3855WIN
Well-known member
Louisiana does, even for NRs.
Free license for seniors
- Thread starter AlaskaHunter
- Start date
3855WIN
Well-known member
The wealthy retirees will probably purchase some NR licenses. Those things aren’t cheap.
Hilljackoutlaw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2019
- Messages
- 6,475
Boy this is effing stupid.
I thought the same thing reading some responses on the first page.
Hilljackoutlaw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2019
- Messages
- 6,475
OP asked a simple damn question not loaded just a straight forward question. 3 posts in completely derailed and onto SS and inflation and 401ks.....
R
rwc101
Guest
I have the Oregon Pioneer license which includes a half price elk tag and a couple of other perks. It in no way is a subsidy by the government for me. Before I got the pioneer license I would by the "Sports Pack" every year, which includes a license, several tags and permits. Right now if I did not have the Pioneer license and I were to by the Sports Pack it would cost me $196.50. With my Pioneer license if I were to buy everything included in the Sports Pack it would cost me $204.25. So it certainly isn't us old farts getting subsidized.
JEL
Well-known member
This is on the Montana license page for deer. Regular price is $16. I believe this applies to most licenses. "Montana residents 17 and under, holders of a disabled resident conservation license, or residents 62 years and older may purchase this license for $8."
I'd be more interested in relief from property taxes at some point in my life then I would in a free or reduced hunting/fishing license.
By the way. I'm not sure what Iowa offers for seniors. I got a bit yet before I'd benefit.
By the way. I'm not sure what Iowa offers for seniors. I got a bit yet before I'd benefit.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Huh...I guess the R3 stuff is just all bullchit to yap about but nothing to take action on.
Recruitment, Reactivate, Retain
Seems to me that throwing some old geezers a reduced price/free license might just help retain them in the sport.
It might give them a chance to take their grandkids and recruit them into the sport. Maybe pass on their knowledge of hunting, outdoors, conservation, etc. while sharing a hunt with someone younger.
It might be an avenue for them to get their old hunting buddies reactivated into hunting if the licenses are cheaper.
...and we wonder why hunter numbers continue to decline?
Yeah, real mystery.
Recruitment, Reactivate, Retain
Seems to me that throwing some old geezers a reduced price/free license might just help retain them in the sport.
It might give them a chance to take their grandkids and recruit them into the sport. Maybe pass on their knowledge of hunting, outdoors, conservation, etc. while sharing a hunt with someone younger.
It might be an avenue for them to get their old hunting buddies reactivated into hunting if the licenses are cheaper.
...and we wonder why hunter numbers continue to decline?
Yeah, real mystery.
Ajax2744
Well-known member
Colorado cost of annual small game/fishing combo: $50.37
Senior combo: 29.75
I have a real hard time believing the $20 dollar a year difference would drive hunters out of the woods if they got rid of the senior price. For the majority I would assume health is a much bigger factor than money.
Senior combo: 29.75
I have a real hard time believing the $20 dollar a year difference would drive hunters out of the woods if they got rid of the senior price. For the majority I would assume health is a much bigger factor than money.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Any data to support the theory that hunting decline is due to life long hunters with solid financial footing hitting 65 and not wanting to pay full share of license fees? Or might it be a lack of land access, a more urban society, a drop in "family traditions", increase in alternative outdoor activities vying for attention, high cost of entry for new hunters, etc? I agree the numbers of a particular generation are going down, but more likely physical infirmities and death are more a factor than resident license fees in that demographic.
Arizona has a Pioneers License for people 70 and older, available to those who have been a resident 25 years or more. It is a free hunting and fishing license for life. Tags are still required and have to be purchased. My 92 year old dad has one as his dad did. After reading the comments above, I will feel very guilty when I get my Pioneer License in 2 years. I hope that I am able to overcome these feelings and use that free license for 25-30 years!
If your 60 or 65 and you can’t afford a full price license that’s on you. If the 3R’s are as important as everyone says they are. Reduce license cost 14 and under to near nothing, 15-18 slightly above that. Grandpa could take all his grandkids out for damn near nothing. Is it about him filling a tag or the kids?
While we all hope to be kicking a$$ and taking names at 65 one should be honest that most of your hunting days are behind you.
While we all hope to be kicking a$$ and taking names at 65 one should be honest that most of your hunting days are behind you.
Last edited:
BuzzH
Well-known member
I totally agree, and since everyone's chances of being able to kick ass and take names hunting until then isn't very good, and they likely wont fill their tags anyway, why the big whine fest by you and others that they get to stay in the game at a reduced rate?
You afraid of some guy living on SS at age 65 getting a reduced price tag outcompeting you?
Lots of people will find something to complain about no matter what...prime example this with "issue".
BuzzH
Well-known member
Oh, so its not as simple as a single issue...who would of guessed?
You don't solve a complex problem by focusing on one part of it...you fix the parts you can.
The way I approach these problems, pluck the low hanging fruit first. If reduced price tags for youth tags are taking away a barrier, do it, you're solving a piece of the problem.
If keeping older hunters active in hunting, fishing, and outdoor activities is because they pay less for their tags, do it, you're solving a piece of the problem.
If guys can afford to pay more for things like access, direct donations to NGO's, Game and Fish, etc. and aren't...YOU'RE part of the problem, not solving one.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
You're the one who raised it as a major issue, not me. But as always you will dodge, pivot and recast every discussion to ensure you are "always right" - I expected nothing less. As for contributions - I sleep well at night.
BuzzH
Well-known member
...says the guy with post #3 whining and making it an issue, and 7 of the 37 posts on the thread.
Funny stuff.
BTW, its no issue to me, I'm fine with the idea of youth and older folks getting reduced priced licenses. If you don't like it, change the law/regulation.
Last edited:
Lyfter1013
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2020
- Messages
- 605
Is it elk or deer season yet? Can’t believe a thread like this went off the rails so quick..
No worries from me, if your dropping animals left and right at 65 good for you. Just don’t whine that a reduced rate is needed for you to stay in the game. Also, don’t strawman that reduced rates for the over 60 crowd is important to the 3R’s. At that age you’re going to do it because you love to do it or to pass on your knowledge and Traditions to others.I would much rather focus the 3R’s on the 21 and under crowd. Get them to hunt and enjoy the outdoors at that age and hope they do so for the remainder of their lives.
Are you the same BuzzH from rokslide?
Similar threads
