I propose the “Fair opportunity in America’s Outdoors Act”

[CJ19]

Where do you intend to hunt once public land gets sold off? Probably to a Chinese company who won't allow access. What are you going to do then? Hope to hop on a lease? That want you want the West to turn into? That's an idiotic take.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I dont understand why western residents wouldnt simply agree to pay more taxes if federal lands got transfered to the states. Afterall, every resident in these states moved there to take advantage of the wonderous public land opportunities, apparently. You guys dont need to sell the land. It can be your own little slice of state managed paradise.

 

[Archer86]

I think the vast majority of us posting here believe in a few fundamental things, one being access to our vast federal lands for recreational opportunities as well as state management of wildlife via the North American model. However we’re seeing a worrying trend in American hunting, specifically non resident big game hunting opportunities are becoming more and more monetized, greatly benefiting the coffers of state fish and game agencies, subsidizing resident license sales, and giving increased preference to politically connected outfitters. This comes at great detriment to the average American hunter. It might benefit him to a minor degree if he is lucky enough to live in a state that has ample big game opportunities, but it comes at his great cost if he chooses to explore opportunities in the 49 other states.

Along with state management of course comes states rights. Bottom line the federal government has no right to come in and tell a state what to do with its management of wildlife outside the bounds of the ESA. In my mind nor should they. Likewise states should and obviously do give great preference to their residents through both costs of tags and opportunities to hunt. However in many states hunting as a non resident is becoming an onerous task out of reach of many. Most of these opportunities however occur on federal lands that the rest of the country in large part pays for and owns.

That said the federal government provides millions to the states each year through matching funds through the Pittman Robertson Act, the excise tax we pay for through hunting and fishing equipment. These funds are only allocated if states meet certain requirements such as keeping fish and game sales dollars out of the general fund and put back into wildlife management. (If I’m getting any of this wrong, apologies, I’m by no means an expert.)

I propose this be amended to at least give a left lateral limit to all states with their non resident opportunity.

“A state shall not receive Pittman Robertson Funds if they,

1. Charge a non resident more than 10 times the resident cost of a hunting, fishing, or trapping license or tag valid on federal land.

2. Allocate less than 10% of all limited entry tags to non resident hunters or fishermen valid on federal land. If 6-10 tags are allocated for said unit, at least one of those tags shall go to a non resident. If 1-5 tags are allocated, at least one tag must be issued to a nonresident every other season. If tags valid on federal land are sold over the counter to residents, at least 10% of the sale amount for the previous year must be provided to nonresidents.

3. Provides any differing rules or regulations to nonresident hunters, fishermen, or trappers compared to that required of residents while utilizing federal land. (Eliminates nonresident guide requirements on federal land or wilderness areas.)

4. Proves any preference in drawing to outfitted non resident hunters for tags valid on federal land, or allows outfitted hunters to purchase additional points compared non outfitted hunters.

5. If preference or bonus points are utilized in tag drawing process, these points will not cost more than 10 times that of the resident cost, or 10% of the nonresident tag cost, whichever is less.”

Bottom line the idea above is a dumb fireman’s idea of how to tackle the problem after a finger or two of bourbon. I’m sure it’s far from perfect, and I anxiously await it getting torn to bits by people who are way smarter than me. But it’s at least an attempt at tackling an issue that is barreling down the neck of all of us who enjoy hunting all across this great country. Maybe it will start a conversation that refines itself into something good for all of us.

I’m sure some residents of western states can’t wait to angrily type into their keyboards or smartphones after reading this. That’s fine, all I ask is you stop for a moment and consider the big picture. We’re all non residents in 49 other states after all.

Lol...this doesn't make any sense. Non resident hunters don't pay more federal taxes then residents of a state why would you cut funding and hurt the wildlife more? Hunters make up about 15 million in the US how many non hunters do you think that pay more taxes then us hunters do. Probably 3 to 4 times as many and they would like nothing more for us to not be able to hunt on ANY federal land....they are all ready trying to limit hunting as it is.

 

[sneaky]

Its pretty easy for you to say things like this when you pay a fraction of the tax rates a lot of NRs pay. I dont want them sold off at all. I want the states to manage them. I would be very disappointed if they were sold. Unfortunately, people like yourself and many others think that just because people enjoy using federal lands means they are automatically a priority for everyone. Some people have real choices to make financially when it comes to balancing entertainment and life.

I have always been a public land advocate. Its a shame the way things have gone the last few years have resulted in me feeling this way. Maybe i just need to crjnch some numbers. The idea of federal land being sold to some rich prick is not appealling at all. Im not trying to spite any resident of any state, but rather thinking where my money is best spent for me and my family. I dont know i really like western federal land, i might have to reconsider my position.

States can't afford to pay for the management of these lands, and they would be sold off in short order. Where do you live, Utah? Your line of reasoning sounds just like the typical Utah spiel

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

The public land in TX is as it should be everywhere

Wow. Just wow. I've read some real winner logic on here as of late, but this hot take tops them all.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[cuerro viejo]

Pretty typical response from a Texan

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Wait so Texans are the only ones that believe we are Americans living in America and not XYZ Reservation?

Koddos to them aren’t you from Florida? Now that you aren’t in Florida it’s cool to close other Americans out. Got it

 

[CJ19]

States can't afford to pay for the management of these lands, and they would be sold off in short order. Where do you live, Utah? Your line of reasoning sounds just like the typical Utah spiel

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I think the residents there can afford it. I dont think they want to pay for it. Thats a big difference.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Wow. Just wow. I've read some real winner logic on here as of late, but this hot take tops them all.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

On Texas NF it’s public use of $50 FOR ALL Americans to hunt. No restrictions on NR or RES. No preference given

On the draws hunts there is no allocation difference between NR or Res. Also no applications based license required to apply. Just $3 per hunt.

Ignorance at its finest. Classic projection

 

[Sanchez]

Non resident hunters need to play the race card and take this to court.

Montana and Wyoming each have about 1 % African Americans while the USA overall is about 13 %. New laws that discriminate against non resident hunters in favor of resident in these two states clearly have a racial bias. There are Federal Laws against this and we are largely talking about Federal Land so there is plenty of reason for application of Federal Law.

 

[CJ19]

Non resident hunters need to play the race card and take this to court.

Montana and Wyoming each have about 1 % African Americans while the USA overall is about 13 %. New laws that discriminate against non resident hunters in favor of resident in these two states clearly have a racial bias. There are Federal Laws against this and we are largely talking about Federal Land so there is plenty of reason for application of Federal Law.

Very interesting take on this situation.

 

[sneaky]

Well why does it rely so heavily on federal funding, my state doesn’t. Maybe it’s time for some income taxes to be implemented.

Why? Because you think that hunters are the ones providing all the public land funding? How about hikers start paying their fair share? They make up 97% of land use demographics since hunters are about 3% of the population.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Rich M]

And what we're saying is no one cares about your opinion. I'm sure that's tough to hear but it's true.

If applications in the west start going down then things might change, but with the demand at an all time high the states can pretty much do whatever they want because for every one guy that drops out 5 guys will try to grab his spot.

It's supply and demand. It's not complicated. Go ahead and cry to the feds if you want. They'll tell you that states manage their wildlife. End of discussion.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

Supply and demand is true.

Boo-hoo that things have changed and the WY F&G managers can’t seem to do their job correctly and keep some critters at a level or balanced number.

So its the NR’s fault. LoL. The Rs deserve to hunt pristine forests and mtns for record book animals. Bla bla bla.

It would be diff if you-all didnt need the point funds, NR funds, and federal funds to do it. So, basically you are whining that the pony is yours but you need daddy to cover the expenses.

Cant have states with federal funding making their own decisions. You fund it if you own it, if i fund it, i get a say. How real life works w that pony.

So, your challenge is figuring out how to fund it. Thats all thats between you and that utopia you envision. Simply complex solution.

