Caribou Gear Tarp

Screwing over the Non-resident (or not)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Look Wisconsin screwing over the nonresident crossbow hunter again...lol

Still half of what we charge NR for an archery permit. As it should be. If they don't like it. I would be more than happy to see us residents have it to ourselves and pick up the rest of the tab.
 
Idk squat about nonresident hunting… I stay in my own lane…

I have a freezer full of game and adding a turkey before long! How anyone could hunt 4 states for 12 different species spending thousands in the process just to struggle to eat all that is beyond me…
Just because we are hunting all over the country doesn’t mean we are good at it.
 
Hunt any state you want, FOR FREE!!
Most of us won’t get one anyway. So save the license and tag fees, go out to Idaho, camp for a week and freeze your Christy off. Eat crappy freeze dried meals, don’t get enough rest, drink too much, rub shoulders with all the other hunters in the pumpkin patch. Take a camera instead of a gun.
Now, if you want to kill sumptin, well, that’s different.
 
Fixed it for you.
OK. As a resident of my state, I still stand on the opinion that nonresidents should receive no more than 10 or 15 percent of tags. The way it is run here benefits the few financially, with resident hunters having fewer opportunities than non-residents in the case of elk. Just go buy a tag from an outfitter, you say? Many if not most outfitters off-reservation here will not sell a tag to or guide a local, for fear the local will then turn around and hunt the honey hole himself next year, or tell his buddies. The guided hunt is where the money is for the landowner, and is almost exclusively the purview of the non resident hunter.

David
NM
 
Disagreeing with the premise does not mean non residents don’t understand.

Well said.

@Big Fin, I wonder if the fact that you’re seeing this subject more and more often on your forum may instead be a sign that many NR’s actually are gaining a better understanding of how things are set up- and they are realizing it’s kind of a scam in many cases.

I did enjoy the video piece, well balanced and I do appreciate you addressing a touchy topic straight on.
 
Last edited:
If you look at the odds on the powerball, it's kind of a scam, tax on stupid as some refer to lottery tix. People spent $105 billion on lottery tix last year, humans just see an opportunity, not sensibility. There will never be a shortage of NRs buying tags, even at double the current cost of tags here in Co. I'd be willing to bet Wyoming could add another 1k to a special elk tag and they would still sell every single tag
 
I’m going to put this out for consideration. Many of we HTers throw down app fees, bonus point costs every year in the hope of drawing a permit in which to pursue game on public lands. Over time it becomes thousands of dollars. Well now, follow these links to see how much it costs to pursue the King’s deer in a Scotland red stag hunt on private land this year. I would ballpark a grand for airfare (Dallas to Edinburgh) and maybe three for everything else including gratuity. $4000. Let that marinate in your brain a bit. It’s cheap, right? Considering everything included, it is very “affordable” over donating the same to various State game agencies over several years. Then driving ourselves, lodging/food expenses. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t need to hunt Scottish red deer, but considering the expense to hunt in my own country, we then ask why the hell not?


 
Well said.

@Big Fin, I wonder if the fact that you’re seeing this subject more and more often on your forum may instead be a sign that many NR’s actually are gaining a better understanding of how things are set up- and they are realizing it’s kind of a scam in many cases.

I did enjoy the video piece, well balanced and I do appreciate you addressing a touchy topic straight on.
There might be a better understanding and might be why it is so common in our comments and emails.

And maybe a better understanding does result in people realizing more and more how it is a system designed to favor the residents of said state, and therefore the non-resident is merely along for the ride, however rough that ride might be in terms of cost and low opportunity.

All that said, until the USSC rules differently on these issues, in the states where we are non-residents, we can expect less and less opportunity for more and more cost, as long as two trends continue; 1) rapid resident population increase in the Rocky Mountain states, and 2) reduced herds across the west due to human-causes habitat declines.

Thus my continued harping on changing the trends of #2 above. When we make more progress on herds and habitat, the tension in this R/NR allocation drops. And that is part of why I hate point schemes. Those schemes make it seem like somehow we are putting more animals on the landscape, when all we are really doing is reorganizing priority for access to the ever-shrinking resource of wildlife, with the reorganization normally benefiting old farts like me, residents, and those with high levels of financial/political capital.
 
It'd be interesting to see this discussion put into context by state from a budget and allocation perspective.

Budget wise: what is the total budget for a state fish and game department (or maybe better yet just the wildlife component), what percentage is provided by hunter licenses, tags and fees and within that what is the mix between R and NR. The trend of R/NR funding would be interesting to see as fees have increased but likely so have NR applicants.

From the allocation perspective how does the state split licensing from the general 90/10, to the #*^@#* you we're giving your tags away like NM and a lesser extent Utah.
 
There might be a better understanding and might be why it is so common in our comments and emails.

And maybe a better understanding does result in people realizing more and more how it is a system designed to favor the residents of said state, and therefore the non-resident is merely along for the ride, however rough that ride might be in terms of cost and low opportunity.

All that said, until the USSC rules differently on these issues, in the states where we are non-residents, we can expect less and less opportunity for more and more cost, as long as two trends continue; 1) rapid resident population increase in the Rocky Mountain states, and 2) reduced herds across the west due to human-causes habitat declines.

Thus my continued harping on changing the trends of #2 above. When we make more progress on herds and habitat, the tension in this R/NR allocation drops. And that is part of why I hate point schemes. Those schemes make it seem like somehow we are putting more animals on the landscape, when all we are really doing is reorganizing priority for access to the ever-shrinking resource of wildlife, with the reorganization normally benefiting old farts like me, residents, and those with high levels of financial/political capital.
What about 3) Increased hunter recruitment and popularity from social media?
 
