Idaho considering limiting non resident opportunity

[Gobbler36]

The real problems lies within there not being enough states that have enough opportunity too many are in for the preference point monies with the hope of shooting some TV bull, so then we get all those guys coming to CO or ID BAR I don't know anyone that comes from ID to CO to hunt a otc tag.... they would need to be high on acid. Hell if I was a resident in a state where I couldn't get an elk tag but every other year at best I'd be doing the same thing, so I feel like the focus should be animal populations supporting the amount of hunters in those areas and quality of experience next area should be trying to get those residents that live in states where they are more stingy with tags to offer more opportunity for their locals

 

[realunlucky]

The great western Expo was born with the idea of taking non resident tags and using them to raise money for conversation and provide more opportunities for residents. Maybe this is the beginning of end for managing for opportunity in Idaho

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[martin_shooter]

These new proposed rules affect a small amount of hunters. Between the current unlimited control hunts (which this rule targets) it's about 2k non-residents. I have no problem sharing areas with guys that do homework and get it done. What I DO have issue with is outfitters that tell you they:
A) Have a no-compete lease (within federally designated wilderness, and we were both residents)
B) Have to compete against hunters (RESIDENTS) who are taking food off their table
C) Have exclusive water rights (to a spring within federally designated wilderness)

All of the above and other constant harassment has been experienced by my partner and I. This particular outfitter has shot deer out from under us as well as told their hunters we are 'assholes hunting their spot'.

If Idaho limits non-res tags in the 4 units proposed, I can in no way, shape, or form support an outfitter quota. The number of 150" 4 points I have seen harvested by hunters paying the outfitter 6k is astounding. With fewer outfitters encouraging clients to shoot 4 year old deer, herd health would likely improve.

 

[bigdesert10]

The great western Expo was born with the idea of taking non resident tags and using them to raise money for conversation and provide more opportunities for residents. Maybe this is the beginning of end for managing for opportunity in Idaho

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

You can't manage for opportunity at the expense of herd sustainability, though. I, like most Idahoans, am a huge proponent of managing for opportunity rather than quality, but I think doing so also requires a measure of caution and foresight because you're not leaving as much of a margin of error in herd populations, generally speaking.

Regarding Bar's question on Idahoans hunting Colorado, I won't go so far as to say that it doesn't happen, but of all the hunters I know in Idaho, I can't think of a single one that has ever mentioned to me that they have hunted Colorado. Likewise, I don't see a lot of Colorado plates around here during hunting season. Simple fact is that when people have ample opportunity close to home, they have little to no reason to roam, aside from chasing an animal that is not present in their state.

My ideal would be to have all western states manage their game for more opportunity for their residents. Then the majority of NR hunting would be for species unavailable in one's home state. Hunt ungulates at home and then come hunt wolves, lions, and black bear (as well as grizzly soon enough) in Idaho if you can't get them in your own state.

Some will inevitably bring up the financial aspect of reducing NR hunting in this scenario, and it's a good question. I haven't done a cost-benefit analysis on it but we survived before the NR boom, I'm sure we could figure it out somehow.

 

[vanish]

I'm confused on the specifics of the proposal due to so much hearsay going around and don't want to weigh in until I know the specifics.

From what I first heard, the proposal would cap the number of NR hunters in the zone, UNLESS they hired an outfitter. I can't tell if that's the truth.

 

[Gobbler36]

When you subtract revenue but want to keep the budget unchanged you have a few options...

1. Increase resident hunter recruitment which will require many more hunters afield than current mix for same revenue

2. Increase cost to non-residents and hope you don't dramatically impact (reduce) demand

3. Charge residents more

Pick your poison.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd gladly quadruple my tag fee in order to alleviate pressure

 

[realunlucky]

I'd gladly quadruple my tag fee in order to alleviate pressure

And someone would happily pay 8x times to eliminate your presence there.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[dreamingbig]

I don't doubt it and so would i but put it to a vote and I doubt it would be passed by the majority.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[orionthehunter1]

aren't a lot of the non resident tags bought by residents as second deer and elk tags?

 

[idelkslayer]

I'm confused on the specifics of the proposal due to so much hearsay going around and don't want to weigh in until I know the specifics.

From what I first heard, the proposal would cap the number of NR hunters in the zone, UNLESS they hired an outfitter. I can't tell if that's the truth.

It will cap the number of NR in these units.

By creating a quota IDFG is required to set aside "outfitter allocation" tags in every zone with a tag quota. There will still be a majority of NR tags that do NOT require the NR to hire an outfitter. The outfitter tags exist to guarantee their business now that their potential clientele is reduced. I personally don't like it but that's the way it is. After a certain date, all unsold outfitter tags become available to the general public.

These units are getting overcrowded. 70% of hunters in these units are NR. IDFG plans to reduce hunting pressure by capping NR tag numbers and reducing the ratio of NR: residents to be more in line with the standard 10% that exists in all other controlled hunts in the state.

Sent from my 5046G using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

The great western Expo was born with the idea of taking non resident tags and using them to raise money for conversation and provide more opportunities for residents. Maybe this is the beginning of end for managing for opportunity in Idaho

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

You mean, it was started with the idea of taking NR tags and raising money for Don Peay and SFW.

