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

[sndmn11]

Yeah, no joke on your second paragraph. We pretty easily become spoiled.

Truest statement in this thread!!!!!

I hate to talk about TV like it is real life, but this one stuck with me. A scene in Yellowstone where the Indian guy was in the kitchen with his wife and son in the morning, and she hands him a sack lunch with PBJ and the kid sack lunch with roast beef. Dad asks why he gets PBJ and the wife says son doesn't like it. Dad's response is, "he isn't hungry enough".

 

[bohntr]

Be honest, outside of national parks and monuments, would you drive to another state to go see their public lands?

I would and have!

 

[BuzzH]

Be honest, outside of national parks and monuments, would you drive to another state to go see their public lands?

Absolutely, yes do it all the time.

 

[fwafwow]

I like the idea of proposing something for civil discussion with varying viewpoints. But I don't want to spend too much time thinking this through given that "selfish" was used (on the first page!) to describe the handful of people who had responded without agreeing with the idea.

If part of the proposal is based on Federal funds being used to maintain Federal lands, do folks who pay more in PR taxes, or Federal taxes overall, get a priority in tag allocation under the FOAOA? (I suggest, by the way, a catchier acronym - as the acronym is more important than the words in the title of the Act, as that is key to passage.) Are we going to debate the SALT tax deduction next?

I would have thought there would be more memes by page 6. @Rob5589?

 

[diamond10x]

I would and have!

what types were they?

 

[Rifleman86]

First off thanks for the thoughtful replies thus far.

I suspected a few of those ideas might ruffle some feathers but that wasn’t the intent.

Bottom line the sky isn’t falling just yet. I have tons of nonresident opportunities, and the ones I’ve had have been excellent. Expensive yes, limited compared to a resident absolutely. But well within reach of the “Everyman.”

But I worry about the trend toward increased privatization of wildlife, decreasing opportunities both resident and nonresident as well as increased catering to special interests hoping to profit off that wildlife.

I worry my son won’t have the opportunities that I had. Because of those experiences, it’s made me a huge advocate for the wild places I’ve been and the wildlife that inhabit them. If those experiences aren’t shared, those advocates will cease to exist. That’s the real rub in all of this, and why those wanting nonresident tags to go away, be priced out of reach for all but the very wealthy, or limited to expensive politically connected outfitters are being shortsighted in their viewpoint.

My idea might not be great or even workable. But it’s an idea. My hope is that it might get refined through thoughtful discussion into a better one. All I care about is that we all have access to wildlife, access to places to hunt that wildlife, and great experiences available to as many people as possible for many generations to come.

I hope those that want to call me names, say I’m “retarded” or any such nonsense can step back and realize at the end of the day, we all want the same thing, and we’re going to have to work together to find workable solutions to get there.

 

[bsnedeker]

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.

My tax rate is almost exactly what it was when I lived in Minnesota. It's a bit lower here, but that is more than offset by the vehicle registration fees in this state, so you're just wrong but hey, nice try.

When you hand over public land to states they will sell it off. This has been demonstrated countless times. Do some research.

And EVERYONE needs to make real financial decisions regarding balancing "entertainment" (as you put it), and life. I made the decision to prioritize quality of life over continuing to climb the ladder at my job. This has cost me tens on thousands of dollars over the last few years alone. I'd make that trade again in a heartbeat.

I feel zero sympathy for those of you complaining about tag allocations for this reason. If you really cared about this you could do the same thing I did, but that would require sacrifice. You're not willing to sacrifice anything and yet want tags handed to you regardless.

We don't owe you a single thing. Play by our rules, or stay home. It's pretty simple.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Gobbler36]

Private of course, but plenty of big deer get killed on public. Just like private ranches out west kill big bulls usually. Will gladly open my 20 acres to someone who lets me kill a big bull on their private on an OTC tag.

Never asked for the same opportunity as a resident. Just thought it might be a good idea that we all agree as fellow hunters that collectively allocating a small percentage of opportunities to non residents might benefit all of us as Americans.

It’s a crazy concept but all of us might enjoy hunting out of our home state from time to time.

I don’t even know how to respond to this, pretty much all states have small opportunity for Non resident in regards to most species if not than it’s because the resource can’t sustain the pressure. whitetail states back east and western big game aren’t even close to the same comparison in terms of demand

 

[*zap*]

Fair opportunity....

 

[CJ19]

My tax rate is almost exactly what it was when I lived in Minnesota. It's a bit lower here, but that is more than offset by the vehicle registration fees in this state, so you're just wrong but hey, nice try.

When you hand over public land to states they will sell it off. This has been demonstrated countless times. Do some research.

And EVERYONE needs to make real financial decisions regarding balancing "entertainment" (as you put it), and life. I made the decision to prioritize quality of life over continuing to climb the ladder at my job. This has cost me tens on thousands of dollars over the last few years alone. I'd make that trade again in a heartbeat.

