What's up with UTAH???
- Thread starter Hntnhrd
- Start date
I agree with most of what has been said here. This discussion is mostly about hunting as non-residents in some other state.
Here in MT, what keeps resident hunting so affordable is how hard we gouge non-residents. Looks like UT is taking lessons from MT. You could never convince me that the average man is getting priced out of hunting as a resident of Montana. A thank you is in order to all the NRs that keep these resident fees low.
I do not agree with gouging non-residents, but that is the reality of what happens. To say that high non-resident fees (and thus lower resident fees) will keep us from hunting does not seem to be realistic when we look at what resident fees are in most of the states we live in. I doubt charging non-residents higher fees will keep young people from hunting in their home states, and therefore negatively affect hunter recruitment.
Additionally, the tag fee is usually a very small portion of a non-resident hunt whether guided or DIY. That being said, I do cuss everytime I have to purchase a license just to apply for a NR tag. If we can afford everything else that comes with the cost of hunting as a non-resident, then we can afford the tag fee. If I can't afford the tag fee, then I can't afford the gas, lodging, meals, etc. (and hopefully taxidermy).
Will my son be priced out of hunting? I dobut it, unless he refuses to hunt in the state of which he is a resident.
We all seem to act as though hunting out-of-state is some God-given birth right that should be inexpensive and available to all. Hell, I was/am happy hunting grouse, deer, or whatever was available in my local area, and my son was/is always happy to tag along. I was 38 before I ever went on an out of state hunt. If my son is 38 before he draws a premium NR tag somewhere, I doubt it will keep him from being a hunter.
The whole notion that the grass is always greener on the other side is promoted by the "horn porn" magazines who want you to think that unless you have hunted some of the popular areas, you are a nobody. I say BS.
I have been lucky to draw some tags for premium units across the west. They were fun, but guess what? These were not slam dunks with B&C critters behind every tree. The biggest elk, deer, and antelope we have shot have come from right here at home, where we have more time to scout and know the country better. My friends here in MT, some of whom are regulars here at HT, always seem to shoot trophies locally that surpass 90% of what is shot on most of these "premium" western hunts.
For you guys who are ready to tell these states to take a hike, I think you will be better off. Using that time and money for more local or regional hunts will probably be less expensive and result in equal or better trophies. You can also take satisfaction knowing that you had the kahunas to tell these states to go to hell. I admire you for that. I am sure my wife is waiting for the day I see the light and take the same stance you have.
Whether we like it or not, this trend will most likely continue. But, before we say that higher non-resident fees will be the end of hunting, lets really think about it. I suspect higher non-resident fees has less affect on hunter recruitment than what would result from higher resident fees.
Happy Hunting!
Here in MT, what keeps resident hunting so affordable is how hard we gouge non-residents. Looks like UT is taking lessons from MT. You could never convince me that the average man is getting priced out of hunting as a resident of Montana. A thank you is in order to all the NRs that keep these resident fees low.
I do not agree with gouging non-residents, but that is the reality of what happens. To say that high non-resident fees (and thus lower resident fees) will keep us from hunting does not seem to be realistic when we look at what resident fees are in most of the states we live in. I doubt charging non-residents higher fees will keep young people from hunting in their home states, and therefore negatively affect hunter recruitment.
Additionally, the tag fee is usually a very small portion of a non-resident hunt whether guided or DIY. That being said, I do cuss everytime I have to purchase a license just to apply for a NR tag. If we can afford everything else that comes with the cost of hunting as a non-resident, then we can afford the tag fee. If I can't afford the tag fee, then I can't afford the gas, lodging, meals, etc. (and hopefully taxidermy).
Will my son be priced out of hunting? I dobut it, unless he refuses to hunt in the state of which he is a resident.
We all seem to act as though hunting out-of-state is some God-given birth right that should be inexpensive and available to all. Hell, I was/am happy hunting grouse, deer, or whatever was available in my local area, and my son was/is always happy to tag along. I was 38 before I ever went on an out of state hunt. If my son is 38 before he draws a premium NR tag somewhere, I doubt it will keep him from being a hunter.
The whole notion that the grass is always greener on the other side is promoted by the "horn porn" magazines who want you to think that unless you have hunted some of the popular areas, you are a nobody. I say BS.
I have been lucky to draw some tags for premium units across the west. They were fun, but guess what? These were not slam dunks with B&C critters behind every tree. The biggest elk, deer, and antelope we have shot have come from right here at home, where we have more time to scout and know the country better. My friends here in MT, some of whom are regulars here at HT, always seem to shoot trophies locally that surpass 90% of what is shot on most of these "premium" western hunts.
