Montana Proposed bill to raise Non resident base hunting fees over 500%

[mtwarden]

If a resident license price hike is proposed it would have to be tied to something very (very) tangible to have any chance. The only thing I can think of that would have much of a chance is to take that increase in revenue and cut nonresident licenses.

More studies, more personnel, more anything with the department would stand almost no chance IMHO. Maybe something directly tied to access????

What do nonresident's think of cutting the number of nonresident licenses currently available in exchange for an increase in resident licenses? I think that would stand a chance of passing.

 

[InkedElkSlayer]

I agree that serious MT hunters, like us Roksliders, would be willing to pay more for resident hunting licenses. But I do not think we’re the “majority” in MT.

You have to look at the “majority”, whether they’re the casual hunter or the local degenerate. The average freedom fighter from MT that just cashed his disability check, then loaded up his half rack of Busch Light and trusty ought-six into his Tacoma would freak out if there was a proposal to increase our Sportsman License by $2.

Meanwhile… bill after bill, land swaps and land acquisitions proceed without a blink of an eye. 80% of entire mountain ranges are locked off to exclusive access. Just don’t raise those Res fees and we’ll keep voting you in. Result is pure European elitism, but just don’t raise those fees.

 

[wind gypsy]

If a resident license price hike is proposed it would have to be tied to something very (very) tangible to have any chance. The only thing I can think of that would have much of a chance is to take that increase in revenue and cut nonresident licenses.

More studies, more personnel, more anything with the department would stand almost no chance IMHO. Maybe something directly tied to access????

The proposed NR fee hikes are slated to fund access. NR already fund the bulk of Block management. 'spose resident fees could fund more access.

What do nonresident's think of cutting the number of nonresident licenses currently available in exchange for an increase in resident licenses? I think that would stand a chance of passing.

[Edit to more directly answer your question - no way would standard NR care enough about what Residents pay to give up opportunity. If they had to choose between $100 base hunting fees and a little less opportunity there might be a little more balanced feelings] I'm fine with cutting all of the exemptions from the statutory Big game license #s.. Or at least making them pay full price. Residents are rightfully perturbed that there's supposed to be a cap on big game combo and deer combo licenses but the cutouts result in way more licenses given than the statute is supposed to limit them at. You're either a resident or you're not. MT native/come home to hunt is a goofy thing that i'm not aware of other states doing.

 

[Hnthrdr]

This is fine, like I have said before, dudes are not going to hunt out of state as a last ditch way to get protein on the table. It’s a vacation, paying more and waiting more than the residents should absolutely be expected and respected. If you want the benefits move to said sate and receive them

 

[The Guide]

This is fine, like I have said before, dudes are not going to hunt out of state as a last ditch way to get protein on the table. It’s a vacation, paying more and waiting more than the residents should absolutely be expected and respected. If you want the benefits move to said sate and receive them

Technically, if you just want protein from a wild source most states have some form of OTC or easy to get LE antlerless tags that can be gotten and hunted on DIY public land or private land that allows public entry hunts from the truck. Bring a tent or sleep in your vehicle to keep costs down. Spend a night in town to get a shower and clean up after a kill. Hunting without the trophy aspect doesn't have to be an exceptionally difficult or expensive endeavor.

Jay

 

[CasNed]

Here you go residents, rally together, spend the money and kick those non residents out.

Roughly “google search” 17,000 either sex elk ($1100) and 1,000 cow elk ($300) tags and 23,000 either sex ($800) deer tags and 7,000 doe tags ($100) were sold to non residents. Rough numbers here.

17,000x$1100‎ = $18,700,000.00

1,000x$400 ‎ = $400,000.00

23,000x$800‎ = $18,400,000.00

7,000x$100‎ = $700,000.00

18,700,000+400,000+18,400,000+700,000‎ = $38,200,000

Roughly 200,000 resident elk tags sold

Roughly 150,000 resident deer tags sold

$38,200,000/100,000‎ = $382

Make it voluntary, give the residents 6 months to purchase their tags yearly to see if the revenue can be collected, if it can’t, sell some non resident tags to get to the budget. Residents will have their chance every year to put their money where the complaints are. If 100,000 residents spend roughly $382 on deer / elk combined it should be enough to boot those non residents for the year.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Technically, if you just want protein from a wild source most states have some form of OTC or easy to get LE antlerless tags that can be gotten and hunted on DIY public land or private land that allows public entry hunts from the truck. Bring a tent or sleep in your vehicle to keep costs down. Spend a night in town to get a shower and clean up after a kill. Hunting without the trophy aspect doesn't have to be an exceptionally difficult or expensive endeavor.

Jay

Exactly. And it should be that way. If you want meat and just meat there should be good options, opportunity, and success rates in your home state. Don’t travel half way across the country and act like it should be super cheap and you should be allowed to do it every year. It’s a treat.

 

[ThunderJack49]

Same here. I'm 4x on whatever we have for licenses, permits, and drawings. If they start charging more to residents, you will see residents killing more game. If it costs them $100 for the tag, they will kill every 2 point, raghorn, doe, and cow that is legal. Nothing will get a pass. If you think resident hunters are dicks to nonresident hunters now, just wait until those tags go up. When residents quit traveling in-state to hunt and you nonresident hunters have to float the entire tourism bill for some of these small towns, just wait to see the prices of your lodging and food. Your desire for "equity" will cost everyone.