I feel zero sympathy for those of you complaining about tag allocations for this reason. If you really cared about this you could do the same thing I did, but that would require sacrifice. You're not willing to sacrifice anything and yet want tags handed to you regardless.

We don't owe you a single thing. Play by our rules, or stay home. It's pretty simple.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

Thanks, youve been very insightful. I am going to push hard for transfer of BLM lands to the states every chance i get. I know it wont make a difference probably but oh well. I guess ill still just hunt all this fed and state land until then. Probably after if i am lucky enough to see the the transfer occur too. Oh well.

 

[tdhanses]

Owned by the state, managed by the state. Plain and simple.

The wildlife yes, the land most hunt, no.

 

[tdhanses]

My tax rate is almost exactly what it was when I lived in Minnesota. It's a bit lower here, but that is more than offset by the vehicle registration fees in this state, so you're just wrong but hey, nice try.

When you hand over public land to states they will sell it off. This has been demonstrated countless times. Do some research.

And EVERYONE needs to make real financial decisions regarding balancing "entertainment" (as you put it), and life. I made the decision to prioritize quality of life over continuing to climb the ladder at my job. This has cost me tens on thousands of dollars over the last few years alone. I'd make that trade again in a heartbeat.

I feel zero sympathy for those of you complaining about tag allocations for this reason. If you really cared about this you could do the same thing I did, but that would require sacrifice. You're not willing to sacrifice anything and yet want tags handed to you regardless.

We don't owe you a single thing. Play by our rules, or stay home. It's pretty simple.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

What’s your sales tax spend on consumptive goods vs when you lived in MN?

 

[bsnedeker]

What’s your sales tax spend on consumptive goods vs when you lived in MN?

No sales tax in Montana, which is nice. Of course, the price of these items is higher in general because I'm not in a population center, so that's about a wash as well.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[bohntr]

what types were they?

Forest, BLM lands

 

[Bump79]

My tax rate is almost exactly what it was when I lived in Minnesota. It's a bit lower here, but that is more than offset by the vehicle registration fees in this state, so you're just wrong but hey, nice try.

When you hand over public land to states they will sell it off. This has been demonstrated countless times. Do some research.

And EVERYONE needs to make real financial decisions regarding balancing "entertainment" (as you put it), and life. I made the decision to prioritize quality of life over continuing to climb the ladder at my job. This has cost me tens on thousands of dollars over the last few years alone. I'd make that trade again in a heartbeat.

I feel zero sympathy for those of you complaining about tag allocations for this reason. If you really cared about this you could do the same thing I did, but that would require sacrifice. You're not willing to sacrifice anything and yet want tags handed to you regardless.

We don't owe you a single thing. Play by our rules, or stay home. It's pretty simple.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

I feel like there's some cognitive dissidents here. You accurately state that if federal land is given to the states it tends to be privatized. Then you say we don't owe you a thing while you hunt federal land. It seems like it's the other direction right? Does the country owe you this? State land often isn't viable financially so the federal government holds the property. Which I support it staying federal. However, this effectively is subsidizing resident hunters access is it not? If so shouldn't we respect that non-residents are helping support public lands staying in public hands? I'm definitely not saying we do everything he said in the OP. But non-residents are frustrated and I think they have some valid points.

What stake would most non-resident hunters have in keeping our land public if they know they'll never be able to afford a tag? It seems like putting our middle finger up to them is short sided and when we need them to fight for our access they won't forget conversations like this.

I'm most familiar with Montana so I'll use them as an example. They charges $935 for a non-resident archery elk tag and if you're a Montana resident you get a big game combo deer/elk/bear for something like $85. I'm definitely not saying it should be the same or even close. But over 10x more is a little out of line in my opinion.

The frustration I hear most is over pressure. Which is in my view a state management issue. They need to manage quotas better and do their job. Not reduce tags and increase costs necessary but get more creative. At least in Montana all the non-residents are there in archery opening day or whenever Corey Jacobsen says is the best week. So I just avoid that week . Maybe they should assign a week when you get a tag as a non-resident. Idk.

We're all in this together. I don't agree with everything the OP stated but its a fun thought experiment. I don't believe things are perfect the way they are and I hope we can improve on our practices. For the benefit of wildlife and those pursuing them. Really all I was hoping to see here was some valid discussion of points. All you seem to do is attack people and if you're trying to convince us watching this conversation of your opinion... it's not very effective.

 

[5MilesBack]

I contend that there’s just fundamental differences in what someone who chooses to lIve in Ohio prioritizes in their life over what a resident of a western state does.

Yep, while I watched that Laird Hamilton surf documentary that I mentioned earlier, all I could think was how similar it was for him and doing everything he had to do to surf and keep hunting for new surf breaks........as it has been my whole life with elk hunting. It's all about priorities. Even in college, I'd disappear for weeks at a time during hunting seasons. Missed several tests and quizzes over those years, but still graduated with a 3.0.