For you guys who are ready to tell these states to take a hike, I think you will be better off. Using that time and money for more local or regional hunts will probably be less expensive and result in equal or better trophies. You can also take satisfaction knowing that you had the kahunas to tell these states to go to hell. I admire you for that. I am sure my wife is waiting for the day I see the light and take the same stance you have.
Whether we like it or not, this trend will most likely continue. But, before we say that higher non-resident fees will be the end of hunting, lets really think about it. I suspect higher non-resident fees has less affect on hunter recruitment than what would result from higher resident fees.
Happy Hunting!
Bigfin, i think your reality is scewed because you live in a state that has almost all of the big game species. If you think that there will be no drop in hunter recruitment in the future you need to think about the east side of the big river. The world is bigger than Montana you know... Horn porn rags are not the reason guys leave thier own stste to hunt, it is because they dont have the kind of big game they are leaving for. That is the biggest reason the majority of nonresident hunters cross state lines.
One could always move to a state with a large variety of big game... 
I may be moving back to the Midwest someday and if I do I know that hunting will become much more expensive for me due to the travel involved to get to many of the states that I want to hunt. But that is a decision that I will have made.
I know more than one person that has chosen to live in a state because of the hunting opportunities offered there at the cost of having a crappier or lower paying job. That said, I do want to hunt many of the species in alot of the western states, so I play the game that is required to try to get a tag.
I may be moving back to the Midwest someday and if I do I know that hunting will become much more expensive for me due to the travel involved to get to many of the states that I want to hunt. But that is a decision that I will have made. I know more than one person that has chosen to live in a state because of the hunting opportunities offered there at the cost of having a crappier or lower paying job. That said, I do want to hunt many of the species in alot of the western states, so I play the game that is required to try to get a tag.
Hntnhrd
Member
Exactly why I moved to MT from New england in the First place.
Hntnhrd
Member
I did the math one time and the 17,000 non resident licenses sold in MT pay for 70% of the entire FWP budget. Yes I like pay 80 dollars a year for a buck tag/elk tag/bear tag and all the upland bird hunting and fishing I could want. Oh and all the doe tags that can fit in my pack for 8$ to 11$. But is it really fair when most NOn's also suppot our tourism industry?
Schmalts:
Are you kidding about the world being bigger than MT? I would have never guessed that.
I agree with the reality of MT, versus WI. I grew up in MN, but the fact that I couldn't afford to go to MT was not going to affect whether or not I was a hunter, as some have implied in previous posts.
I don't think non-resident fees have anything to do with recruitment, whether we are talking about MT, MN, WI, or PA. It may affect the number of people who will travel out west to hunt.
When I go back to my home town in MN (often to hunt), all the kids are just as passionate about hunting as I was. They hunt the opportunities that are available, as that is what their budgets allow. The fee charged by MT, or any other western state has not affected their interest in hunting.
Maybe I am missing something, since I live in this dream world of MT, but I am still struggling to see how high NR fees, which keep resident fees lower, has any negative affect on hunter recruitment.
I hope you draw whatever tags you apply for, so long as it is the one I was applying for.
Are you kidding about the world being bigger than MT? I would have never guessed that.
I agree with the reality of MT, versus WI. I grew up in MN, but the fact that I couldn't afford to go to MT was not going to affect whether or not I was a hunter, as some have implied in previous posts.
I don't think non-resident fees have anything to do with recruitment, whether we are talking about MT, MN, WI, or PA. It may affect the number of people who will travel out west to hunt.
When I go back to my home town in MN (often to hunt), all the kids are just as passionate about hunting as I was. They hunt the opportunities that are available, as that is what their budgets allow. The fee charged by MT, or any other western state has not affected their interest in hunting.
Maybe I am missing something, since I live in this dream world of MT, but I am still struggling to see how high NR fees, which keep resident fees lower, has any negative affect on hunter recruitment.
I hope you draw whatever tags you apply for, so long as it is the one I was applying for.
AZ402
Well-known member
Well said BigFin, I hope you draw UT and AZ(again) before schmalts does
Bigfin, you dont think that when a father gives up hunting because he cannot afford to do the kind of hunting he enjoys the most that it won't effect the chances that his kid will or will not have interest in it?
There is a lot of guys who really dont care much for ducks and tree rats, and are bored with the WT deer or opportunities they have in thier home state, so western states are the only things that really keep them in the hobby. Just as you go outside of your own state to do something different or hunt a different way. Take away the affordability of it and many will quit hunting all together. I say many, not all, but many.
And does anyone but me notice how AZ402 gets so defensive anytime anyone ever speaks negetive about AZ or the Fat rich republicans whom he love to cart around in his shiny new yamaha Rino?
There is a lot of guys who really dont care much for ducks and tree rats, and are bored with the WT deer or opportunities they have in thier home state, so western states are the only things that really keep them in the hobby. Just as you go outside of your own state to do something different or hunt a different way. Take away the affordability of it and many will quit hunting all together. I say many, not all, but many.