Jay

This is the behavior I see now from residents and non-residents. I wont be any more or less picky based off of how much I pay as a resident.
The intention is to limit non resident pressure by picking up the financial difference of less non residents. If there is less hunting pressure I think residents would be less likely to shoot any legal animal.
Additionally I believe that there would be less resident hunters who don’t actually care about hunting but just want to kill something for social media and status.

The trick is finding the number to land on. Your four kids prices shouldn’t go up. But yours and mine should.

I have very little faith in any government agency being transparent and effective but I do know that they certainly won’t do anything without securing funding for it. And absolutely won’t give up any funding.

 

[ThunderJack49]

Shut up and take my money.

 

[CorbLand]

I won’t weigh in on whether I think the increase is good or not. I don’t hunt nor do I want to hunt Montana.

I will say that the increase may not improve hunting. It may be what it takes to maintain what currently exists. Government agencies are not immune to inflation. It hits them too and they have to increase pay to keep people. Material to complete projects got more expensive. Fuel, vehicles, tires, wages, etc they still have to pay it just like private sector.

 

[pacoalcracker]

Montana will eventually end up as a cross between Hawaii and Texas.....super expensive housing and land prices and the majority of the good hunting land being held by a handful of wealthy people and if you want to hunt on it, you will pay dearly for it....resident or non-resident. Oh, it's going to take a while..but it's coming. After the raging fires in California, once those thousands and thousands of people get their insurance check they are headed straight to Montana. Many are wealthy too.

 

[wind gypsy]

In lieu of resident fee hikes - I'd much rather Residents (enough to move the needle) advocated for management for the benefit of the resource based on quality data collection.

Instead it seems many are against mandatory harvest reporting as "government overreach" and against any hint of management that doesn't involve uncapped #s of hunters chasing deer and elk Sept-Nov. Gov Gianforte seems to want to pilfer some of the FWP revenue at the same time as his party members are asking for more from another NR fee hike. https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/01/13/conservation-groups-ready-to-defend-marijuana-tax-revenue/

 

[The Guide]

In lieu of resident fee hikes - I'd much rather Residents (enough to move the needle) advocated for management for the benefit of the resource based on quality data collection.

Instead it seems many are against mandatory harvest reporting as "government overreach" and against any hint of management that doesn't involve uncapped #s of hunters chasing deer and elk Sept-Nov. Same politicians wanting NR to pay more are trying to pilfer other existing FWP revenue dollars. https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/01/13/conservation-groups-ready-to-defend-marijuana-tax-revenue/

We already have e-tags so why is it so hard to get information? I understand that they need to have an alternative source for people who don't have the option for an e-tag but why not just make those people have to call in for a validation number to write down on their tag when they kill. All info could be obtained live during the hunting season as animals are harvested. Fill out the animal data while completing your e-tag or getting your validation number. The annual survey calls are a joke. They don't want all your information just deer or just turkey. And did you see any wolves while you were hunting. Nope, never seen a wolf while duck hunting...

Jay

 

[wind gypsy]

We already have e-tags so why is it so hard to get information? I understand that they need to have an alternative source for people who don't have the option for an e-tag but why not just make those people have to call in for a validation number to write down on their tag when they kill. All info could be obtained live during the hunting season as animals are harvested. Fill out the animal data while completing your e-tag or getting your validation number. The annual survey calls are a joke. They don't want all your information just deer or just turkey. And did you see any wolves while you were hunting. Nope, never seen a wolf while duck hunting...

Yes, much of the country has had mandatory harvest reporting for decades. Since 1972 in my home state. It's not hard.

 

[mtwarden]

Well the next thing you know they'll want to put chips in our asses—wait minute I've heard they already do

 

[InkedElkSlayer]

In lieu of resident fee hikes - I'd much rather Residents (enough to move the needle) advocated for management for the benefit of the resource based on quality data collection.

Instead it seems many are against mandatory harvest reporting as "government overreach" and against any hint of management that doesn't involve uncapped #s of hunters chasing deer and elk Sept-Nov. Same politicians wanting NR to pay more are trying to pilfer other existing FWP revenue dollars. https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/01/13/conservation-groups-ready-to-defend-marijuana-tax-revenue/

I’ve posted on this several times before and it was my first comment above.

Mandatory reporting is supported by many, many MT hunters. MTFWP absolutely will not even discuss it. They think 60yrs of shitty data is statistically valid and that they don’t need exact numbers. I guess you could debate that, but we have discussed it numerous times during public meetings.

Right now we have 3 separate efforts that get partial data. 1) Intermittently staffed check stations. 2) Contractors calling you until September of the next year to ask you about grouse and deer… but not elk. 3) The new eTag. Then plug in some numbers from a flight on a shitty overcast day… boom. MT statistics.

 

[Archer86]

Are you creating a distinction because a very small % of the US population happens to be NR hunters in any given western state? If you don't think NR hunting and fishing folks aren't one of the biggest players as in keeping land accessible to the public (via lobbying and conservation orgs) regardless of the taxes they pay, I didisagree.

Sure seams like anytime this stuff comes up the same thing comes up we(NR HUNTERS) pay more taxes so we should get anything we want every year. It's the same thing every year.

The fact is nr hunters make up less then 1 percent of the US tax payers yet they think they should be bowed down to because the nr hunters THINK they fund public land In Everystate in the west.

Suck it up and pay the fees or stay home. None of these fee increases will change my applications in any of the states I am a nr in