I can't even count the number of times over the years that I've had recruiters get in touch with me about very high paying job opportunities in other parts of the country. And I've turned them down every single time. It just wasn't worth it to me, to live and work in places far away from elk country. And now that I'm finally ready to move to WY, my wife goes and gets a job here that she enjoys and is a really good paying job. We might still have to buy a house up there, even if we won't be residents for at least 7-10 years, depending on how long she decides to work. But if we weren't already in an elk state, that job wouldn't matter much.

 

[5MilesBack]

Be honest, outside of national parks and monuments, would you drive to another state to go see their public lands?

We do that all the time. Camping, hunting, fishing, hiking, sightseeing......it's all available in most every western state. And since they've implemented the reservation systems for the parks and monuments etc, we generally avoid those now. That's half the reason to go to these places even in other states........to get away from people and the hustle and bustle of life.

 

[Rob5589]

First off thanks for the thoughtful replies thus far.

I suspected a few of those ideas might ruffle some feathers but that wasn’t the intent.

Bottom line the sky isn’t falling just yet. I have tons of nonresident opportunities, and the ones I’ve had have been excellent. Expensive yes, limited compared to a resident absolutely. But well within reach of the “Everyman.”

But I worry about the trend toward increased privatization of wildlife, decreasing opportunities both resident and nonresident as well as increased catering to special interests hoping to profit off that wildlife.

I worry my son won’t have the opportunities that I had. Because of those experiences, it’s made me a huge advocate for the wild places I’ve been and the wildlife that inhabit them. If those experiences aren’t shared, those advocates will cease to exist. That’s the real rub in all of this, and why those wanting nonresident tags to go away, be priced out of reach for all but the very wealthy, or limited to expensive politically connected outfitters are being shortsighted in their viewpoint.

My idea might not be great or even workable. But it’s an idea. My hope is that it might get refined through thoughtful discussion into a better one. All I care about is that we all have access to wildlife, access to places to hunt that wildlife, and great experiences available to as many people as possible for many generations to come.

I hope those that want to call me names, say I’m “retarded” or any such nonsense can step back and realize at the end of the day, we all want the same thing, and we’re going to have to work together to find workable solutions to get there.

I'm right there with you with regards to non resident tags. I've only hunted Idaho and have taken my daughter twice as a junior. We had a great time but, now that she's not a jr, the increased cost is a big (bigger) chunk to manage. Not sure at this point if we'll return together, probably just myself for elk.

But as shitty as that is, we can hunt together here and still have a great time. I also believe that Idaho needs to take care of residents first while also believing that non residents should have at least some voice and consideration.

I also certainly do not want hunting, res or non res, to become a wealthy mans sport. But it's not hard to see the writing on the wall with regards to non resident hunting. I just don't see these changes all over the west as attacks on non residents but as states listening to their ever increasing residents.

I too believe we're "in this together" (can't stand that now) and should fight for hunters regardless if resident or non. Anyone that is in CA like myself knows we're constantly being attacked and can use all the help we can get.

I'm sure I didn't call you any names, not my style, and apologize if I came off like a Richard. Been working days on end so I can be a tired and cranky bastard sometimes

 

[diamond10x]

We do that all the time. Camping, hunting, fishing, hiking, sightseeing......it's all available in most every western state. And since they've implemented the reservation systems for the parks and monuments etc, we generally avoid those now. That's half the reason to go to these places even in other states........to get away from people and the hustle and bustle of life.

Yes you go there to hunt and fish. Like every other non resident. The point I was getting at and asking for honesty ,which I appreciate you coming forth with, is you go there to recreate to do the things that are legal that you love to do. People are arguing well “we’re not taking away your public lands you’re still welcome to come visit them”. Well technically no you didn’t take them away per say but you can’t enjoy all the activities that a certain group gets to even though you’re just as much an owner of it as they are. Make sense? It’s almost like the class field trip gets to go to the petting zoo and the teacher says all the kids with last names A-F don’t get to touch or pet the animals but feel free to enjoy their time.

 

[BuzzH]

Yes you go there to hunt and fish. Like every other non resident. The point I was getting at and asking for honesty ,which I appreciate you coming forth with, is you go there to recreate to do the things that are legal that you love to do. People are arguing well “we’re not taking away your public lands you’re still welcome to come visit them”. Well technically no you didn’t take them away per say but you can’t enjoy all the activities that a certain group gets to even though you’re just as much an owner of it as they are. Make sense? It’s almost like the class field trip gets to go to the petting zoo and the teacher says all the kids with last names A-F don’t get to touch or pet the animals but feel free to enjoy their time.

Again....you're confusing wildlife ownership with land ownership.

You absolutely have equal access to every acre of federal land as anyone else.

You are not afforded the same right to another states wildlife resources and that is codified in federal and state law. Also been upheld in multiple court proceedings.

It's how things work in the United States.