No people should be given preference for tags just because they make their living off of outfitting or because they have enough money to pay an outfitter. The outiftters are hated as much as they are because they are the ones who are leasing up all the ground and keeping residents from being able to hunt. By increasing the amount of land they control and by being able to guarentee all the clients a tag they will be able to afford to lease more ground and soon enough certain areas have very little huntable ground anymore. And worse they only lease the ground to use during deer season and keep all small game hunters out the rest of the year.

Money spent by those who use outfitters goes to the outfitters. Those who come and camp or hunt from hotels are the ones who use resteraunts, drive themselves all over the place, get groceries at the local grocery store and such. With the outfitters I know they provide everything and the money is more concentrated.

It really is irrevelvant now because there will be no limit so they can give the first 20,000 to outfitters and the next 100,000 to the other NRs. It just doesn't matter with the virtually unlimted tags now available. But to answer your question, I would rather see the NR who doesn't use an outfitter. Has very little impact on me as I have my land to hunt but the growth of outfitting is only a huge negative for the state in the long run.