RE: Reduction of out-of-state fees
Just a couple more thoughts here....
I'm not wholly against increased access for nonresident hunters. We have game here in Wyoming that simply isn't available to some of them at home, and specifically I'll cite elk and antelope.
Deer, however, abound in these United States. I'm appalled when I hear from them things like "everything's private land at home, I just can't afforda lease". In my opinion, that's a bigger problem than nonresident tag fees in states where public lands abound, and it's a problem that's shown up here in the west now, too.
My family used to own quite a bit of land suitable for hunting. But because of some irreconcilable differences over its management between those who inherited it, it was forced to sale. Now, the bright spot of all of this is that we received WELL more than the appraised price. The sad spot is that the guy who paid so much more for it? Well, his only interest in it is as a private hunting reserve. So, the average joes who used to show up in the fall to ask permission to hunt are out of luck there now.
It isn't just the individual with money who's chasing us out. I see more and more private land sales involving interestgroups like the Nature Conservancy who often try to place restrictions (no motorized travel, no hunting) on the ground they'll "help" you come up with the cash to buy as a condition of "helping you".
We're not going to see American hunting go the way of European hunting as long as we have public lands. But - we have to stop and reverse this wave of lost access EVERYWHERE. I wonder if the bill's sponsor here has considered how much of his home state has been closed to public hunting due to private land sales?