 

[realunlucky]

You mean, it was started with the idea of taking NR tags and raising money for Don Peay and SFW.

Sold to the sportsman of Utah. I'm just saying the impacts could be far worse than the problem that originally promotes the plan to change

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

"The zone that I've hunted the last 30yrs has been literally mobbed by out of state hunters,it's bad.If you're after a quality hunting experience I think some areas need a quota to alleviate the pressure."

^^^^This.
"Pandering to special interest" crap notwithstanding, thank God that ID F&G might have some brains.
I'm tired of seeing Washington, Utah, Cali hunters in my back acreage, and everywhere else.
Last years Central ID hunt was a disaster due to Washington hunters, thankfully we came home to my place and killed a couple of bucks that the lazy-assed Spokane-based hunters couldn't road kill.
Sorry, no love lost here. I'm a land owner and I'M sick of seeing these guys trespass and drive our roads and kill our game. I don't want their money, I'll pay more for a res tag.
Go home.

Says the man who has a Dall sheep up as his avatar. Alaska said you can suck it too. Buy more optics and go birding.

 

[sneaky]

I've found many of the replies on this thread insightful, some delirious with complications, and some downright ignorant. The bottom line is that every other state bordering Idaho has greatly reduced hunter opportunity. Idaho cannot be a haven for everyone that doesn't draw in their own state, yet it is quickly becoming just that. We welcome the non-resident crowd that spurs the local economies statewide and helps feed the families of our outfitters and their hard working employees. But it has become time to draw a line and turn some away just as your states (except Colorado) have done to us more and more so. Non-resident hunting is supposed to be a reciprocal relationship, but it is becoming anything but. I urge everyone that migrates to Idaho each spring and fall to partake of our natural resources to ask themselves why the same pleasure cannot be had in your state of residence. Is it the residents and governing bodies of Idaho that have been tasked with providing unlimited opportunity on resources that are extremely finite? No, it is not. Your own state governments and connected aristocrats have done you a disservice, and it is time to change that, but only the majority can come together and conquer the powerful establishments.
Quit lamenting Idaho's proposal that is far yet from law, and go to work in your own states proving that hunting is more than just a pastime, but something you will fight for as hard as you can. Only then will you truly enjoy the experience of harvesting an animal for the table after a hard fought battle to restore rights that were historically granted to those passed on. Be assertive, be aggressive and good luck.

The establishment you speak of, is creeping into Idaho from Utah, and has the tacit consent of YOUR elected legislators. Careful what you wish for because Idaho and its unlimited opportunities is running out of time.

 

[sneaky]

A lot of western states have quotas and severely cap the nonresident tags, it stands to reason most end up hunting idaho. I would like to see more tag quotas (regardless of residency) myself, but I also like being able to buy a left over nonresident tag as a second deer and elk tag.......

So, have your cake and eat it too? Interesting post, as limiting NR numbers is going to pretty much do away with leftover tags.

 

[Rizzy]

So, have your cake and eat it too? Interesting post, as limiting NR numbers is going to pretty much do away with leftover tags.

Thats exactly my concern over this issue assuming we are in fact proposing to limit tag numbers.....

 

[sneaky]

Thats exactly my concern over this issue assuming we are in fact proposing to limit tag numbers.....

I know this thread was started on controlled hunt numbers, but I know a lot of residents but 2nd deer and elk tags from the NR pool ood tags. 15,500 deer tags, and 12,815 elk tags. There really isn't a huge number of NR hunters in Idaho compared to resident numbers, which in 2015 they sold 330,000 hunting and fishing licenses to residents. Maybe limiting controlled hunt tag numbers will have an effect, but limiting already relatively low NR numbers seems more smoke and mirrors. I spent two weeks in the elk woods last year and saw two people in the woods, and one at the trailhead. Saw a lot of road "hunters" though....

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

Has IDF&G posted up numbers of second tags purchased by residents? That would give a better indication of true NR participation.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[TheTone]

These new proposed rules affect a small amount of hunters. Between the current unlimited control hunts (which this rule targets) it's about 2k non-residents. I have no problem sharing areas with guys that do homework and get it done. What I DO have issue with is outfitters that tell you they:
A) Have a no-compete lease (within federally designated wilderness, and we were both residents)
B) Have to compete against hunters (RESIDENTS) who are taking food off their table
C) Have exclusive water rights (to a spring within federally designated wilderness)

All of the above and other constant harassment has been experienced by my partner and I. This particular outfitter has shot deer out from under us as well as told their hunters we are 'assholes hunting their spot'.

If Idaho limits non-res tags in the 4 units proposed, I can in no way, shape, or form support an outfitter quota. The number of 150" 4 points I have seen harvested by hunters paying the outfitter 6k is astounding. With fewer outfitters encouraging clients to shoot 4 year old deer, herd health would likely improve.

I hope you've been complaining to the outfitters and guides licensing board about the harassment from the outfitter. I think the board does a good job protecting their own interests, but at the same time the behavior needs documented.

 

[sneaky]

In 2015 Idaho sold 101k elk tags and 168k deer tags. Looks like NR tags make up 10-15% of totals. That's in line with most other states

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk