Federal Funding for Hunting access?

Truthfully I am willing to pay the money to experience the great western outdoors
Click to expand...

And so are about 2 million of your fellow NR hunters. So if you are willing to spend the money in the current system what incentive is there for the residents or the states to change it. We need more revenue for our fish cops, well lets charge the NR because they are willing to pay it. Or am I the only one that sees it that way?

You willingly fork over your hard earned money to get a chance to hunt out west but then gripe about residents willingly accepting your money. I don't get your what your bitch is.

Nemont
 
Basically I see this issue as this way. I do not have the link but taxpayers in Ohio receive back less per dollar than what we pay into the federal funds while the tendency is for the less populous states get back way more than they pay in. Since NR have to pay way more for any tags and licenses thsi is just another way for the western states to help keep the residents from paying more. Good for them but bad for the NR. I do not see many westerners coming to Ohio for the game we have here.So we cant gouge you. :D
 
What the hell are you ranting about, Nemont? Who's got a chip? "Boy Genius?" Puh-leez. :rolleyes:

For your personal information, though I'm sure you don't believe it and I don't really care, I don't think that states should "pay homage" to NR's. I have stated many times that I hate it when NR's come to my state to hunt (Team Nut & Tennesseans excluded ;) ) because it just exacerbates already crowded conditions. But I also recognize that the KDFWR is just barely making ends meet, and without NR dollars they would be bankrupt. It's a DOCUMENTED FACT. Buzz will tell you that Wyoming is much the same way, as are several other states. By the same token, I also hope to hunt out west someday, which relies on NR access, so it's all terribly hypocritical of me, isn't it?

And, if you don't believe that many want "NR's to go away," you're a little out of the loop. For a decent "both sides" article, try reading this article for starters. You may poopoo OL as being a "fluff" magazine, but again, that's what the mainstream reads...not "Eastman's Journal of Big Racks" or whatever.

Try being a little less angry and work with me here. I'm just trying to work through the issues. Unlike others, I'm not here for name-calling match, so cool your jets.
 
“You’ve got increasing populations, greater competition for scarce resources and, like the European system, those anglers and hunters with the economic wherewithal are demonstrating a willingness to pay large amounts of money to go after these pursuits,” said Horn. “These issues will simply keep increasing.”
Click to expand...

I asked for a solution to the problem. NOBODY has ever came up with a viable solution. If you want to be able to hunt out west in the future then you should see the fight to keep NR from taking over as a good thing.


Montana relies on NR dollars to fund the bulk of their F&G budget but that doesn't mean that the issue is NR discrimination.

In your article link you posted there are as many reasons to limit NR hunters as there are to not limit them. Conservation Force and USO do not care about whether you can afford to hunt out west, they are for the guys who can afford to outbid you on every thing (access, tags, gear, guides, and time). If you buy into the the NR Vs. Resident stuff you will see most of your opportunities turned into the European model where the rich hunt and the average guys sit in the Gasthaus and swill beer.

Nut,
I guess your state needs to elect more effective representatives and senators. Montana has a congressional delegation of a whopping three members. Ohio has a congressional delegation of 20. That is the combine total of Montana, Wyoming, Idaho,
Utah and Nevada. Sounds like instead of blaming the western states for getting to many federal dollars you should be campaigning for some new political hacks.

Nemont
 
Sounds like Nemont got up on the wrong side of the bed today!
Click to expand...


No, Nemont didn't get much sleep because all three kids were sick all night and the Mrs. is gone to visit her sister in Seattle.

Nemont
 
I agree that no one has come up with a completely viable solution. Like all real problems, the answer isn't easy or clearcut. I also don't recall stating that I think the issue is about "NR discrimination." I don't feel discriminated against that other states charge me a lot of money to hunt there. I don't like the expense, but as I've stated twice now, I understand the need for it. Nor did I ever say that I thought USO's idea of "fairness" was a good idea.

So what's your good solution, Nemont? I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why the Open Fields bill is a bad idea because it's "welfare."
 
Nemont, I dont bitch. I piss and moan. :D My state is controlled by Republicans who have their head up their ass. They dont care much about anything except who donates to their campaign coffers which seems to be from out of state businesses.

Hope the kids get well quick. ;)
 
I have one possible solution to the problem of Western States jacking prices on NR tags.

Its so easy, just charge the resident 15-20%(or more) of the NR cost. So, if a NR tag is $1000 the resident tag is $200. That way, as residents demand increases in NR license fees, theirs good up as well. I think that would make the residents think before they automatically reach into the pockets of the NR.

Oh, and Nemont, I have been literally "booed" off the microphone at F&G meetings for asking for an increase in RESIDENT licenses. Montana hunters are getting a reallll good deal on their permits compared to other western states and still bitch.

Oh, and dgibson, the cost of a hunt to the West is not that much. For the properly motivated, even people working for average salaries can afford at least one hunt a year to a Western state. I bet a person could shovel snow from sidewalks on the weekends to come up with the scratch to hunt antelope in Wyoming. Its more a matter of priorities than the money involved.
 
I just had a quick read of the bills. I think the 225 bill looks good.

Nut, how do you think this is a way of ripping off non-residents when non-residents benefit from this Block Mgt program just the same as residents do? You don't have to buy a lottery ticket in the event this bill passes, but you'd be able to reap the benefits, so how does it rip you off? I'm cornfused. :confused:

Ten Beers, you say "It is my OPINION, that this program will make more landowners lock up their land until they get compensated, rather then open more land to hunting that was previously closed." Explain the logic from that landowner's point of view.. you got me cornfused too...
 
Buzz,
that might work. Setting the price of tags as a percentage of NR's price. I have suggested increasing resident tags at our sportsman's club meeting and got about the same reaction. The same local attorney who had just spent $15,000 on a sheep hunt said he would have to quit hunting if resident deer A tags were raised to $50.

Greenhorn,

Are you looking at 235 or 225? If it is 235 what exactly do you like in particular?

Nemont
 
Greenhorn,

Wish I was in Montana having too much beer after work, but someone has to be in Phoenix having too much beer after work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Big Fin
American Prairie - 88,000 acres of access
Replies
0
Views
427
Big Fin
Big Fin
perma
From the Wyoming WSF, "SF-118 Becomes Law"
Replies
0
Views
612
perma
perma
Sytes
Colorado: HB 1375. Wolf Non-Lethal Tied To Rancher Compensation.
Replies
11
Views
924
Sytes
Sytes
Ben Lamb
SB 442 - Habitat and Access
8 9 10
Replies
195
Views
19K
Jock Conyngham
J
cheeser
House of Representatives votes to remove gray wolves from endangered species list
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
ismith
ismith
Advertisement

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,587
Messages
2,026,111
Members
36,239
Latest member
cprsailor

Share this page

Back
Top