1sagittarius

What about WI Non-resident deer licenses? The Wisconsin Legislatures 2004 NR $25 fee increase to $160 was a insult to Wisconsin residents.

5 Years ago Iowa raised its NR deer license required fees to $308, and will increase to $328 for 2005, and add the ability to purchase an extra doe tag for $100 in 2005. That is $428 for a non-resident to shoot two deer in Iowa in 2005.

4 Years ago Illinois raised its non-resident required deer license fees to $285. There is a proposal in the Illinois legislature right now to increase the required NR deer fees to over $400 for 2005.

Wisconsin is still the #1 Pope and Young deer state in the country by a wide margin. Gun and Bow combined WI sells about 900,000 deer licenses .... only about 40,000 are to non-residents. 40,000 x an extra $200 is an extra $8 million the govenor/legislature would not have to suck out of WI residents.

Rangerlab

Give me a break!

KONK

If the State would give the DNR the money from licence fee's instead of putting it in the general fund and then giving the DNR a "BUDGET", we as sportsman in this State would be alot better off. [:'(]

Rangerlab,
Give you a break for what? Explain !!!!!!!!

HNI_Christine

I used to hunt in WI with both gun and bow. When WI hiked up the license fees to 135.00 I quit going up there for bow season. $135.00 on it's own isn't so bad, but my husband and I usually hunt together... so now that's 270.00 for tags, not to mention all the gas and food and lodging we had to pay for.

We still went up for rifle season for a while.

Last year I quit going for rifle season too.

It's just too much money to drive all the way up there and chase around a bunch of small bucks in the Northwoods. Last time I hunted up there I counted 31 deer pass within 50 yards of my stand and only 5 were bucks and every buck was 1.5 years old. (sure I know there are some big bucks in WI, but they are rare compared to the zillions of dinks running around)

If WI raises it's prices too much more, you will see a dramatic drop in NR hunters. (which you might like, but it's not going to increase your revenue any.. and it won't help you get rid of the earn-a-buck or T-seasons)

Don't use Illinois as an example of how to run your DNR... that's for sure. [:@]

Spatrat

IMO They should set recipricating agreements with the surrounding states so NR licenses cost what they cost in those surrounding states.

Konk, Where did you get the assumption that licensing fees go into general fund revenues? I am a financial manager for a county agency and we use fund accounting just like the state. Generally speaking revenues generated in a particular fund , such as the DNR, stay in that fund. It makes no sense to put those revenues in the general fund.

1sagittarius

Yup, And I used to bow hunt a reletives farm in IL ... til my son turned 12. Then I could not see spending $570 in just license fees for the two of us to hunt down there, it would have been/ will be almost $900 in 2005. It is cheaper to hunt and home in Wisconsin, and there is more deer.

HNI_Christine

1sagittarius, the Illinois NR deer license fees are certainly rediculous.

I know some Illinoisians think that by jacking up the cost, we'll lose some of the leasing and outfitting... but in my opinion.. the only NR's who can afford to hunt in IL now are those can also afford to lease land or hire an outifitter.

I did hear that there might be a 25.00 NR doe only tag offered this year. I hope they go ahead with it. I have some East Coast and West Coast friends who've never killed a deer with a bow, and they'd jump at the opportunity to hunt our big, fat does.

Dan D Buck

I tell ya who gets insulted, its the small business owners who don't sell the gas, lodging, food, and other stuff anymore to us NR's who don't come anymore due to the high cost. Also lost is the tax revenue from all those expenditures. Higher hunting fees help to accelerate even more the problem of hunting becoming for the rich only. So with the lost fees from hunters who chose not to go, and loss of tax revenues from sales and usage taxes, I wonder if there really is any overall net revenue gain from charging the remaining NR's higher fees?

00Hunter

I think this is the worst type of thinking for our sport of hunting. Jack-up rates and fees for fellow hunter? I don't know about the rest of you but, someday I would like my son and daughter to experience hunting in other places; a New Mexico elk hunt, a Alaskan bear hunt, or a Wyoming antelope hunt. Can the average guy do this? Not if states keep going up with hunting license fees. Raising fees does not seem like a way to encourage nonhunter to give it a try. Money is lost by small town USA with businesses that depend on the tourism during an otherwise slow season.
I think we all should check with our state gov. to find out where the license fees go. I can tell you a large percentage goes to non-game animal causes and to other non-hunting/fishing causes. You should be applauding Wisconsin for not soaking fellow Americans to participate in our God given right of hunting.
I'm gettin off my soap box now

kevin1

Enjoy your woods 1sagittarius ,
as your NR prices spiral ever upward you'll surely have fewer NRs to contend with .