Originally Posted by
Muley70
I expect the disparity in fee cost may end up in court. I have no problem with NR paying higher tag fees, but 10x residents is getting absurd. It is true the people of the state own the wildlife, but much of it resides on federal land were the state is not paying for the cover, food, water and raising of the states animals either, the American tax payer is. Locals are also not paying private land owners for raising the states wildlife either.
Locals have demanded access to private lands via I-161. Has anybody bothered to ask, how long will these prime areas be prime if it is opened to public access? The local Montana hunter has complained and whined for years. Survey after survey has indicated that private lands are leased for control issues and bad history with the general public. There are millions of acres of public land here, but the reident wants to shoot a 6x6 out of the truck window, those days are gone forever.
Good luck repealling I-161. It won by a large margin and isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Your argument about wildlife on federal lands is moot. That's been taken to court and beaten down repeatedly. The game animals belong to the states...end of story.
We live in a free market society so supply and demand dictate price. I'm not a Montana resident so if I want to hunt there I'll have to fork over the market price to play the game. I don't doubt a lot of outfitters are hard working individuals, but there's no reason why they should have a guaranteed business set aside. Outfitters are doing just fine in other western states that don't have outfitter sponsored licenses and I'm sure they'll continue to get by in Montana too.