used from all sides to approve every interested group and their opinions. The department of fish and game manages the wildlife, seasons and fees according to these principles, whether done in accordance to your wishes or not. Residents do contribute to those decisions, but don't make policy.

As far as I am concerned, I am not bothered by non resident hunters or outfitters. I can either hunt on public or private ground the same as anyone, there are only two options. I spend my time making the most of those choices I can and pay accordingly, I would suggest you try the same...

I hunt MT every year as a NR. It cost me with tags about $1750 to hunt for 10 days all up. This assumes a few guys going with me. This is considerably cheaper than a 7 day trip to Cabo with the wife.
I would like to see MT raise the tag price further.
DINK, is just a whiny miserable a-hole. I don't think the state of MT will miss him much.

I'm jealous of that $600 deer license. I paid less than 600 total for these 5 Montana animals combined - even if you throw in the 5 B&C entry submissions. Thanks again for your contributions to Montana and your sniveling whimpers.

DINK,

Montana "residents are jealous of a lot of things"? Like what?

I'm not calling anybody names, just stating very apparent facts about your inability to understand facts:

Federal land is controlled by the Federal government, but with some exceptions the game on it is controlled by the state. If you want to whine and moan about that "injustice," even after the legality was long ago firmly settled in court decisions, then by all means start another lawsuit. But based on past results, it won't go anywhere, despite how much you whine.

For years Montana did NOT raise their non-resident rates in comparison to inflation, and of course nobody bitched because they were getting real deal. Then Montana did raise its rates to a comparable level to fifty years ago, and people like you started whining.

The vast majority of Montana residents don't have any problem with non-residents hunting here. What many residents resented was Montana outfitters leasing considerably more land after they were guaranteed a certain number of tags for their clients--after the outfitter's association promised that wouldn't happen. Residents didn't "want to be mean to the outfitters," because a lot of residents know outfitters, work for outfitters, and are related to outfitters. But they thought the outfitters got a good deal with the license agreement--then grabbed for more. This trend continued for several years, and eventually a majority of residents decided the outfitters had reneged on their part of the deal, so revoked the deal.

You're also ignoring the fact that several years after I-161 passed, non-resident licenses are still selling out, despite costing more. So your claim that passing I-161 caused the price rise is obviously incorrect, since revoking guaranteed outfitter licenses didn't cause demand to drop.

I consider a non-resident license charge in Montana to be a bargain. Great hunting and great residents make it all worthwhile.

I suspect that the Montana residents would be glad to see Dink far, far away.

Steve

I been drawing elk tags every year since I-161. Beats paying $1500

What a ripoff!!! Grin

2012 was the year Montana really laid it to me!! Still mad about that!!


DIY

2011 was yet another horrible year over there for the pard and I , , less than 14 hours apart, evening of the first day, he killed his 180" daybreak of the second morning, DIY ground anyone can hunt. Bastards!!

2010 sucked too, as the pard killed this 185" buck on the first day , DIY public ground, first year in that area....


I can't take in anymore I'm sending my tag back for a refund!!

I've hunted NM and several times in AZ. Always good value. I just flew down and took the AZ non res hunter Ed course and will have 20 elk points next year. What kind of $ do ya think I'll have into that one when I finally draw for a public land hunt?

My son AND daughter are applying out of state this year. Why I don't take them all over the west? Because I live in MONTANA and they can and do hunt a TON here! Duh. We just hunted yesterday and saw deer, elk, moose and bear. How's things in Missouri?

- a jealous MT resident

Yeah, I know. I just wanted to say what I said about dink and his little insults, and that was the best way I could come up with to say it.

So here's an idea for you. If you plan to do this hunt every year why not save $1.64 a day for a whole year to pay for that $600. Surely you piss away $1.64 a day in worse ways than saving for a hunting trip to make memories

A bit more to the cost of a hunt than a tag...

No schit?

Only thing I've read him complaining about is the tag

It SHOULD.

I don't give a flying puck it Montana charges $120,000 per deer tag for NR or don't allow NR to hunt at ALL. I think residents should ALWAYS have first priority.


That said, on FEDERAL LANDS, EVERYONE should have equal opportunity and equal prices.

HOW THE [bleep] IS THAT NOT RIGHT? Better yet, the FEDS shouldn't be controlling ANY lands and let the states have them.

When MONTANA owns ALL the lands, I don't give a flying [bleep] what they do/charge with their lands. I'm all for STATE'S rights.

To recap for the stupid [bleep] that can't comprehend on this thread: FEDERAL LANDS= Equal Opportunity, Equal Price

STATE LANDS= Montana does whatever the [bleep] they want.

As has been mentioned, the game on it is managed by the states and price is an easy (and profitable) way to manage volume.

Do agree that the Feds should get out of managing state lands...

They do but they shouldn't. I don't care about tag prices, all I really care is that the Feds get out of managing state lands.

Today the state manages game, how about tomorrow?

If Dink has his way, the Fed will be managing. And then to be fair, everyone in the city of Chicago who wants to kill something will get a special deal to hunt in Montana to help cope with inequalities.

You know I own land in Michigan, just like the Federal government. But I still don't get to set my tag prices...:)

The difference between ownership/management of the land and the animals on it has been pointed out many times on this thread. It's not my fault you can't wrap your head around the concept. The state pays for and manages the game, not the feds, and that's how it should be.

Your own state has around 600,000 acres of national forest and if I want to hunt big game there it'll cost me over ten times what a resident tag costs. It's the same everywhere, not just out west. Tags out west are just worth more, so they cost more.

All states charge more for NR tags. It's just that some states can and do charge more, because more people want to hunt there. In CO, anyone can buy an over-the-counter elk tag, and most people here want to keep it that way. If non-resident fees were the same as resident fees the public land here would be a disaster, and the elk herd would suffer.

You want to talk about the "fairness" issue of the federal government paying to manage the NF, do a quick comparison of how much money the federal government pays to manage the NF in any western state vs. how much the federal government has poured into your state. And will continue to pour into your state to support your largest city and keep it from flooding, and to support the shipping industry through all the work that goes in in the ports--dredging, levees, and other infrastructure. Louisiana is the #1 maritime state in the nation and it's not the state taxpayers footing the bill for your coastal infrastructure.

Ya might want to keep up on where He lives. miles

Don't know where he lives for sure, but thought it was Louisiana.

If he doesn't live there, the point is still valid.

Tennessee. miles

OK. Is the TVA a state agency?

Does Tennessee have national forests, and will I have to pay a lot more than a resident to hunt there?

Two things are of interest to me in this thread.

First, the argument about owning federal land and therefore being allowed to hunt it. The rules for that are the same for resident and non-resident: with a license you can hunt state/federal land open to hunting, period. Without a hunting or fishing license, residents and non-residents can use the state and federal land for all lawful purposes. There is no difference.

Second, we are all non-residents for 49 other states and are subject to the same rules. In most cases the non-resident licenses are "extremely" expensive compared to resident licenses.

As for license prices, they are all too high by the amount of government waste and bureaucracy contained therein. However, there is a least a little bit of market forces involved in that, they are charging what the market will bare in an attempt to both manage game and maximize revenues. I think if the combination of maximizing revenues while effectively managing the herds could be accomplished by selling one non-resident tag for 1 million dollars, they would do it. On the other hand, if maximizing revenues while effectively managing the herds could/would be accomplished be selling 10 thousand non-resident tags for 2 bucks a piece, they would probably do that.

When you do scrape the money together to come to Montana get ready for the surprise of your trip the first time you say: "What, no sales tax?, Holy crap!".

About those TVA lakes. Really good smallmouth fishing in some, and really good tailwater trout fishing below some.

All built with federal money, during the depression as part of Roosevelt's New Deal. To help the depressed Tennessee Valley.

So, can I fish there for the same price as a resident?

TheBigSky,

As I recall from past threads much like this one, where DINK whined exactly the same way, he hunted deer in Montana not many falls ago, and killed a forkhorn mule deer.

States with no or low sales tax usually have a State Income Tax to go with the Fed Income Tax

We do in MT, which, helps make my point. The non-resident hunters are not subject to that, obviously; nor, are they subject to a sales tax.

Entertaining thread, as expected. My thought is that MT big game tags will be way overpriced at whatever price people quit buying them. Until then, I would expect them to charge what the market will bear.

Dink could buy a $50 NR tag for "whatever" in MT and still be clueless.

Not in Oklahoma!
We got both sales tax and income tax! including sales tax on groceries which should be a crime!


Fretting over non-resident hunting fees seems like a waste of energy.
Some hunting opportunities are just more expensive than others.

