Public lands article by JM77

[beginnerhunter]

Absolutely, but if public federal lands mattered as much as being a resident then 98% of the permits wouldn't be allocated to residents like they are Oregon. Or 95% in Arizona. Or 94% in New Mexico.

My point is that, for hunting, being a resident is more important than being a federal landowner and the article failed to highlight that truth. Now if he were talking about hiking, fishing, camping, or birdwatching then his article would have been accurate.

I see what you are saying and it's a good point. Why should I care about public land when there are limited opportunities to hunt in the states that have it? But I don't think that point was brought up in the article because it would have been an unnecessary tangent.

There are still several states that are good for non-resident. Fresh Tracks goes all over the west. So hunt the states that have good non-resident access and hope it gets better in the states that don't.

And if all the Western States decide to stop issuing tags to nonresidents, PLT will become a lot more popular. I sure didn't give a crap about public lands until I wanted to go west.

 

[stillkickin]

Thanks for sharing Buzz!

 

[Schaaf]

Thanks for sharing Buzz. Great article, Jeff!

 

[shoots-straight]

Great write up. Thanks for helping to keep it public. Public accessible lands will be what keeps hunters hunting in the future.

 

[TheJason]

My point is that, for hunting, being a resident is more important than being a federal landowner and the article failed to highlight that truth.

More important in what context? I would argue it not more important. I can pretty much hunt a western state every year. Between OTC tags, 0 point draws, and leftover tags, if you can't find one (and sometimes VERY good ones) you aren't looking very hard.

Just because the author doesn't view this as either 1) a significant truth or 2) a germane truth doesn't take anything away from the article. That is based on your assumption you are right, which in your viewpoint you are. As a NR hunter in the Rocky Mountain states, I personally view public land and public access as a much higher priority than the availability of the tags/permits themselves.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[Whiptail]

More important in what context? I would argue it not more important.

In the context if you want to hunt. When the vast majority of permits(and the numbers support this) are only issued to residents(or guided hunters) then it matters. When I bring up the point that land ownership should matter when permits are allocated everyone on here says it doesn't matter but if that were true then the author would wax poetically about the 10th amendment and state ownership of wildlife but that's not what he's writing...

 

[TheJason]

In the context if you want to hunt. When the vast majority of permits(and the numbers support this) are only issued to residents(or guided hunters) then it matters. When I bring up the point that land ownership should matter when permits are allocated everyone on here says it doesn't matter but if that were true then the author would wax poetically about the 10th amendment and state ownership of wildlife but that's not what he's writing...

Probably should write your own article then. I’ll reiterate, getting tags has never been difficult for me. Without public land, I probably wouldn’t even care if I could get them.

 

[BuzzH]

When the vast majority of permits(and the numbers support this) are only issued to residents(or guided hunters) then it matters. When I bring up the point that land ownership should matter when permits are allocated everyone on here says it doesn't matter

Couple points. First off a MAJORITY of pronghorn tags in WY are given to NR hunters...check your facts before you flap your blowhole. You seem to like to ignore the OTC NR hunting opportunities that exist all across the West for moose, elk, sheep, deer, black bears, caribou, upland birds, waterfowl, etc.

Its been stated previously, but you also like to ignore the very easy to draw and/or leftover tags. I have friends that show up to WY every year and successfully hunt leftover tags or tags that have 100% draw odds.

Land ownership and tag allocations don't matter...the only one claiming it does is you. Make your case and prove it or move on.

If you aren't hunting the West every year and enjoying your public lands, that's only one persons fault. Look in the mirror for the problem and the solution.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Nicely done Jeff. Thanks for all the time and effort you put towards helping other hunters.

 

[RidgeRunner76]

Jeff, Well written article. Lot of truth said in a small amount of space.

As to availability of tags. Here's the leftovers in CO as of 5 minutes ago. Thousands of tags left between antelope, bear, deer, and elk. Not to mention the Over the Counter Bull tags for the 2nd and 3rd rifle seasons. Which cover most of the state. I've shot my 2 biggest bulls on the OTC bull tags. Not the high pref point and hard to get tags.

http://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Leftover.pdf

 

[VAspeedgoat]

Great article!

Its sad to take a shot at tag availability. Like Buzz has pointed out many times, yes tag fees are higher but residents spend tax money and labor in those states that non residents take for granted. I think most of this resentment comes from eastern guys that grew up with long seasons liberal bag limits and heavier densities of game than our western counterparts. For example, in Va, I can kill 6 deer three of which can be a buck, three turkeys two of either sex, and one bear every year. If the game departments did that in the west, there would be no hunting in a matter of a few years. Lets stay on the topic of keeping public lands public.

 

[cgarner]

Seems to me, If you want to hunt, then public lands is the most important factor. Thousands upon thousands of non-residents hunt the west. Without public lands, tag quotes would most likely drop, and the cost to access private land would most likely exclude many hunters.