SpyroAndes,
You missed a lot of points, with your selective cutting and pasting. Paragraphs are there for a reason.
Let me address this with a couple of different points...
1) Charity work should be done for just that CHARITY. Not for some personal gain.
2) I belonged to several of these small local organizations and about 10%-20% of their membership was from non-residents.
3) The VAST majority of the funds raised by these small local organizations were not from residents. They were from auctions, more importantly Governor's Permits, to NON-RESIDENT hunters. Most of the hunts that were donated to these banquets were from OUT-OF-STATE outfitters.
By using your ex.: 10-20% of the organizations Nonresidents put a
vast(vast means 90%+) majority of the funds into the state organization. I don't buy that(per avg. state org.), and I doubt anyone else here does.
quote:
ORIGINAL: kshunter
Residents should also have the advantage of the tags system for game management. Majority of the resident hunters do not hunt out-of-state. They hunt in the same places every-year(as long as the outfitters don't get them).
Please tell me how a resident shooting a deer is different than a non-resident from shooting a deer... both serve that same purpose in managing herds.
All you have to do is read a little further down on my paragraph. You point is fabricated out my a point which was only stated in a Copy/Paste. If you read further down, you'll answer you're own question.
quote:
ORIGINAL: kshunter
With that being said, the majority of hunters will pay more and many will not want to pay 2-3 times the amount to be "equal" to non-resident tags.
You only believe that non-resident tags are 2 or 3 times more expensive? Are you naive?
Non-residents generally pay 10 to 25 times of the resident price for the tag.
Nope you're wrong. For a hypo. example. If a NR tag in KS cost $400 and a Res. tag cost $40, and your "equal theory" were to occur, Residents tags would not jump to $400 per tag, but instead the overall equal tag between the 2 would lower the NR tag and raise the Res. tag making the 10-12X you're talking about more like 3-5X. It would only be 10-12X higher if all tags went to $400. But that would defeat the purpose of what you want, wouldn't it.
quote:
ORIGINAL: kshunter
Does anybody already see the deer population on the increase? And guess who will be liable to the lawsuits, from the insurance agencies and lobbyist? You guessed it, the State Wildlife and Parks. And all of this for a some greedy out-of-state hunters. Give me a break! Why would the Wildlife and Park do that, theyd be stupid?
So basically, you are claiming that your local Wildlife Department is already mismanaging your deer herds because every herd is on the decline?
Just think maybe good management is a declining deer herd. Take Kansas for example. KS is trying and has been trying to lower the herd for "Management" practices. A declining deer herd is not always bad, and your "equal tag/price theory" would only do the opposite of Kansas's deer management by leaps and bounds.
That is MANAGEMENT and nobody is fighting that.... We are talking tag allocation discrimination and tag pricing discrimination.
Wrong again, see above. You may be fighting the tag allocation and pricing, but also fighting management. The two are directly linked together. Just read the paragraphs above, and if you're smart enough,(which I'm sure you are), it's easy to figure it out.
quote:
ORIGINAL: kshunter
Hunting Regulations are a right given to the state. The state manages the land a resource, whether it be Federal, Public, or Private. So let them do their job.
You just told me that they are doing a poor job of management because all the deer herds are on the decline.... Why do you want them to continue to do the same job that they are doing?
Must I really respond to this one? See above, again.
I'm using Kansas as an example because it is a state I am most familiar with. Making the tags and prices equal for Kansas, would be disaster. Not only for Game Management also for liability of many many potential lawsuits against the State W&P, that would most deffinately happen. Even besides all of that, the ethical stance of eliminating the "little man" in hunting, is something I will stand up against anyday, to preserve to sport of hunting.