Screwing over the Non-resident (or not)?

[Pucky Freak]

so would you guys be happy or unhappy if your DNR was forced to restrict buck hunting in an amount of tags equal to the amount of resident hunters that currently hold one each year, but then decided to shave off 10% for NRs, which means 10% of resident hunters go without a buck tag? would you be pro eliminating that 10% for NR? or pro keeping that 10% for NR?

Percentage of tags isn’t calculable here b/c of low public land %, and non-migratory big game animals.

Excluding Iowa as an outlier, look at all the states East of the Mississippi + the Great Plains states (TX, OK, KS, NE, SD, ND). There is a lot of private land, and NR tags are either unlimited, OR you get a NR LO tag. The land is leased to NR’s, outfitted to NR’s, or purchased by NR hunters. Who is harvesting more bucks these days? It’s wealthy NR’s.

Some of these states with substantial public (MN, MI, WI, PA, NY, VA), would I be happy if NR tags good on public land were capped at 10%? I’d be ecstatic. Mandated to 10%? Meh, not terrible. I’d prefer that over unlimited NR tags.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Yeah, that's fine, if there's leftover doe tags in MN, have at them.

Then things are perfectly fair to you as a non resident.

I wouldn't be trying to take MORE tags from NR hunters.

You're whimpering about the wrong state. Man I hope MT can get some reigns on how NR licenses are dolled out.

You have options: Go hunt cow elk. Get in line. Get out your wallet. The lines and prices for bull elk heads to the non-residents are going to get longer and longer and more expensive...

 

[cedahm]

FYI- Colorado and NM mandate that the landowner offering the tag must open up their land even if it’s a unit-wide tag (don’t know about other states).

Not true in CO for LPP tags. Rules here: https://cpw.state.co.us/thingstodo/Pages/LandownerPreference.aspx


RFW program tags require the LO to issue some amount (the ratio of private to public tags varies by species but it’s heavily tilted to the private tags) of tags to R’s in the public draw, but they can also set their own seasons, weapons, access hours and rules, etc.

But in neither case does the LO in CO have to open their land to the public like the NM rules.

 

[Nick87]

You're whimpering about the wrong state

This

 

[seeth07]

Some of these states with substantial public (MN, MI, WI, PA, NY, VA), would I be happy if NR tags good on public land were capped at 10%? I’d be ecstatic. Mandated to 10%? Meh, not terrible. I’d prefer that over unlimited NR tags.

There are more NR at the WI boat launch on pool 9 for the duck opener than WI plates. Could we restrict that to 10%?

 

[Pucky Freak]

NR hunting has never had anything to do with income brackets, it was always about priorities.

IMO/E, hunting for a lot of the newbies is one of the many things they do. They want hunting to be cheap enough that they don't have to decide between taking the kids and old lady to Disneyland OR going on a NR elk hunt. They want both, they want it now, and if they dont then they're being "priced out" of hunting. Certainly not priced out of Disneyland though, just their hunting license.

If the expectation is that a state should accommodate your broad base of activities to suit your income bracket, so you can do it all...I'm inclined to say tough chit.

If you want cheap hunting AND the trip to Disneyland, that's what resident hunting is there for.

Hunters need to get over this delusional idea they can have it all in every state they feel like hunting.

I certainly do NOT want a state to cater to me not having to prioritize where my money is spent. I’m in favor of a 1:10 resident to nonresident cost ratio for tags, so $220 for WY NR doe/fawn antelope, etc. Ive been writing WY legislators for years in support of 90/10 tag allocation.

 

[Big Fin]

There are more NR at the WI boat launch on pool 9 for the duck opener than WI plates. Could we restrict that to 10%?

The Dakotas haver restricted non-residents in response to similar concerns. They restrict non-residents in different ways as it comes to bird hunting seasons to address a very similar situation.

 

[BuzzH]

Then things are perfectly fair to you as a non resident.


You're whimpering about the wrong state. Man I hope MT can get some reigns on how NR licenses are dolled out.

You have options: Go hunt cow elk. Get in line. Get out your wallet. The lines and prices for bull elk heads to the non-residents are going to get longer and longer and more expensive...

