Non-resident license fees.

[Bear62041]

Now might be an opportune time to brush up on "The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation". --- "1) wildlife resources are a public trust to be managed by governments for the benefit of all citizens; 2) unregulated commercial markets for wild game that decimate wildlife populations are eliminated; 3) allocation is by law, meaning that laws are developed by citizens and enforced by government agencies to regulate the proper use and management of wildlife; 4) opportunity for all, which means that every citizen has the freedom to view, hunt and fish, regardless of social or economic status; 5) wild game populations cannot be killed casually, but only for a legitimate purpose as defined by law; 6) wildlife will be considered an international resource because wildlife migrates across political boundaries; and 7) science is the proper basis for wildlife policy and management, not opinion or conjecture, in order to sustain wildlife populations." --- Notice that principles numbers 1 and 4 reference wildlife as being a "public trust", and accessible to all "regardless of social or economic status". Non-resident fees greater than that of residents are counter to the principle of the NAMWC, and it might be legitimately argued they violate the 14th Amendment equal protection clause of the Constitution. As an aside, The Boone & Crockett Club support the NAMWC. Just saying.

You are soooooooooooooo correct.

 

[lyle2231]

There's no need for justification. They have the animals to sell a lot of states don't. So we pay. If we'd quit paying prices would come down. That ain't gonna happen. I just submitted a request for a Montana tag for around $1200. Resident is probably $30. And I'll b happy if I draw cause I know I'm not getting 1 of the 10 elk tags available in WI. Where's the justification in paying income tax when they can print money out of thin air. Don't look for sane reasoning when it comes to governance. They do cause they can cause we let them.

Ok so for the sake of discussing…..An out of state hunter goes to Montana doesn't buy the non-resident license, gets arrested with an elk in the back of the truck. How severe could the penalty get?

 

[WYO300RUM]

I don't feel non-res hunters are the problem here in CO, the problems are the over-abundance libtards and californicators moving here and voting to put wolves where they don't belong or without proper mgt accounted for and voting for the crap they had when they were in CA that they supposedly moved to get away from. Interesting that many units for Residents had 3 point jumps last yr in the pref point quagmire. And I know of one that was 4 pts for non-res. Another great feature of covid I guess.

It isn't just Californians pard. They are from many states. COVID craze made a lot of people move out of the big cities to Wy., Co., Mt., Id., Ut.,Nv., etc.. The price of housing here doubled. People paying cash for a house they haven't even been to. Rent doubled. Everything has gone up thanks to Brandon. I see lots of out of state plates here during hunting season. A lot of Wi. and Tx. plates. It doesn't bother me. I was once a non res. also. Bothers me more during turist season May thru Sept. A quiet town turns into a zoo. You have a WAY bigger population than we though. My son lives in Co. Springs . That city is HUGE ! He stays away from Denver. I can see why now.

 

[sitkastw]

The wolf problem is a major problem and has decimated wildlife in every state they have been reintroduced. I would bet Colorado will have a major decline in deer and elk over the next 10 years. Then hunters will blame hunters for over hunting when it was sustaining prior to wolves. Should fence off the major cities and let then experiment with wolves there first before reintroducing them to places they cannot be controlled.

 

[Allen Kitts]

Ok so for the sake of discussing…..An out of state hunter goes to Montana doesn't buy the non-resident license, gets arrested with an elk in the back of the truck. How severe could the penalty get?

You might be walking back to Hollywood..........

 

[justinp61]

I live in KY and for years our non-resident licenses were cheaper than surrounding states, I don't know if they still are. In my opinion if you're a non-resident coming to hunt they should charge you whatever your state charges for non-residents.

 

[Bear62041]

Ronald Reagan taught us to vote with our feet. Do so.

A better question might be: "why doesn't your state have the game you seek to hunt?"

Ya can't have elk and antelope hunting in Iowa, just sayin'

 

[Crusty Buck]

That would be a travisty for kids.

I lived in Colorado for 11 years and enjoyed resident license fees. I marveled at the number of license plates from different states that showed up during hunting season. Some of these boys had their heads screwed on straight, others not so much. I now live on a hobby farm in my home state of Minnesota and shoot Whitetails 200 yds from my house. I want to get back out west and hunt Elk, but the outstate license fees have made me reconsider.

