Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting Non-Resident Tag Fees

Different thread got me pondering...


What does your state charge for non resident deer tags (whitetail). Are they OTC or are preference points/draws applicable? Do they whack you for a general hunting license and habitat fund charges as well as the tag itself?


WI is $160 for a gun deer or archery license. They've got a "First Time Buyer" non-res gun deer or archery now for $79.75 (also available to persons that haven't purchased a non res tag for the previous 10 years). Under 12 non res is $7. Non res student I believe is $24. No preference points. No general license required. No extra habitat fee.


Seems compared to other states (looking at you Iowa) and western states WI is practically giving tags away.....


Fair? Not Fair? Discuss.






*Personally I'd like to see WI start to charge non resident purchasers their own state of residence's non-res fees.

For instance - IA preference points are $60.50 (say it takes 5 points or better to have a good chance to draw). Non resident hunting license is $131. Habitat fee is $15. Actual tag is $498 for 1 either sex and and antlerless. SOOOO, IA resident wants a deer license in WI go ahead and buy it OTC - that'll be $946.50, you get one either sex and one anterlerless tag, and you're not eligible to purchase another for 5 years.

Draw for all here, NRs that is in Wyoming.
Big price increase thanks to the outfitters in our state but only for part of the allotment in the NR draw.
I believe a Special draw deer tag in Wyoming will cost $1200 or so in 2024 but we still have regular priced deer licenses that are $373 or so.
Wyoming does offer doe tags for $34 to NRs.

I know if I want to go to Texas and shoot a doe it would cost me $315 or so for NR license but have multiple tags on it.

Here in TX a regular general hunting license is $25 for residents and it is $315 for non-residents. Most the people I know in TX splurge for the resident super combo for $68 which covers all licenses for big game, small game, upland game, freshwater and saltwater fishing as well as archery endorsements etc.... That license is not offered to non-residents.

$115 here and include deer, bear, and turkey.

PA is still $102 for a NR buck and turkey tags. Everything else is extra. I don't think it's changed in years. Ohio has inched up into the $250 range for 1 buck tag. Everything else is extra. NY is $100 for a big/small game license that includes 1 buck and 1 bear tag. Archery, muzzle loader, doe and turkey tags are extra.

Until I see DNR groups actually managing deer herds for the herd and habitat - I kinda feel like NR vs R fees doesn't mean much.

Reality is - the average hunting landowner is probably doing more to maintain the health of deer hunting (all be it super local level but combine them) than the DNR is.

I'm 100% a NR hunter - I do not hunt in WI where I live but hunt MI where I have land. I've always paid the extra, under the idea that somehow I was taking advantage of the work/money being paid in by Resident hunters to manage the herd.

Understand the thought - disagree on the execution. I'm not swooping into the UP to shoot a deer that someone else financed lol. It's my land, my improvements, my agreements with the neighbors that have created the heath of the herd I see and work with.

The DNR takes the money - uses it everywhere else but deer it seems. Which - whatever.

I could be convinced non-res landowner is a different issue.

New Jersey is reciprocal to your state. Last year I spent $1300 on a moose and caribou tag in New Foundland. $315 in Texas to hunt hunt deer, at least in Texas you get a bunch of deer and turkey tags. This year it's elk and deer in New Mexico, elk in Colorado and deer in Texas. It ain't cheap but at least I can afford it.

That's an interesting approach. Seems MI, MN and WI have similar fee structures.

I recalling reading in the MJS that WI gets hunters from all 50 states and a host of foreign countries for the gun deer season – that surprised the hell out of me.

Good find, my friend. And that's just 4 counties - very good counties to be in a tree stand too.

I'd seen it in a CWD write-up that used it as an example of the potential for deer pieces and parts to get scattered to the wind.

I always found it strange that western states changed out of state hunters to hunt on government land. My own state hunting license should be good to hunt on government land anywhere. Just like my drivers license is good to drive on public roads anywhere………Hasbeen.

It doesn't work that way. It's been hashed out countless times here on the fire. Talk about beating a dead horse. Geeze

Does not really matter how many times it’s been discussed. It’s still wrong to charge different prices to people to hunt land owned by all . Hasbeen

In South Carolina a NR license and tag will cost $225 for license and $110 for tags. That will be 4 bucks (2 of them have to be 4points on one side or 12 in minimum spread.
In todays market $335 for 4 deer isn’t too bad. No draw. Over the counter.

GreggH

That makes good sense Mike, you are right

You are a fool. The game animals belong to the individual states. SCOTUS has ruled that way. You have the right to use any federally owned lands in the nation. They are not charging non-residents anything to use the land. You want to go to a national forest? Go. You want to go to BLM land? Go. You wanting to go to National Grasslands? Go. Nobody stopping you and nobody is charging you. But the federal govt doesn't own the game, the people in the individual states do and it is the states that issues hunting licenses. Period.

Alabama NR all species including deer and turkey is $350 for annual license or $216 for a 10 day trip , or $153 for a 3 day license. Me… free

This was added to Public Law 109-13 and signed into law in 2005 or 2006.
Look up Section 6036
Don't like it get the law changed or get hunting stopped on Federal lands, and that would be for all if it happens.


Reported to Senate (04/21/2005)
[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 339 Reported in Senate (RS)]






Calendar No. 85
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 339

To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and
fishing activities.


_______________________________________________________________________


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 9, 2005

Mr. Reid (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska,
Mr. Ensign, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Salazar,
Mr. Craig, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Kyl) introduced the
following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on
the Judiciary

April 21, 2005

Reported by Mr. Specter, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL



To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and
fishing activities.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Reaffirmation of State Regulation of
Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL
SILENCE.

(a) In General.--It is the policy of Congress that it is in the
public interest for each State to continue to regulate the taking for
any purpose of fish and wildlife within its boundaries, including by
means of laws or regulations that differentiate between residents and
nonresidents of such State with respect to the availability of licenses
or permits for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the
kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or the fees
charged in connection with issuance of licenses or permits for hunting
or fishing.
(b) Construction of Congressional Silence.--Silence on the part of
Congress shall not be construed to impose any barrier under clause 3 of
Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as the
``commerce clause'') to the regulation of hunting or fishing by a State
or Indian tribe.

SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed--
(1) to limit the applicability or effect of any Federal law
related to the protection or management of fish or wildlife or
to the regulation of commerce;
(2) to limit the authority of the United States to prohibit
hunting or fishing on any portion of the lands owned by the
United States; or
(3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, supersede or
alter any treaty-reserved right or other right of any Indian
tribe as recognized by any other means, including, but not
limited to, agreements with the United States, Executive
Orders, statutes, and judicial decrees, and by Federal law.

SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED.

For purposes of this Act, the term ``State'' includes the several
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.




Calendar No. 85

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 339

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and
fishing activities.

_______________________________________________________________________

April 21, 2005

Reported without amendment