No kidding, he's going to draw a Wyoming general tag and either whack a raghorn or come home empty handed complaining his failure was due to the wilderness guide law anyway.

May as well just hunt cows.

 

[The Hedgehog]

The Dakotas haver restricted non-residents in response to similar concerns. They restrict non-residents in different ways as it comes to bird hunting seasons to address a very similar situation.

I’m not up on any bird regulations but doesn’t one of the Dakotas restrict public land bird hunting for residents only the first week?

 

[Big Fin]

I’m not up on any bird regulations but doesn’t one of the Dakotas restrict public land bird hunting for residents only the first week?

Yup. Some of the state enrolled private lands are also off-limits to non-residents for certain periods. I completely understand why they do it and if I was one of their Trustees I would do the same thing for my Beneficiaries.

 

[Treeshark]

But in neither case does the LO in CO have to open their land to the public like the NM rules.

Yes, I believe they do. Directly from your link:

 

[Bigjay73]

They absolutely do

 

[rjthehunter]

You were calling residents greedy for wanting more tags. When all your concerned about is more tags. You never answered my question what's a fair split and price for you?

Who said all I'm concerned about is tags? Read post 290 if you forget...

I love the idea of increasing elk populations.

Then things are perfectly fair to you as a non resident.


You're whimpering about the wrong state. Man I hope MT can get some reigns on how NR licenses are dolled out.

You have options: Go hunt cow elk. Get in line. Get out your wallet. The lines and prices for bull elk heads to the non-residents are going to get longer and longer and more expensive...

I'm using WY as an example. I'm in line, I have an application in for a general tag.

Your last sentence is exactly what I'm talking about. Things are only going to get more difficult for NRs. The elk population has been steadily increasing in WY along with the number of resident hunters declining. Why should things be getting tougher for NRs?? Looks to me like they should be getting better.

 

[Nick87]

Who said all I'm concerned about is tags? Read post 290 if you forget...

So what's the split and the price ?

 

[Treeshark]

Ive been writing WY legislators for years in support of 90/10 tag allocation.

No you havent, come on dude

 

[rjthehunter]

So what's the split and the price ?

Let's say 75/25? I don't know the answer to that. I don't know if there is a right answer. But there's definitely wrong answers.

As far as price, should a NR tag be over 12x as much as a resident tag? Seems ridiculous, but what can realistically be done about it?

 

[Nick87]

Let's say 75/25? I don't know the answer to that. I don't know if there is a right answer. But there's definitely wrong answers.

As far as price, should a NR tag be over 12x as much as a resident tag? Seems ridiculous, but what can realistically be done about it?

What state?

 

[cedahm]

Yes, I believe they do. Directly from your link:

The distinction is different than in NM though. In NM, a LO that chooses to receive unit wide vouchers has to open their land to the general public if they hold a valid (publically acquired) tag. That snippet from the regs only applies to the person (hunter) that buys the voucher and converts it to a tag.

The hunter who holds the LPP tag (eg. the person who converts the transferable LPP voucher to a license) has access to all the LO’s “registered” land (which is registered as either unit wide or private). Other hunters that got tags through the public draw or OTC do not have that access (unlike in NM with their UW tags)

But unlike NM, any other hunter from the general public with a normal (limited or OTC) tag for that GMU can not enter the land (which they can in NM) without permission.

Eg when my uncle sells one of his LPP vouchers in GMU 999 to someone, it doesn’t mean I can go hunt uncles land with my GMU 999 tag that I got in the draw.

 

[Treeshark]

Who cares.

We were talking about the hunter being able to hunt the land the tag came from.

You said they can’t. They can.

 

[cgasner1]

To anybody worried about getting an opportunity to hunt elk in 2025 thinking it will be hard or require planning for a small fee I will point you in the right direction on how to acquire an elk tag. It may only be for a cow or a very hard to fill bull tag. The opportunity to hunt is there just because it’s not in a unit you’re gonna see a YouTube episode on doesn’t mean you can’t hunt elk every year. If you want a hunt