Strange Observation in Idaho

[dreamingbig]

We saw a ton of Washington plates on over on the East Side of Idaho as well. Wondered why they would drive all the way across state.

Maybe because it is public land owned by all of us and as long as they pay the very high priced put of state fees then they get to choose where they want to hunt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[paleraider]

I guess California could charge Idaho residents exorbitant rates to visit our beachs because Idaho doesn't have many, or Dodger stadium, Disneyland, Legoland, Seaworld, Hearst Castle, I could go all night here. To camp at our local county campgrounds, I pay the same as an international tourist.

You can charge what ever you want, yet those things are not wildlife so it isn't a valid comparison. I am stating charge more for a hunting license not a camping permit.

 

[colonel00]

Kansas has mule deer way out west and a very small herd of like 100 elk as part of a special restoration program. Missouri doesn't have mule deer but does have some elk. Are they on your list too? Is it just deer and elk? What about bears?

Also, if someone lives in a state that has a thriving deer or elk population, are they penalized too or just those who are from states that have numbers that aren't on par?

 

[paleraider]

You also would punish AZ residents like crazy but not NM residents even though AZ gives a higher percentage of tags to nonresidents like you. Your proposal completely lacks an understanding of the facts, pale. Perhaps it could start a conversation about a new way to go about things, but you haven't thought it through even a little bit.

You mean my offhand response to a thread in on a hunting forum was not a fully vetted, fact checked, detailed proposal for implementation and discussion by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game? Well sir you have me there....

My original point was that our hunters from neighboring states are showing up in greater number. This, as my theory stated, was due to the mismanagement of their wildlife in their home states. My original idea was to charge a surtax to those residents as a means of raising awareness to this issue. Then things got sideways when someone said how would you do it. So some form of quid pro qou came to mind and AZ is the poster child for managing for quality over quantity which essentially ensures very few people hunt there.

Regardless people are all bent out of shape that they may have to pay more for something than someone else, this is how the world has always worked. Also people are attempting to equate paying a surtax on a hunting license to keeping them off of public property. By all means come and partake of the public land. Partake of the hunting, just please pay more if you are from WA/OR/CA, and now AZ as they seem to be leading the whiny brigade.

As a side note the discussion of restoring Elk is interesting. Many states back east are in fact doing that. The issue I see there is the herds are very young so hunting opportunities are very low. Those states, for now, are not managing for quality and reduced access like AZ is. Please note I was born and raised in AZ so it isn't like I have it out for them.

 

[paleraider]

Kansas has mule deer way out west and a very small herd of like 100 elk as part of a special restoration program. Missouri doesn't have mule deer but does have some elk. Are they on your list too? Is it just deer and elk? What about bears?

Also, if someone lives in a state that has a thriving deer or elk population, are they penalized too or just those who are from states that have numbers that aren't on par?

My proposal wasn't about the size of the herd but how the state manages them, specifically the states of CA/WA/OR. Everyone from everywhere seems to want to dog pile on this like an idea for a surtax is some horrible world ending idea. Which strikes me as funny as I basically see every state that uses a points system as having this surtax already but everyone seems to think that is ok which I find odd. Please pay us for 10-20 years of fees and points and then get the privilege of paying us a license. I am sure this will only flame the fans of crazy analogies further. I think I owe the OP an apology for hijacking his thread

 

[realunlucky]

I'd hate it if you residents didn't get your two tags every year because a non resident wanted to enjoy YOUR resource.
Don't worry Idaho is on the verge of a change but I'd wager it's the residents that will take the shaft. Your political movers and shakers are sure enjoying the sfw money that's flowing over the border from Utah.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[paleraider]

I'd hate it if you residents didn't get your two tags every year because a non resident wanted to enjoy YOUR resource.

Finally someone who sees reason!

 

[wannakillabigbull]

You mean my offhand response to a thread in on a hunting forum was not a fully vetted, fact checked, detailed proposal for implementation and discussion by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game? Well sir you have me there....

You're arguing every one else's finer points but excusing your lack of finer details? Hey, sounds fair to me.

