RE: Reduction of out-of-state fees
The grass is always greener.....
I liked the point made here about the high prices in Orlando. Fortunately, my "uncle" pays for most of my travel, as there's little way I could afford to take my family there (gas is one thing, hotel and entrance passes are entirely another). What a RIPOFF!
But, that's not really the point here. Some food for thought. Let's just say this billpasses and my uncle from WI can now come here to WY andhunt on federal land. I, then, should be able to do the same thing in WI, right?
One problem there in WI, there's NO PUBLIC LAND! I couldn't hunt there unless I paid some landowner off to do it. How does that factor into the "cheap" fee I'd pay there for a nonresident license?
Seems when I lived (as a resident) in Alaska, nonresidents seeking game like Dall Sheep and Brown/Grizzly Bear were required to have a guide. How would you nonresidents feel about that? After all, it's our local Wyoming taxes that pay the Sheriff's office and the National Guard (if approved by the Governor and in a state status) to come looking for you if you get lost?
One point I believe does have merit here. If you want to pay resident tag fees, then you're free tobecome a resident. Heck, I'm not a Wyoming native, either! Of course, that may mean giving up your job and whatever security you find wherever it is that doesn't allow you to hunt. The coal mines and railroadsout here are hiring, so is Wal-Mart. You may not get weekends off and may have to work a lot of night shifts, but hey - at least you can hunt for cheap on federal land!
Maybeour license feesARE too high? How about we set about fixing those, and when you folks fix it so that I don't have to pay a landowner to hunt in your neck of the woods we'll all be happy?!
For the record though, I'm not opposed to nonresident hunting. I think we'd see higher success ratios though if we saw less hunting pressure on public lands. Lowering tag fees will achieve exactly the opposite and you may pay less, but you'll also see less game. There are a couple ways to alleviate this pressure: 1) higher tag fees and/ordraw quotas for nonresidents AND residents (and no more "general" tags), or 2) pressure on private landowners to end the practice ofleasing huntingrights to individuals and to outfitters(you want the public's money for damages, improvements, etc., you let the public in). It's a fine balance any way you look at it, since the future of hunting is also at stake (we want to recruit more hunters, not restrict them from hunting). So, it's obvious to me which of the twooptions make more sense to me - open up more land.