Non-resident hunting, the controversy

[Buster]

I have no problem with non-residents having limited tags and increased fees to hunt out of state but I would like to do away with WY wilderness, AK guide, and Canada's laws that don't allow non-residents to hunt without a guide. It is pretty lame that Canada does not reciprocate the open hunting laws allowed by the US.

Come live up here, the queen isn't so bad. Problem solved.

 

[ozyclint]

i spent 6 months in BC, canada and found the regulations to be draconian. even other canadians from a different province can't hunt there without hiring a guide let alone an 'alien' like me. beautiful place but the restrictions are a turn off. i hope to do a hosted hunt in alberta for bear someday. DIY is my thing and it's a shame that some of the best parts of the north american continent aren't available to DIY'ers or sometimes not at all. they won't get my tourist $

 

[Buster]

Seriously though, I don't really see it as fair, hence why I started the thread.

 

[5MilesBack]

Seriously though, I don't really see it as fair, hence why I started the thread.

Is it supposed to be "fair"? Nothing else in life is "fair", why should hunting be?

And the required guide or outfitter thing........that always bugs me. It certainly isn't the state's responsibility to make sure every visitor makes it back home safely, so call it what it is........an economic enhancement law for local businesses (guides and outfitters). Are visitors required to hire a guide or outfitter to hike in said state wilderness?

 

[Coyote Commander]

Do you think the Federal Lands should be manged different that then state land?

I dont want the federalis managing when to change out the TP roll let alone game management.

 

[Buster]

Is it supposed to be "fair"? Nothing else in life is "fair", why should hunting be?

And the required guide or outfitter thing........that always bugs me. It certainly isn't the state's responsibility to make sure every visitor makes it back home safely, so call it what it is........an economic enhancement law for local businesses (guides and outfitters). Are visitors required to hire a guide or outfitter to hike in said state wilderness?

And if people are still willing to pay for it, I guess there is money to be made. Unfortunately, that mentality runs the risk of the have nots being excluded from many hunting opportunities.

 

[Coyote Commander]

Im all for non-resident hunting as long as the resource can handle it.

Im also all for limiting non-residents in favor of offering more/better opportunities for residents. Id rather see 100% of residents get their tags than even one non-resident get a tag.

Every time this topic comes up I hear people talk about their "right" to hunt. Im sorry, you have no "right" to hunt, there is nothing guaranteeing you the "right" to hunt anywhere. A non-resident certainly has no hunting "rights" in another state, no more than I have hunting "rights" in your state. Hunting in another state is a privilege.

Unfortunatly, in this day and age, money talks, and often the resource suffers. I personally think MT does a pretty decent job managing its draw units, but I think they stack entirely to many general tags on top of it all. Hunting the elk rut last year thats all we saw were non-residents, we only talked to two other resident hunters in a week, but ID'd over 100 non-resident camps. And ive always said, they dont have to be killing critters to be affecting the hunt quality. And as more and more private ground gets locked up by corporations or outfitters, the public land situation only gets more crowded.

My biggest pet peeve is with asshat NR's. Its mostly city boys, they get out in the wide open spaces and its like they loose their damn mind and think they can do whatever they want! I grew up in waterfowl country and had to put up with NR waterfowlers a LOT (most from a two state area), and I tell you what, im just now getting to the point where I can trust someone from those states again. The crap they pulled just made a guy livid.

 

[Coyote Commander]

Seriously though, I don't really see it as fair, hence why I started the thread.

Its not fair, im gonna get Obama on this. Mr. Fairness.









Life isnt fair. If hunting Canada was that important to me, id move there. Thats the GREAT thing. If you dont like where you are on this continent, you are FREE to move wherever you want and PURSUE happiness!

 

[5MilesBack]

And if people are still willing to pay for it, I guess there is money to be made. Unfortunately, that mentality runs the risk of the have nots being excluded from many hunting opportunities.

Yes, and the "have nots" are also excluded from many vacation destinations and cruises and luxury auto's and mansions, etc, etc, etc. Why is hunting any different? The problem here is.......all the "have nots" HAD an equal chance at success and not being a "have not" just as much as the "haves".

 

[Buster]

You guys are making me feel a lot better about putting in for hunts down there.

 

[jmez]

Canada is a different country. They should not reciprocate, nor should we with them. Why should they consider foreigners when drafting their use laws? I don't care what they do. Unless you are a true communist then there are going to be have and have nots. The have's will always have more opportunity in anything that they do. Fact of life. It isn't changing and hunting/fishing isn't immune.

As it currently sits, I don't see it as excluding anyone. A NR elk tag in Co is $600. That is approximately 4 months cell phone bill or cable bill. Take your pick. You want a smart phone or to hunt elk? You want both and can't afford it, improve your situation. The difference between want and need has been lost on my generation, (gen x). We are used to being given what we want an need. When we left home that attitude followed. Wait and work for nothing, be handed what we want.

 

[DaveC]

...all the "have nots" HAD an equal chance at success and not being a "have not" just as much as the "haves".

Perilously close to political debate here, but I'd submit that your statement here is so incorrect as to be ridiculous.

There's also a question of degree. 2-400 bucks to hunt (for example) deer in cool area which happens to be out of state is doable, if annoying. Saving 2-4 grand for that once-in-a-lifetime sheep, goat, or bison tag? Sure. These things are within the reach of most, provided a bit of discipline. 20k for a sheep hunt in AK or the NWT? Not so much. What bugs me is that the same trip could be done DIY for 2k all-in save tag fees.

