ORIGINAL: kshunter
Which would be very normal since the given the circumstances. A resident doesn't need to pay the big money for tag like th non-resident that buys it is. The statement makes complete sense. Still with all the state org's. non-resident's still aren't going to pay a vast majority of funds, when they equal 10-20% on the high side. If you went to other org.'s that didn't have the gov. tags, things would be a lot different, as you would see.
However, you disputed my original point that the vast majority of the $ raised by these local species organization come from non-residents. I showed you how you are wrong. Who cares about the resident/non-resident percentage of membership in the Org?
The tag auctions are what make these orgs the money and that money comes from NON-RESIDENTS. Conceed atleast this point already.
Please I never disputed the original point. Just because you went to a meeting where some tags went for 20-30K, now you think that Non-residents put into 90%+ of the money into State organizations on the avg. Come 'on, I feel like I'm having a debate with a kid.
As for your extreme case, what makes you think that they outfitters could careless about the wildlife?
Even if they don't and are completely driven by money, they'll want to improve the herd.
I'm hate to categorize all outfitters, but I sure don't know many who shoot many doe here in Kansas. And that is the top objective in the eastern 1/2 of the state of Kansas for the KDWP. So in theory, Majority of outfitters fail on the top objective in Deer Management.