And does anyone but me notice how AZ402 gets so defensive anytime anyone ever speaks negetive about AZ or the Fat rich republicans whom he love to cart around in his shiny new yamaha Rino?
I agree it is nice to have nonres pay for everything, but if any of you can deny our sport is going in a bad path you will be eating your words in 10 years. Great Briton is always used as an example and i do think we are pushing ourselves to it with this kind of thing. Trust me, when you make it so only the rich are the only nonres hunting in your state don't whine to me when the outfitters push to take more of your tags and lease up all your stomping grounds because you thought it was fine to make it a big money game. The more money the nonres have to pay is really a bad thing for residents because it will change the type of hunters, and outfitters coming and working. Take a look at UT and A402's state.... UT has headhunters running all over the place following animals for weeks to have some guy do nothing more than pull a trigger to fill a tag he gets every year because he can afford to buy one. AZ 402's neck of the woods you have outfitters staking claims and putting cameras and blinds on every water hole on the map expecting everyone to stay way because joe moneybags is coming to town. Is this what you want to happen? More outfitters band together and push for outfitter only tags, lock up landowner tags, lock up land in leases.
Anytime you let money make someones odds of hunting more of an issue you are hurting yourself. We all have heard of outfitters getting pissy with DIY guys, and guys whining about losing hunting ground to big leases. It will only get worst as prices skyrocket
Hntnhrd
Member
I think you misunderstood my post. I don't think it is fair. I think it is unfair that I can by an elk tag for 20$ and a nonresident has to pay 600 +. Plus the fact that we as resident business people make livings off of the tourist industry. Our Game departments really need to take a hard look at what they are doing to OUR sport.
"If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem"
"If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem"
I knew what you meant, and am glad you see it that way. I should have been more clear why i quoted you.
Your a good man, and honest to say what you did. If UT residents paid a little more for thier share of the fees maybe they wouldnt be bitching about all the wealth tags that are being sold. (20%)
Schmalts:
I think if you look at these posts, no one is in favor of hunting becoming a rich man's sort. I am still not convinced that we will see masses of hunters dropping out because of non-resident fees.
When you compare the affect higher non-resident fees have on non-residents dropping from the sport compared to what affect we would see if we had a large increase in resident fees, I think we would agree that large increases in resident fees (whether out west or in the midwest) would have a larger affect on huntng recruitment.
If not, I guess we can agree to disagree.
I am sorry there are not elk (not many), mule deer, or antelope in WI. Until such time, residents of WI and similar places are faced with the reality of what western states will do in order to keep resident fees lower.
I hope you get to hunt the critters you want!
I think if you look at these posts, no one is in favor of hunting becoming a rich man's sort. I am still not convinced that we will see masses of hunters dropping out because of non-resident fees.
When you compare the affect higher non-resident fees have on non-residents dropping from the sport compared to what affect we would see if we had a large increase in resident fees, I think we would agree that large increases in resident fees (whether out west or in the midwest) would have a larger affect on huntng recruitment.
If not, I guess we can agree to disagree.
I am sorry there are not elk (not many), mule deer, or antelope in WI. Until such time, residents of WI and similar places are faced with the reality of what western states will do in order to keep resident fees lower.
I hope you get to hunt the critters you want!
Have you tried comparing UT's resident tag prices to other states? I know for a fact that the general season tags in UT are more than those in ID and MT. The problem with UT is that we have landowners who have banded together and have high ties in state government. There are strong opinions on private property rights in this state, much of it going back to before it was a state, and the landowners feel they are exercising them. Not that I agree with the system, but there is much more to it than resident tag prices IMO.
AZ402
Well-known member
I couldn't read the rest because my head would explode. The Rhino isn't that shiny anymore
I couldn't read the rest because my head would explode. The Rhino isn't that shiny anymore
Funny thing, that was the last few words anyway, so you read it all beotch
Tell me if this goes on in your home state... In wisconsin everytime we get a flamin Dem of a governor he robs the funds that were collected from hunting lisence sales. Our tag fees keep going up, and that is fine as long as it is to run the F&G but it is robbed and used for other crap instead that has nothing to do with wildlife. Frigging DEMS, tax tax tax
noharleyyet
Well-known member
schmalts, to bad H-D doesn't build a plant in elk country. Win/win
I have said that myself, i would be gone! closest hey come is KC, but that is all manufacturing and assembly and no R&Dschmalts, to bad H-D doesn't build a plant in elk country. Win/win
AZ402
Well-known member
OK, so i went back and read all of what the "Wisconsin whiner" had to say. Lamer than I thought it would be and a hint more crying than expected.
Similar threads