 

[boom]

i love how people move about the country hunting game.

take turkey for example..i love the guys going about taking various subspecies..in the process they are funding the giant economy by helping money move about. in addition..passing on and gathering local traditions and ideas..

i wish the odds were a tad more fair, but whatever..i dont make the rules..i cant vote in some of the states i love to hunt in.

 

[MattB]

Canada is a different country. They should not reciprocate, nor should we with them. Why should they consider foreigners when drafting their use laws? I don't care what they do. Unless you are a true communist then there are going to be have and have nots. The have's will always have more opportunity in anything that they do. Fact of life. It isn't changing and hunting/fishing isn't immune.

We do it with social services, why shouldn't they do it with game?

Seriously though: their game, their rules. In the U.S. the game is effectively a ward of the state to be managed by state government for the benefit of its residents (I presume Canadian provinces are structured similarly). States generally allocate some level of tags for non-resident as the higher NR tag prices subsidize tag costs for residents and in many states the influx of non-residents provides economic stimulus that wouldn't otherwise occur with all-resident hunters. I just hope that the folks who set the regulation appreciate we are all non-residents everywhere except our home state/province, and make some consideration of equity when drawing the lines.

 

[flyinsquirel]

This is a complicated topic for sure, and we're doing a pretty good job of keeping it civil so far. Just to understand the rationale here; would those of you who support the current fee structure for NR hunters also support similar pricing structures for other NR activity? IE: NR pay 10x the cost of what residents pay to get into a state or national park?

 

[Coyote Commander]

This is a complicated topic for sure, and we're doing a pretty good job of keeping it civil so far. Just to understand the rationale here; would those of you who support the current fee structure for NR hunters also support similar pricing structures for other NR activity? IE: NR pay 10x the cost of what residents pay to get into a state or national park?

When you enter a park what are you consuming?

Key difference is, when youre hunting, your taking (harvesting, whatever you want to call it) a resource from the state. A resource that may or may not be easily replaced. A resource who's management is largely funded by the taxpayers of the state.


Actually, you should be thankful that a state park charges the same entrance fee for NR's as it does residents. A state park is funded largely by the resident taxpayers of the state.

 

[Buster]

Here's an interesting example from Saskatchewan. Non-residents that are still Canadian citizens have a season at the end of the resident season (late november), that allows them to hunt without a resident or guide. Thousands of people from BC, Alberta, and presumably Manitoba and Ontario, would converge on Saskatchewan for the opportunity. I am not sure what the exact fees were, but I know they were more than what residents pay, but not more than a couple hundred dollars. (This hunt was becoming so popular that they had to implement a non-resident draw for it). Pretty generous to non-resident Canadians.

On the flip side, any species that they have a draw for as a resident hunter (mule deer is the big example), there is no non-resident hunting of what-so-ever. No guided hunts, no hunter hosting. I don't blame Saskatchewan residents for not lobbying to let non-residents hunt mule deer though. Have you seen some of the bucks coming out of that province?!

 

[16Bore]

Think hard about the (general) effort and funds a non-resident has to put into a hunt vs. the local bubba in his pickup truck. A guy doing that kinda work is most likely not going to be a schlub. I'd bet a dollar to a donut that local yocals cause more havoc.

 

[BRobertson]

I think this is all about numbers. There are too many people, therefore too many hunters to be given hunting privileges in any one particular area. Especially
the more desirable areas!!! So basically it is limited by seasons, bag limits, tag numbers, etc.
The available tags are limited by various methods, drawings, registration, and cost. Some people can afford them, and some can't. Fact of life!!!

I grew up in Florida. I hated it, I hate hot weather, I hate flat country, I hate snakes, I hate .......

I knew that I belonged in Alaska!! I read everything I could find about Alaska, Yukon, NWT, etc., from a young age!!!!
Within a few days of finishing high school I got in my Jeep and headed North.
I did not have anything, barely enough gas money, my bow, ( Bear 65lb takedown recurve), marginal camp gear,
I did not have family here to make it easy for me, and I had no job lined up. Just a strong desire to live a certain lifestyle, in a country that I knew I was made for!!!
I won't bore you with all the details , but I don't have a lot to show for the last 45 years, except a lot of amazing memories, and the absolute knowledge
that I did the right thing for me!! I moved here primarily for the hunting, and if you want something enough you will make the necessary sacrifices!!!

I have met so many folks through the years , (mostly when I was down south flying game surveys in Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, etc) that would say
" I always wanted to go to Alaska, but when I got out of college, I got married, started having kids, etc, etc, yeh, yeh, yeh!!! ""
Same old excuses, bottom line they did not want it badly enough!!!

Bob

By the way, I have been back to Florida exactly once in the last 45 years to visit family!!!

 

[sneaky]

When you enter a park what are you consuming?

Key difference is, when youre hunting, your taking (harvesting, whatever you want to call it) a resource from the state. A resource that may or may not be easily replaced. A resource who's management is largely funded by the taxpayers of the state.


Actually, you should be thankful that a state park charges the same entrance fee for NR's as it does residents. A state park is funded largely by the resident taxpayers of the state.

What are the odds of success for most NR hunters, 10-15%? You are saying that they are "taking" or "consuming" a finite resource of the state when in reality just a small percentage of them are. Most NR hunters are simply donating money to the state through higher tag fees and spending money in small towns that depend on them coming to make a decent living. I would say they are "giving" far more than they are "taking". It could even be said that locals who poach do far more damage to the resource than NR's who buy licenses and all do. As for the park statement, you are consuming services, putting wear on trails and infrastructure just to name a couple of things. Same argument could be applied to National Parks, we all pay taxes so why should we have to pay an entrance fee at all? Because we are using the services of the ones we do decide to visit. It would probably be more fair to level out the NR license fees and just charge a trophy fee to those who are successful. That might work, it might not.