I’m going to put this out for consideration. Many of we HTers throw down app fees, bonus point costs every year in the hope of drawing a permit in which to pursue game on public lands. Over time it becomes thousands of dollars. Well now, follow these links to see how much it costs to pursue the King’s deer in a Scotland red stag hunt on private land this year. I would ballpark a grand for airfare (Dallas to Edinburgh) and maybe three for everything else including gratuity. $4000. Let that marinate in your brain a bit. It’s cheap, right? Considering everything included, it is very “affordable” over donating the same to various State game agencies over several years. Then driving ourselves, lodging/food expenses. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t need to hunt Scottish red deer, but considering the expense to hunt in my own country, we then ask why the hell not?


[URL

I'll use up the points I have then will focus on hunting abroad. Would like to kill a moose in canada and then maybe Africa or Ibex in Austria.
 
Ok, my 2 cents,

Regarding the herd sizes. In most instances, presently, the herds are not far from what the social tolerance for the various herds is. A few exceptions, maybe bighorn sheep for instance. In those cases there is most often an environmental reason limiting much growth in herd size. I just do not think we can double our game herds. Mule Deer are struggling almost everywhere they are found. That is the one species that has potential for growing its numbers. However it may well be they are declining for reasons we can't entirely resolve.

As Randy pointed out in the video. If a young person realizes that big game hunting needs to be a large priority for them to live a satisfying life, move to one of the western states that offers good big game hunting. Do this before you get too rooted in all of life's obligations. This is what I did during the year of my 30th birthday. It is one of the most consequential and best life decisions, I have made. It has enabled me to have a very richly blessed 40+ year hunting career in Montana. I could never have afforded to do the hunting I have, if done as a non resident.

The 90/10 split for MSG is, imo, entirely fair. These tags are far from easy for a resident to draw during their hunting career. I have been applying for a Bighorn ram tag every year since moving west. I have not drawn a tag, and I know I have company, in that regard.

The price disparity between resident licenses and non resident license is too large. It is true that non resident hunters pay the freight. It would not bother me a bit to have resident hunters shoulder more of the load.
 
For me the take away is Resident hunters will not stop until they have as much of pie as possible while a small sliver goes to the NR who pay for the majority of it.

We have seen so called “conservation orgs” that’s morphed into tag mining machines to get tags into the free market…in the name of conservation. I say the they were just ahead of the curve.
NR should take note of that trend and support every single initiative that allocates tags that can be put onto the free market. Because that will be the only way you’re going to go compete in the future. Outfitter allotments, transferable land owner allotments, PLT to the states who will now have to pay to manage the land resources will have look for ways the land to pay for itself, no problem ….Nevada and Utah start selling concessions with tag allocations.
 
We have seen so called “conservation orgs” that’s morphed into tag mining machines to get tags into the free market…in the name of conservation. I say the they were just ahead of the curve.
NR should take note of that trend and support every single initiative that allocates tags that can be put onto the free market. Because that will be the only way you’re going to go compete in the future. Outfitter allotments, transferable land owner allotments, PLT to the states who will now have to pay to manage the land resources will have look for ways the land to pay for itself, no problem ….Nevada and Utah start selling concessions with tag allocations.
Screenshot 2024-03-02 at 11.20.53 AM.png
 
For me the take away is Resident hunters will not stop until they have as much of pie as possible while a small sliver goes to the NR who pay for the majority of it.

We have seen so called “conservation orgs” that’s morphed into tag mining machines to get tags into the free market…in the name of conservation. I say the they were just ahead of the curve.
NR should take note of that trend and support every single initiative that allocates tags that can be put onto the free market. Because that will be the only way you’re going to go compete in the future. Outfitter allotments, transferable land owner allotments, PLT to the states who will now have to pay to manage the land resources will have look for ways the land to pay for itself, no problem ….Nevada and Utah start selling concessions with tag allocations.
Yes, as resident population growth continues and herds decline, residents will ask to keep their opportunity static. If they keep their opportunity static, the only place for change in declining herds is the non-resident allocation. That is a function of a state-based system and application of the Public Trust Doctrine, whereby one group (residents) are Beneficiaries that imposes an obligation on the Trustees, while the other group (non-residents) are Stakeholders that only require Trustees to consider their interest to the degree it helps the Trust and Trust Corpus (wildlife). That's a huge difference in standing and results in what we see, the Stakeholders sustain their seat at the table with funding.

As for allocations in some disproportionate manner, where Trust Corpus (wildlife) is allocated to preferential groups without consideration to the benefits of the Beneficiaries, that might happen. If it does, the Trustees best hope that they don't have some well-informed and well-funded Beneficiaries, as if such Beneficiaries exist in that state the Trustees will be sued for breach of their fiduciary duty. If I was a Beneficiary of the Utah Public Trust that holds wildlife, I'd be lawyered up and the tag bordello they have built would be in jeopardy. But, I'm not a Beneficiary in Utah, so it's a moot point. If such ever came to Montana, where I am a Beneficiary, I'd be on that like a fire on a hay bale.

And for using the free market for some of the tags, that could/can be done within Trustee laws if the Trustee could/can demonstrate doing such is beneficial to the Trust Corpus and the Beneficiaries. That is the basis on which they have issued one raffle tag, one auction tag, and one Super Tag for each species in Montana. It becomes a discussion of size and scope, when determining when the Trustees are no longer acting in the best interest of the Trust Corpus/Beneficiaries. If you are suggesting that all tags, both resident and non-resident, be allocated on the free market, a Trustee would be sued immediately. If you are suggesting only the non-resident tags be sold on the free market, then the Trustees probably have a far more defensible case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,055
Messages
1,945,113
Members
34,992
Latest member
bgeary
Back
Top