Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Bugle Article on Resident/Non-resident fees and tags

Yup, I'd love to see the state regulation that tells landowners how many residents and nonresidents can hunt on their property. Should be a good read.

I think the simple act of getting out of bed in the morning brings the stupid out in some.

Nothing "stupid" about the series of questions. actually, because they'll be coming ton you jurisdiction, soon enough. Burying your head in the sand doesn't help the process, in your regard.. Legislation happens.

Maybe states could auction non resident tags. List the number available (say 1,000), we all submit a bid, and the top 1,000 bidders each score a tag.

I'm sure residents would support something like that, for obvious reasons -- financially and otherwise.

Am I reading right that you think there will be legislation telling a LO how many NR's can hunt there deeded ground?

Considering how things are projected on the national level and how states are ever more starving for assistance, I see a day. I mean, thirty years ago when I started in politics it was conceivable. Nowadays it's almost certain.

Ok, you're right.

And your point???

That you think the Gov. can/will tell a LO who he can or can not have on his property might just be the craziest thing I've read.

Dink's head will probably explode when he reads that now the Gov. will limit him on private ground as well as public.

Then your point is ill advised.

not sure why some think allowing separating the state and federal land is gonna wind up saving them money on tags cause if that happens then your gonna need a new agency/expand an existing for game management on federal land so the license prices are going to go up......though now they will be controlled by DC where the anti-hunters out number the hunters...

All you need to do is look to Alaska and see how that's turned out over the last thirty years since federal oversight and consequential court proceedings took control --- Not good for the visiting non-resident hunter.

I highly recommend that consumptive users become active on a localized level and to make it personally by BEING INVOLVED and to appoint a lead that can carry the cry to Washington DC. I had to do it alone. That's the hard way and God forbid you find yourself in that position [though IT IS coming]. Become active now!!!!

.gov already limits how many people can be on private land by controlling how many tags are issued in each unit.

If states wanted to charge $5,000 for muledeer tag on private land thats between land owners and their .gov. If private land owners could not get any hunters it's easy enough for them to vote .gov into and out of office until they get to the price land owners want.

Dink

WOW, you really don't get it, do you?

Unless enrolled in some sort of state program, the LO can chose to let every tag holder or none on the property.

That will not change.

Classic Dink
How much did you pay that rancher to slay his forkies again?

Your exactly right but...There are ranches in places like Oregon that have good numbers of sheep and charge big trespass fees to hunt them. I bet they sure would like to see more than one tag issued for the unit so they could charge more hunters. There are also ranches in Wyoming that sure wish more of hunters could draw antelope tags so they could charge more hunters. What is the limiting factor? Oh yeah .gov.

Dink

just for [bleep] and giggles, I googled Missouri's resident v. non-resident license fees.

Turns out they only have one *real* big game species (white-tails) and one "kinda" BG species (turkeys):

white-tail
res: $17
non-res $225

turkey

res: $17
non-res $195. for a turkey mind you !

both running 17x non-res surcharge, which seems to be in line with other states.

considering you get about 8-10# off a turkey ($24/pound), charging the equivalent for an elk would be $8,000 per tag.

Dink,

Montana's rates per pound are a frickin' bargain compared to your own state's fees

Been reading this whole thread with interest. Not saying anything because what other states do with the land and game that belongs to them and their people it ain't my place to say.

One thing I do see mentioned time after time though that does trouble me is land locking public land. I mean yeah, there is public ground but short of a helicopter there ain't no way you can get to it. That doesn't seem right to me at all.

As I said I can only comment on what I know so I know this. In Texas you can not land lock a place now. Used to be you could but not now. If it is private you must provide access to the landowner. Doesn't have to be the easiest route but they must have access.

If it is state land you must grant public access, again doesn't have to be the easiest way but access must be there.

How does this apply to you boys out west?

Read Randy's piece and been following this thread. I understand the issues but don't find the cost of out of state tags all that unreasonable. I objected to the way Montana used to handle their landowner deer/elk tags but voted with my feet and hunted other States. There are elk outside of Montana.

As to the cost, if a guy can afford to spend $1500, he can hunt elk out west. He'll need a couple buddies, some basic camping equipment, and alot of boot leather on the ground. I do it every year in Colorado and manage to kill elk. I recently put together an estimated cost to hunt both Colorado and Wyoming in 2014 as DIY for 2. We'd spend most/all of October hunting. Total cost: $3172 each. We have all the equipment but the point being a little planning and sharing with friends makes for a very affordable hunt. In the end, don't look at the absolute cost of the tag, look at the return on investment of the memories. I guarantee the memories will outweigh the cost of a tag. Especially after your hunting days are over.

I can understand those that see the perceived discrepancy in resident/non-resident tag costs and the claim of the animals belonging to citizens of the US. I don't think they are seeing the whole picture - it is the State that do the day-day managing of the wildlife. It is the citizens of that state that fund/support the State agencies. So in actuality, the actual resident tag cost is alot more than the price of the tag. Non-residents don't pay the state taxes that manage their out of state wildlife therefore I'd guesstimate the effective cost is very similar.

Secondly, I can accept the cost difference very simply - if I lived there I wouldn't want a bunch of out-of-staters over running my hunting areas. I applied that logic to every state I've lived in.

At the end of the day, the free market condition is way better than government controlled anything - even with all its perceived inequities. When was the last time the government ran something and it turned out exactly as it was intended? I'd submit never. I'll take free market and simply spend my money on what I can afford.

The only access to public land ,at least in CO, is if a public road goes along or thru private land to get to it. IF it is completely surrounded by private land, there is no access.