Just like Buzz saying he’s for everyone to use and enjoy our national lands. LoL.

 

[Bighorner]

I hunt as a way of enjoying being outside. The idea that the land is worthless if you cant kill something on it repulsive. I love hunting, but reading some of this comments makes me really question what it is people are getting out of hunting. I was strongly anti NR for a long time. The last few years I've come around to see them in a different light, but this thread really makes question why we are being so generous with tags to folks that don't give a rip the values of the place they are hunting. You are quite literally a guest here and for the most part you are welcomed. I get that its service for dollars, but when I am outside of my local area I atleast try to behave like an adult.

The idea that hunters are the only people on the federal ground is grossly miss informed. You are basing it off a week or two in the fall, at best. The weather has turned and kids are in school. There are far more people in the mountains in august than November.

 

[bsnedeker]

Supply and demand is true.

Boo-hoo that things have changed and the WY F&G managers can’t seem to do their job correctly and keep some critters at a level or balanced number.

So its the NR’s fault. LoL. The Rs deserve to hunt pristine forests and mtns for record book animals. Bla bla bla.

It would be diff if you-all didnt need the point funds, NR funds, and federal funds to do it. So, basically you are whining that the pony is yours but you need daddy to cover the expenses.

Cant have states with federal funding making their own decisions. You fund it if you own it, if i fund it, i get a say. How real life works w that pony.

So, your challenge is figuring out how to fund it. Thats all thats between you and that utopia you envision. Simply complex solution.

Just like Buzz saying he’s for everyone to use and enjoy our national lands. LoL.

Lol...you sit here throwing a pity party for yourself and say I'm whining...hilarious!

I'm not whining at all about NRs. I'm not trying to keep them from hunting. I have no problem with them coming here. All I'm saying is we live here so we set the rules about how many of you get to come here (just like YOUR state does as well, FYI) and if you don't like, oh well, stay home!

 

[cmahoney]

On Texas NF it’s public use of $50 FOR ALL Americans to hunt. No restrictions on NR or RES. No preference given

On the draws hunts there is no allocation difference between NR or Res. Also no applications based license required to apply. Just $3 per hunt.

Ignorance at its finest. Classic projection

Supply and demand


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rich M]

Lol...you sit here throwing a pity party for yourself and say I'm whining...hilarious!

I'm not whining at all about NRs. I'm not trying to keep them from hunting. I have no problem with them coming here. All I'm saying is we live here so we set the rules about how many of you get to come here (just like YOUR state does as well, FYI) and if you don't like, oh well, stay home!

Im not in the game and dont care.

Im in FL. You and i would apply for the same tag and have the same opportunity. We charge a lil more for NR licenses but only have 1 draw. Same for most of the eastern states. Thats what makes the whining foreign to so many folks. A goodly number of the eastern states also do not require a draw to buy a license and hunt.

Our fishing is regulated by area. Offshore stuff is lumped in with a handful of eastern seaboard states and the gulf fishing is involved with the gulf fisheries and those states. Everyone can go and play by the rules.

All you propose is that you are more worthy than others for x or y. You’ll figure it out some day.

 

[Squincher]

No need to sell federal lands. Just no federal funding used for any habitat management since the animals that use that habitat are owned by the state. Let the states fund the management of the habitat their animals use.

 

[Bighorner]

Vote with your wallets, if you dont like wyomings game allocation take those dollars somewhere else. No one has a gun to your head. Whining isn't going to change anything. If an animal has not value if you cant shoot it, then go somewhere where you can I guess.

 

[jimh406]

There is plenty of private land in many Western states. Also, there is state land and block management lands. Maybe we should make it where NRs can only hunt on Federal lands. Fair?

 

[Bighorner]

I think we just make sheep tags 25$ OTC for everyone and we just kill of this struggling species. I mean there worthless if not on someone's wall. We could probably knock out the moose too while we are at it.

 

[CamoPirate]

How about hikers start paying their fair share? They make up 97% of land use demographics since hunters are about 3% of the population.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

This.