D
Deleted member 52995
Guest
I spent this afternoon "scouting" for real estate, and campgrounds, and while doing so I observed what spot, and stalk hunters would find to be idyllic bear habitat to hunt with vast clear cuts several years old, rolling hills surrounded by heavy stands of timber, and public access via trails, and logging roads. The area has a significant bear population as well. Yet I failed to observe even one nonresident hunter.
Unfortunately, (or fortunately depending on one's perspective) it is not a reduced tag fee unit in the State of Idaho, and that is probably the primary reason why I failed to observe any nonresident bear hunters. They seem to favor units with the most difficult terrain, and excessive hunting pressure. Those reduced fee tags sure "pack 'em in," and help to concentrate nonresident hunters in the more undesirable units leaving the prime hunting areas largely undisturbed, for exclusive use by residents, and those nonresidents willing to "splurge," and spend the extra $200 on a general bear tag. Who emerges the victor in terms of a more satisfying hunting experience , the cheapskates, or big spenders?
Unfortunately, (or fortunately depending on one's perspective) it is not a reduced tag fee unit in the State of Idaho, and that is probably the primary reason why I failed to observe any nonresident bear hunters. They seem to favor units with the most difficult terrain, and excessive hunting pressure. Those reduced fee tags sure "pack 'em in," and help to concentrate nonresident hunters in the more undesirable units leaving the prime hunting areas largely undisturbed, for exclusive use by residents, and those nonresidents willing to "splurge," and spend the extra $200 on a general bear tag. Who emerges the victor in terms of a more satisfying hunting experience , the cheapskates, or big spenders?
Last edited by a moderator: