HB145 - Increase NR license fees

[Wind Gypsy]

Montana legislators propose raising nonresident hunting base fee by more than 500%

Three Montana legislators have drafted a bill that would raise nonresident base hunting fees by more than 500%.

www.montanaoutdoor.com

Tag on another $85 to an already very high price to hunt deer or elk in MT is kind of inconsequential in the big scheme of things. It's that MT residents pay $20 for an elk tag and $16 for a deer tag compared to NR being in for near $1300 for a general elk tag with pref points in comparison that makes this a bit ridiculous. If hunting is so important to so many MT residents maybe they should value it at more than meal at chipotle. I tend to take the side of resident preference on a lot of issues NRs complain about but shit like this gets my hackles up for some reason. I agree that MT residents should fight to get it back to limiting NR tags to whats in the statute without all the cutouts. Stuff like this is kind of pathetic though.

CO resident elk tag: $66
NM resident elk tag: $60
Wy resident elk tag: $57
ID: $36.75
AZ: $148
NV: $120
MT: Chipotle Burrito with guac, side of chips, large coke.

 

[ismith]

Montana legislators propose raising nonresident hunting base fee by more than 500%

Three Montana legislators have drafted a bill that would raise nonresident base hunting fees by more than 500%.

www.montanaoutdoor.com

Tag on another $85 to an already very high price to hunt deer or elk in MT is kind of inconsequential in the big scheme of things. It's that MT residents pay $20 for an elk tag and $16 for a deer tag compared to NR being in for near $1300 for a general elk tag with pref points in comparison that makes this a bit ridiculous. If hunting is so important to so many MT residents maybe they should value it at more than meal at chipotle. I tend to take the side of resident preference on a lot of issues NRs complain about but shit like this gets my hackles up for some reason. I agree that MT residents should fight to get it back to limiting NR tags to whats in the statute without all the cutouts. Stuff like this is kind of pathetic though.

CO resident elk tag: $66
NM resident elk tag: $60
Wy resident elk tag: $57
ID: $36.75
AZ: $148
NV: $120
MT: Chipotle Burrito with guac, side of chips, large coke.

Montana should double the price of R tags and cut NR tags by 25%, as well as eliminate all the “come home” tags.

 

[Wildabeest]

So long as NR’s continue to be more than happy to pay whatever fees MT decides to charge them, MT’s R’s will be more than happy to have their tags subsidized. Can’t say as I blame them.

 

[DFS]

Finally, a bill I can get behind.

 

[Bullshot]

What on God’s green earth EVER justifies a 500% increase to basically an administrative item by a government agency. Greed has no limits, that is clear. Don’t sell NR the tags if you don’t want, but the money grab race is just stupid.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

What on God’s green earth EVER justifies a 500% increase to basically an administrative item by a government agency. Greed has no limits, that is clear. Don’t sell NR the tags if you don’t want, but the money grab race is just stupid.

Maybe that's what it's going to take for them to not eff up the draws every year?

 

[Bullshot]

Finally, a bill I can get behind.

DFS, what are your own personal reasons for saying that? Is there a funding proble this addresses? Is it about giving resident better and more tags (this doesn’t). Do you just want to eventually dissuade NR hunting in general so that you personally have more to yourself? I just don’t understand the knee jerk giddiness or satisfaction that some people have with these quite obviously dislocated pricing schemes. It really is a race to a “bottom” that in the end, isn’t good for shared passions and traditions surrounding hunting.

 

[Pucky Freak]

NR’s have a grossly outsized role in MT’s wildlife management. Shrinking R’s financial stake in the budget is their own loss, which is perhaps the true intent of the bill. Legislature is already beholden to NR landowners and outfitter clients.

 

[DFS]

DFS, what are your own personal reasons for saying that? Is there a funding proble this addresses? Is it about giving resident better and more tags (this doesn’t). Do you just want to eventually dissuade NR hunting in general so that you personally have more to yourself? I just don’t understand the knee jerk giddiness or satisfaction that some people have with these quite obviously dislocated pricing schemes. It really is a race to a “bottom” that in the end, isn’t good for shared passions and traditions surrounding hunting.

I’m more curious how much nonresidents will keep paying to come here. I agree it isn’t going to fix anything. Seems like most states are headed in this direction.

 

[rmyoung1]

I kind of wonder if something like this wouldn’t curb NR demand. I understand that the knee-jerk reaction is “no” but the truth is that Montana hunting isn’t that amazing. Compared to other mountain states it’s already a below-average value. I wonder if this kind of move wouldn’t force many to write it off. Moves like this coupled with a significant economic downturn undoubtedly would.

 

[Bullshot]

I’m more curious how much nonresidents will keep paying to come here. I agree it isn’t going to fix anything. Seems like most states are headed in this direction.

I am only one NR’s opinion but really, I want to use up some points and then be done there. It is already too expensive to really justify for many people (and MT isn’t unique in that.) After that, and maybe I shouldn’t think this way, but states that make it too difficult will simply fall off my radar. I will inevitably tune out, be less informed, less likely to vacation there, and as a result will care less about them. I will certainly de-prioritize their needs in favor of states where I have the opportunity for more actual engagment. This is not meant to be sour grapes or any kind of threat, individually I mean little anyway, but its human nature, and this isolationist pricing movement of various states does and will have some unintended consequences. I fear those too. I love the west. I wish the best for all residents. I often wish I was one too, but I’m not. I have enjoyed every time I’ve been to Wyoming or Montana, etc. But in years past, I felt welcome, and hopeful to return. Now, I regrettfully say, and more frequently hear others say, that there is less and less of that feeling. Changing world, yeah. But just because it seems inevitible, doesn't make it good. This next $85 isn’t the killer. The last 10 or 15 x that wasn’t either, but definitely moved the needle in a bad direction. The next multiples might be. Someday a last straw will be reached. I will hopefully be out of the game or even better dead before I see things get too much more fraught. It’s like watching sand run from an hourglass already.

 

[bigsky2]

I get a kick out of the residents that think price increases like this are going to somehow reduce the number of NR hunters. If anything it just prices out the average Joe NR and then all the NR that are coming here will be the ones with enough money to pay for access and push residents off more ground.

 

[DFS]

I am only one NR’s opinion but really, I want to use up some points and then be done there. It is already too expensive to really justify for many people (and MT isn’t unique in that.) After that, and maybe I shouldn’t think this way, but states that make it too difficult will simply fall off my radar. I will inevitable tune out, be less informed, less likely to vacation there, and as a result will care less about them. I will certainly de-prioritize their needs in favor of states where I have the opportunity for more actual engagment. This is not meant to be sour grapes or any kind of threat, individually I mean little anyway, but its human nature, and this isolationist pricing movement of various states does and will have some unintended consequences. I fear those too. I love the west. I wish the best for all residents. I often wish I was one too, but I’m not. I have enjoyed every time I’ve been to Wyoming or Montana, etc. But in years past, I felt welcome, and hopeful to return. Now, I regrettfully say, and more frequently hear others say, that there is less and less of that feeling. Changing world, yeah. But just because it seems inevitible, doesn't make it good. This next $85 isn’t the killer. The last 10 or 15 x that wasn’t either, but definitely moved the needle in a bad direction. the The next multiples might be. Someday a last straw will be reached. I will hopefully be out of the game or even better dead before I see things get too much more fraught. It’s like watching sand run from an hourglass already.

I agree. Montana’s game management is a complete joke. If I were in your situation I would feel the exact same way. You could give the agency unlimited funding and they would still provide the same product.

 

[Sytes]

Still dumbfounded how LITTLE the average Resident hunter cares for the value placed towards our wildlife.

FFS, raise Resident fees, restructure seasons, poke here and there with LE, weapon choice, blah, blah, blah...
It's our children's future we're messing with.

Regarding pushing out NR w/ too high a price; so long as it remains relative to CO, WY, ID, NM, UT, it's simply mtn state, "inflation".
Now if MT keeps crapping on our wildlife, we may not have the "product" demand requires and THAT would push NR elsewhere.

 

[BuzzH]

Montana should double the price of R tags and cut NR tags by 25%, as well as eliminate all the “come home” tags.

But keep the native tags.

 

[Elktrack]

NR’s have a grossly outsized role in MT’s wildlife management. Shrinking R’s financial stake in the budget is their own loss, which is perhaps the true intent of the bill. Legislature is already beholden to NR landowners and outfitter clients.

You make a good and interesting point. I mean why would they be responsive to Residents? The R are just the pesky little beneficiaries that are only tolerated simply because they have to. Certainly don’t seem to want to listen to them or change anything for their benefit.

The NR is where the money is at and they don’t cause much of a fuss as long as they get an opportunity to hunt. The NR isn’t at meetings and holding them accountable or asking for change.

Think about it, catering to NR landowners and hunters is pretty easy and pain free for them. And it pays better.

Your comment about the R’s shrinking financial stake being their own loss is pretty accurate. At what point does that make their voices irrelevant or less impactful? After all, money talks. Maybe the R’s should be demanding a R fee increase just to keep them financially meaningful? You know that old saying about He who has the gold makes the rules kinda thing?

Interesting point you made.

 

[ismith]

But keep the native tags.

That’s tribal business.

 

[BuzzH]

That’s tribal business.

Montana native tags.

 

[golfer]

Montana native tags.

Get rid of them. Those benefiting by living in another state shouldn’t get any special treatment just cause they once lived here.

 

[BuzzH]

Get rid of them. Those benefiting by living in another state shouldn’t get any special treatment just cause they once lived here.

I tried to tell the Montana legislature that when the bill was first introduced.

They didn't listen then, so now I'm all in favor of them.

I can now say, after taking advantage of it every year since, "I told you so."

They're so embedded now, you'll never get rid of them.