 

[blackpowderhunter]

You mean how good we "HAD" it,I've never seen so many out of state hunters as I have the last three years.I just pack in deeper but friends that can't are beside themselves.
Where do you hunt deer in NY? Can I bring a bunch of friends and hunt the Whitetail rut with you? we don't have Whitetails hear,you don't know how good you have it. Ha!

there are white tail in idaho.
so according to your idaho brethren's plan.
you should pay an extra 500-1000 to go hunt a white tail in new york. i'm sure the residents wouldnt mind

 

[blackpowderhunter]

I don't think you fact checked yourself is the problem.
you want non residents to pay a surcharge for "your" resources.
so the over 10x we pay for something that resides on public land that we already own isn't enough? That's where I'm leading the charge of the "whiny brigade" as you call it.
sorry man, get over yourself. idaho made it enticing for non residents to come hunt, blame yourselves.

 

[norsepeak]

Elk is a finite resource we have them, you want them....

Elk are a finite resource?? Really? Last I checked, they make new ones every spring...that's not really finite now is it? I'd like to know the non-resident harvest success vs. the total amount of non-resident revenue in Id. I think you'll see that without the huge non-resident dollars flowing in and the very small percentage of dead elk/deer leaving the state your game dept. would be going broke even faster than they did after the wolf debacle which in turn would cause them to drastically raise the resident price to compensate for the lost revenue.

 

[alvongunden]

You mean how good we "HAD" it,I've never seen so many out of state hunters as I have the last three years.I just pack in deeper but friends that can't are beside themselves.
Where do you hunt deer in NY? Can I bring a bunch of friends and hunt the Whitetail rut with you? we don't have Whitetails hear,you don't know how good you have it. Ha!

Wyoming county New York, you are more than welcome. I take out new hunters and the like all the time. Just bring your own stands and sandwiches. I genuinely enjoy seeing the success of others.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FlyGuy]

Interesting thread. Certainly gets people talking.

Personally, I think it's a creative solution, but I don't think it would ultimately work. I agree though that as long as there is a relatively easy and low cost alternative available, then there is no compelling reason for the residents of those neighboring states to light up their own congressmen and wildlife depts to manage their resources better. Maybe there are other ways to reach that goal besides a monetary penalty? Ways that would bring people together not than divide?



Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

 

[cnelk]

Paleraider is someone that is stuck in his own town, county and state.
Probably never has - or will - leave his little sanctuary to experience other state's hunting opportunities - thats too bad because there is so much to enjoy.

As far as the NonRes coming to Idaho to hunt... would you rather have them move there and become a resident?

 

[muledhunter]

I'm just trying to understand how you think wa/ca/or would give two shits if idaho jacked their non res rates. This has no affect on each states fish and wildlife. And for the record I hunt both idaho and eastern washington over the counter... So do i get extra tax for having 2 tags?

 

[jlivgren]

I don’t even remember who the op is after reading through this mess. If Idaho manages the wildlife so well then they know what they are doing selling all these tags. Your elk and deer resource is obviously in good hands and you have nothing to worry about. You must be over quota on elk and deer if the tags are a bottomless pit.
All these said people could become Idaho residents I suppose. That will make the locals happy, and every western state should raise its elk license fee. My home state is over $100 for a resident license, and I would be thrilled to pay it if I ever draw.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[geriggs]

I empathize with the OP since i am from Colorado and if anyone should complain it would be us residents but that being said...BLM and National forest does not belong to the state and does not get paid for with State taxes but federal funds paid by everyone (or so i have been told) Also, you would change your tune if you were running a business in these little hunting towns. They make a lot of their money for the year during hunting season. I am not a fan of hunting elk during rifle season because of the 100s (yes i mean 100s) of people i see lined up in the area i hunt. Now i dont see but about 4-8 where i actually hunt but even thats uncomfortable for me....its not a big area. Thats why i bow hunt. I dont normally see but maybe 1 or 2 hunters when im chasing bulls

 

[Gobbler36]