The fact they instantly sold out is an indicator of the "value".

No doubt residents should be paying more, but non-residents shouldn't be paying less.

Just how would those Tennessee and Missouri deer licenses fly off the shelf at $600 each...

I just put in for my resident tags.. No fishing, small game, trapping, or bird license.. My total was $319. I bet no one from the mid west or east pays near that for a license..
Also as pointed out earlier.. Living here is expensive.. Not only is the pay less, but the nearest hospital is 100 miles away..
As far as pay, my wife and I both worked in education.. We had college friends in the same fields on the east coast. Our salary combined did not equal one of there's.. There is a price to pay for living here, but there are also some rewards. If you don't like nonresident fees simple, don't hunt here..

And there ya go.....well said!

Im delighted some NR hunters think they are getting screwed and don't apply.


Less competition for tags.

Thanks for posting that. Some folks don't understand that to live in Wyoming, or Montana, people sacrifice by working for lower wages, educators, nurses, most any profession here. Alot of folks take second jobs or work alot of overtime when its available.
And still, in Wyoming, resident licenses aren't exactly cheap.
I'll be paying in licenses, about what you've paid in licenses, when I finally get elk and deer license for this year.

Dink's global gripes about nonresident licenses ultimately may not even be specific to the cost, as he alluded to. MD stated in a post, that Dink did do a past hunt in Montana, and the poor guy got a forkhorn for his efforts, which maybe he felt disappointed. I'm a meat hunter and whatever goes into the freezer legally, is fine with me. And the experience of hunting in the mountains is Golden to me. I do know that a big antlered buck in Wyoming usually takes alot of high altitude hunting, not road hunting. Here ya gotta put in that effort, so..

On a lease!!!

Nice cow pasture picture!

Bet the deer was good eats tho.

See the difference. The effort put in was probably different too.

As I am sure you know, the Feds took over managing game on Fed lands in AK. The SCOTUS suit that would have probably corrected the mess (Katie John) was dropped by then POS Gov Knowles...

That is not to say Knowles is no longer a POS...

You still carrying that picture around in your wallet so people believe you own nice Sako finnlight, Swaro bino's and Leupold scopes?

I fill tags and make no bones about it. I kill every legal deer that comes by in missouri much less anywhere else.

Ranger you still selling gear over at predator masters so you could afford gas for your truck?

Dink

Greenhorn is a killing machine. He puts tons of time and effort into it. The only thing that keeps him from hunting several states a year is cost. And no doubt tag fees play a part in it.

Dink

Yur special...

Small Penis Syndrome

Any man who feels so inadequate about his penis size that he compensates for it by buying ridiculously large/expensive [bleep] he doesn't need. This usually involves buying the biggest truck they can, raising it and putting airplane tires on it. Owning 20 or more large guns, talking about being violent or making threats when they are cowardly, and sleeping with big women to feel adequate, because they lack self esteem. They usually tend to hit, disrespect or yell at women. This may be because women won't/can't sit on their tiny genitals. They also usually have a [bleep] load of kids because they try to wear XL condoms, thus leading to unwanted kids whom they also beat and yell at. Very often seek positions of authority to compensate for inadequacy in general.

Did the people that wrote this know you Dink?

I nearly forgot about that pic. The rancher was probably super pissed at Dink shooting that close to his cows. At least he kept the haystack out of the photo.

Dink, did you pass on some nicer ones earlier in the trip? Musta seen some monsters on a private deer lease in eastern MT.

I don't think you know me. I apply for permits and buy licenses in multiple states every year (5 this year), and have hunted 2-3 states annually on a few occasions. That said, there are obviously things I cannot afford and don't do. It doesn't make them unfair or a "rip-off".

The price per pound of that 2-point muley above is pretty high. But I understand it's about the quality "experience." YMMV.

My household wins so far this year. Sorry Dink. Much more to come no doubt..

DINK

Do you really feel a MT deer tag is a rip off at $600? My last MT tag went unfilled and I had the time of my life. Furthermore you can afford Swarovski binos but complain about tag prices!!
I'd gladly pay the fee but they are sold out already.

It's only money. You run out of time before you run out of money. Hopefully.

I'll Gladly pay $600.00 for a chance to hunt a Mule Deer or Elk. Tag price is a very small part of the cost of the hunt.

I'm glad the Western states let us have the opportunity to hunt there.