 

[Bear62041]

You might be walking back to Hollywood..........

Pretty serious. There is a law almost nation wide that would fine him the cost of the animal, loss of his gear and possibly his vehicle, a major fine, and loss of all hunting priveleges in the U.S. for 5 years.

You might be walking back to Hollywood..........

 

[lyle2231]

You might be walking back to Hollywood..........

I get your point! In Florida once you you get to 65 years young a license isn't required, now you still need a duck stamp for water fowl but the license requirements are waived. Does Montana have something similar? Just curious…

 

[smokepoler]

Hunting is like owning an apartment building. If you have a lot of vacancies, you're rent is too high. If you have a waiting list, your rents are too low. The non residents pay more because there's a waiting list.
State governments aren't completely dumb. They charge what the market will bear and if that waiting list gets too big, they'll charge more until they find it.

 

[WYO300RUM]

We'll in my state if they didn't we'd be over run with OOS hunters. Remember, the citizens of the state paying taxes come first, as they should. If you'd like to hunt in our state then you pay the fee. Some states as mine have very limited opportunities for big game hunting and most of the times it takes MANY years to draw a tag.

If I lived in Az. or Nv. I'd be doing a lot of out state hunting. I have a few good friends in Az. 8 years in a row can't draw an archery elk tag. This year I stopped applying for that area because I saw it took 15 pts. now ! Done with that. I applied in a late Rifle hunt. Drew it. I had 13 pts. More than enough. I'm on a burn points in all states I mission. So far in Az. Burned deer and elk. 26 pts. for lope and still can't draw. Have bighorn pts. also but $.$$$ for sheep tags in all states. I'll be dead before all points are burned in 6 states... $$$$$

 

[Allen Kitts]

I get your point! In Florida once you you get to 65 years young a license isn't required, now you still need a duck stamp for water fowl but the license requirements are waived. Does Montana have something similar? Just curious…

To the best of my knowledge seniors (62+) still have to buy a license. I do believe it is slightly discounted.

 

[Pro2A]

At least in our state (Iowa) the animals belong to the people not the state. The state just manages them. BUT I've said for years that if we hunters collectively refused to pay the fees for non residents for just 1 year I believe you'd see the fees drop drastically. BUT no one wants to go along with that. No one can wait a year it seems. I tried to organize that movement on-line many years ago and was told by many to go **** myself. I was told "I've got the money and I'm getting mine and too bad you don't". But, that's what it's going to take. Now I expect to get all kinds of reasons why the states have to charge that much. But if that's is the reason then every state would have to charge about the same amount for an elk, because the maintenance of an elk should be the same in every location. It's not game management any more guys but business management. And we're falling for it. Don't buy a license for just one year, everyone, and see what happens.

Bear, I understand your frustration with government agency fees. NO ONE HATES the stereotypical government agency/coasting, anti-America government employee more than me. I was born/raised/schooled in Missouri, strayed away for 30+ years before finding my way home. In Missouri, I feel the Dept of Conservation (MoCon) is a great bang for the buck, and certainly as close as one will ever experience of an agency actually being what government was intended to be. MoCon has brought deer, turkeys, bear, and elk back from near extinction/extinction in Missouri. They have provided excellent wildlife/outdoor resources and areas enjoyed at no/nominal out-of-pocket daily cost. They run hunter education, youth safety, fishing, wildlife, conservation, habitat, et el classes. They support private land owners in improving wildlife habitat, controlling erosion, fighting poaching and trespass, fighting invasive species (feral hogs, carp, et el) and plants. I don't mind paying for hunting licenses, taxes, etc that fund MoCon. Wish every government agency delivered the value Missourians receive from MoCon. I personally know MoCon biologists, game wardens, various employees and find them to be dedicated, hard working, pro-Missouri outdoors/wildlife sports with no hidden agendas, as most government agencies/employees are prone to pursue. I lived in Iowa in early career chapters (ran the Shaeffer Pen Packaging Program, Chevron Chemical plant engineer, and Tones Spices, Director of Engineering) enjoying the Iowa Conservation benefits. I felt my taxes were well spent and the benefits delivered were great. Just my 70+ years perspective on funding state conservation programs. YMMV, but this is mine.