I'm sorry but this made me laugh.
Non resident tags are already steep, so you're saying if there is an elk in your state, you should get taxed more on top of that?
You think we already aren't trying to call the poor management to our own states? It's frustrating to watch. I hunted elk in Idaho this year, invited by an Idaho resident, and was invited back. Why did he invite me? Maybe because we met through mutual friends, and we had invited him out to join our muzzle loader elk hunts in washington, where he had a great time.
And to be transparent...We weren't hunting a "premier" unit with draw tags and huge bulls, but a unit where harvest statistics are in the 10-12% range.
As a resident it's what, 30 bucks for your resident elk tag? Or you drop a whopping 125 bucks for elk, bear, deer, turkey, cougar, mountain lion, steel head, and salmon pacakge? Am I jealous? heck yeah.
Non resident is already at 150 for the license + 416 for the elk tag.
Non resident hunters help fund the greater Idaho fish and game department to practice their (in my opinion) better management practices than my home state.
Out of pure curiosity, I would love to see the revenue of states game departments from license fees and the split of resident and non resident fees.
I don't mean to come across defensive or whiney. In reality, I do understand residents frustrations on this, but there are two sides to the story and it's a bit of a double edged sword.

Dude Idaho is one of the cheaper elk tags for a NR to buy how much is a WA elk, $800 or so?... it's bs that Idaho is everyone's fall back state because their state screws them out of your own elk. I have stated before I would gladly pay quadruple my resident tag if they would cut back on NR tag allowances. I apply to other states and plan on hunting other states, but one common theme is that Idaho seems way easier to get tags for the other states that I apply or plan to hunt in. No one expects to not see another person while out but when their are vehicles stacked at nearly every trailhead and 1 or 2 vehicles being from Idaho. I feel that's a problem,

 

[Odell]

I am sorry but I don't follow here. Everyone keeps saying I want them out of every where. That isn't true. I simply want them to pay more in hopes that it brings attention to the asymmetric policies of our neighboring states. Public land is public for everyone. Yet wildlife management is by state. By all means use our public lands but don't expect us to be happy when your states policies drive you from your home state and into ours for hunting. There seems to be an exceptional amount of hunters CA/WA/OR as per the original post. It isn't cheap or easy for me as an ID resident to hunt in those states so why should I worry about it being easy for them to hunt in mine?? If they are so willing to be harassed by their own state why shouldn't mine follow suite? I don't foresee the unending apocalypse that many on here predict. Elk is a finite resource we have them, you want them....

Your proposal is flawed in a bunch of ways, Your assumption that raising prices in Idaho will somehow affect management policy in Wa is insane. They don't care. Also, you are making a HUGE assumption that mis-management is the reason you are seeing more hunters. Wrong, most people are doing both. People have more disposable income and hunting adventures are awesome. Just because Idaho has better hunting than WA doesn't reflect mismanagement per say, probably reflects geography and population more than anything but either way, many WA hunters enjoy both and would hunt both even if the quality went down. If you really want to whine about what caused the recent increase in visitors you should really point the finger at the internet, Cameron Haynes, Steve Rinella, born and raised outdoors, Gritty bowmen etc. And it is just as easy for you to hunt WA as it is for me to hunt Idaho. OTC tags in both states, both similar in price.

 

[Odell]

Dude Idaho is one of the cheaper elk tags for a NR to buy how much is a WA elk, $800 or so?... it's bs that Idaho is everyone's fall back state because their state screws them out of your own elk. I have stated before I would gladly pay quadruple my resident tag if they would cut back on NR tag allowances. I apply to other states and plan on hunting other states, but one common theme is that Idaho seems way easier to get tags for the other states that I apply or plan to hunt in. No one expects to not see another person while out but when their are vehicles stacked at nearly every trailhead and 1 or 2 vehicles being from Idaho. I feel that's a problem,

The cost difference is around $130 bucks, so maybe 1 or two tanks of gas or what most people pay for 1 month of having a cell phone and we have Roosevelt Elk as well, something you don't. Pretty minimal cost difference and OTC in both. Come chase big roosevelt bulls OTC every year and enjoy a shared public resource.