State Fish and Game Budgets

[realunlucky]

Sounds like a court case uso vs Arizona or the recent new mexico case. I live in Utah so I hunt out of state every year. It upsets me the way Utah treats it's resident sportman in favor of all mighty dollar. I no longer hunt montana because I feel they have over valued their tags now I send my money elsewhere. Apparently they didn't notice because it's yet to change. I agree there is a point where most will say whoa that's to steep but there will always be someone who will throw their cash down

 

[tipsntails7]

As I expected, there have been quite a diverse group of responses. Based on the responses, I'm guessing most of the responses in favor of the NR gouging don't apply in many if any other states than their residence. Seriously, is it fair that a few fortunate hunters of all means draw a limited number of high quality (name species) tags in say, Arizona?

As I have stated before, I have no problem paying more and not having the same opportunity as the residents of state "x", but I don't believe it is fair that the nonresidents pay an unfair share of the hunting fees. As always, just my opinion.

What your saying doesn't make sense. People that live their live their. Wether that means taxes to the state, money put back into the local economy. It's a commodity that's is not available everywhere so it's charged as such. People in hawaii don't want to pay 8 dollars a gallon for milk but they have to. What would the benefit be to charge less to NR then states currently do?

 

[jmez]

Was mainly referencing non residents and people on websites like this. A guy that was truly hunting to feed his family isn't on websites like these debating the merits of $800 backpacks and $500 lightweight sleeping bags. On that front, I don't know anyone that hunts out of pure need. I'm sure they exist but it would be a very,very, small number.

Even if hunting around home, game isn't that much cheaper than buying meat.

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

I have a job that is temperamental with fickle economy so I can say at times I do hunt out of need to feed my family through the winter. I could however sell the $800 bow, $600 rifle, etc... to accomplish the same task guaranteed. When I am in need I hunt my home state with cheap tags.

All that being said, I have no problem with NR paying higher fees. Residents contribute to the local economy year round and should therefore be afforded special privileges. I do think some of these are way out of hand though.
CO $585 NR elk tag = OK
WY $1100 NR elk tag = not OK

I agree that hikers/cyclist/campers/bird watchers/etc... should share some cost as well though not nearly as heavy as they are largely just observing and not taking from the resource.

 

[Coyote Commander]

Supply and demand.

Everyone and their brother wants to come west and hunt.

 

[Coyote Commander]

I wouldn't put much stock in anything Hagener writes either.

I notice he even managed to sneak in some wolf defense in that article.

Biggest threat to Montana hunting/trapping heritage is guys like Hagener. Doing their best to ruin it.

 

[Lukem]

Food for thought for those advocating nonconsumptive users paying into state wildlife budgets: pennies in the pot means a seat at the table. Hunters would be drastically outnumbered in this scheme. Where do you think that ends? Be very careful what you do to chase those funding dollars.

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

Food for thought for those advocating nonconsumptive users paying into state wildlife budgets: pennies in the pot means a seat at the table. Hunters would be drastically outnumbered in this scheme. Where do you think that ends? Be very careful what you do to chase those funding dollars.

A very valid point. I might have to rethink my position on that.

 

[_Nick_]

A very valid point. I might have to rethink my position on that.

Agreed. Though many of the decisions that affect hunters are made at the legislative or ballot-measure level (e.g. in CA). Everyone already has a seat at those tables.

 

[Shrek]

I think the tag pricing for NR is getting pretty high and the market will rein it in eventually. I started heading west to hunt partially because the cost to lease land in South Georgia became too high. I must not be the only one because Rayonier is offering to rebate half of your license cost when you lease from them. I hadn't been following it closely but I was told there are 88 unleased Rayonier tracks and plenty of small farms coming open. I have to wonder if it doesn't do long term damage as people just quit hunting altogether when the costs get too high. for states like Montana , Idaho , and Wyoming the wolves and grizzlies are a death spiral. Higher costs to manage them and fewer tags to sell will drive their tags higher and while many NR hunters will choose to go to states with herds unmolested by wolves and not have to be looking over thier shoulder for grizzlies. If Colorada didn't have their high cost and short seasons I'd probably have gone there and not have to worry about grizzlies and if the wolves had run the fewer elk out of the area I'm hunting. I'm going to Montana again but I may switch next year depending on what I see this year. I'm hoping lease rates start to fall locally so I can afford to have a local lease at which point a shorter western hunt and Colorado becomes more attractive. If I'm weighing theses options then there are plenty of others doing the same.

 

[wapitibob]

Was mainly referencing non residents and people on websites like this. A guy that was truly hunting to feed his family isn't on websites like these debating the merits of $800 backpacks and $500 lightweight sleeping bags. On that front, I don't know anyone that hunts out of pure need. I'm sure they exist but it would be a very,very, small number.

Even if hunting around home, game isn't that much cheaper than buying meat.

A cpl years ago I asked a game cop if he had ever caught a poacher that actually needed it to feed his family. He told me "I'd help him load it up if that was the case. The last guy I busted was driving a brand new Dodge diesel."

 

[Lukem]

Agreed. Though many of the decisions that affect hunters are made at the legislative or ballot-measure level (e.g. in CA). Everyone already has a seat at those tables.

Totally agree, but regulations are one thing, how that additional money is spent is another. That additional money may not go to hunting/wildlife related issues. If you tax ATV's to fund the program, expect to create ATV parks, for example.

 

[Coyote Commander]

Food for thought for those advocating nonconsumptive users paying into state wildlife budgets: pennies in the pot means a seat at the table. Hunters would be drastically outnumbered in this scheme. Where do you think that ends? Be very careful what you do to chase those funding dollars.

Hmmm.

You mean like the proposed $20 "wolf management" stamp they want here in MT that is not associated with any hunting license?

Just one more way to give the wolf huggers a bigger voice.