ROTFALMAO ...Glen you're being Californicated for the most part ,not "easterners".
But I will say most western states get a very large portion of their operating budgets from the fees they charge non res. hunters. That and the fact non res. sportsmen pump billions into the western economy without which people couldn't make ends meet.
I don't have a problem with limited license allotment provided states use a point system towards the applicants. But I do have a problem with the outrageouse increases for out of state hunters and the outright rape by outfitters.
As example a 3 or 4 years ago one would book an antelope hunt for say $850 for a 5 day hunt. Today that same hunt might be $1250 and only 3 DAYS. Almost a 50% increase for the hunt and a 40% decrease in time allotted for the hunt. Any way you try to explain that one can't justify such an increase with the time reduction.

The "western culture" is just what a bunch of "easterners" brought with them when they populated it.

I do agree that the majority of hunting licenses should go to resident hunters guys. Here in the NorthEast we have drawings for moose in our own "trophy areas" that are as hard to win as any good Bull elk area. In PA many of us put in to draw one of the 80 or so elk tags.... but the difference in the draws in place that I reference is that while the majority of the tags go to residents, non residents get an honest shot based on the odds. In NH a resident could wait 5 to 10 years to draw a moose tag, while a non-resident might go 10 to 20 .. or longer. All hunters share the load... and when you compare the odds residents and non residents have to get one of the few tags, they are skewed in favor of the resident, as they should be, but not completely one sided ... and I'll use Arizona as an example .. just 10% to 90%. I have been fortunate to hunt a few of the Western states, but my son who has about 2 more months in the oven may never get the chance. I don't want to have to buy the right ... I want the same shot as the next guy. Anyone who thinks me paying over $1000 for a single big game tag is not paying my fair share is sniffing to much manure.

Now if guys like you can at least throw me the bone that somethings have to be improved, if my son and I are to be able to hunt out West some day 15 or 20 years from now. I am not a big fan of the alternatives that are popping up because people are throwing their elbows up and saying "not in my back yard". Such as outfitters "guaranteed tags" for huge money, or game farms where you pick your animal from a menu, or leasing for huge fees the rights to hunt some outfitters 400 acres.

Ruddy you're right about Cal but most of them that have screwed up California couldn't take the cold on their pinko butts and moved out to the sun from the east. Now they are movin here by the hordes. If you read my stuff I really don't want to hog it all or have your cost go through the roof. I also know that I won't stand for 50% of our tags to go to non-res and especially not the pompous know it alls who wag there fingers in my face from behind a computer. My money is on the couple thousand p&$$ed off rednecks from Utah kickin' some pompous butt if it comes down to a faceoff. Also doubt that billions of dollars from non-res is plowed in to our state game programs. We are the ones buying the sporting goods that generates most of the fed dollars we do get. By now most of you have looked at the annual report. Our state lottery is a good chunk too. Non-res tags and license is a part but we could do fine without it. Bottom line is we will get past this and you will probly end up with better odds than I have of gettin drawn. See you boys in the woods.(banjo music)

Ok. You got an elk that lives part time on national forest, part time on state land, and part time on private land. This happens in every western state. I don't think that anyone here would advocate letting the feds control the hunting on federal land, the state on state land and private landowners when on private land. Obviously this is not a workable situation. Or do landowners in the east get to do what they want with the game on their land?

Ad to that the FACT that, BY CURRENT LAW, the people of that state own the animals that reside within it's borders. Now you may not like that law, but it is the law of the land. That gives the state the sole right/responsibiltity to hand out hunting licenses and decide who gets them.

Also, be careful what you wish for. Think about it. If USO is successful in opening up western states to nonresidents in their drawings, the state can very easily figure out another way to limit nonresidents. Can you say $2500 for an elk tag??? The courts have already said a differntial pricing structure is ok, so they can play that card. That would cut the NR numbers down again while putting more money in their coffers. I would certainly be sorry to see that because I wouldn't be able to hunt elk again.

As it is, nonresidents supply 70% of license revenue collected in Colorado and it is going up every year. I would rather they keep us at a reasonable fee and limit our numbers than have unlimited tags and keep pricing more and more hunters out of the market.

Let's just stop and think about it ................. We are all Americans and we are all hunters that enjoy the outdoors. We need to share all the wonders that nature has to offer us. There needs to be a balance between resident and non-resident hunting rights. In other words, smooth out the need of those who pay state taxes (residents) and those who generate DNR revenues (non residents).

At the end of the day, we all want the same thing!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll be damned!! I think all these easterers puffin their feathers has got to you Txhunter and I can't beleive I agree with what you just said. I bet you can smell those new yorkers rubbing their hands and see the next move as having Gerragos and Johnny the glove suing Texas for the right to hunt on your ranch. I really would like to see you have a chance to hunt elk here and hope things don't go nuts so you can someday. You easterners can stay home. We're gonna start agreeing out here and secede from the union. We will have President Bush and you can have Herman Munster.

"better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt"
Take it for what it's worth glen. I got a better idea ,let's just give all the hunting rights back to the Apache. After all before people came From The East came it was thier land.
P.S. I think I saw some of your eastern realative in Deliverance. That's about your mentality.

Ruddy

Those out there that think that "Their" federal tax dollars are supporting the AZ elk herd simply don't know what they are talking about.

Federal dollars coming in for the game and fish come from the Pittman/Robert act which was enacted by hunters to tax themselves thru purchases of guns ammo etc. in order to manage wildlife. Later the Dingle/Johnson act was passed to tax fishing products to promote and foster fishing in each state. These monies are divided up by the amout of supplies sold in each state and are used by the game and fish. I don’t see NR money in large quantities supporting the Arizona game and fish. The out of state fees at 10% of the tags is not even 1% of the budget.

Either way you look at it, AZ G&F meet in less than 2 weeks to discuss proposals on how to deal with this issue. One idea that I have heard floating around is removing all bonus points for non-res. Another idea that I have heard is to make it illegal to sell antlers and illegal to transport game meat out of the state. If that were the case, AZ could legally not allow any NR the opportunity to hunt. Before you pound your fist on your desk at AZ, keep in mind that several other states currently have hunts (moose, turkey, etc) that are not open to NR.

You eastern boys do have purdy cheeks! Ruddy-you need to read carefully the post from PLB in the "ruling in AZ is bad" thread. The animals never did belong to the nation, they were bought by locals, non-res hunter have equal chances of getting drawn to me, we have paid for the expansion of elk to the east and you guys still keep yelling about your rights. If you are a real hunter and not an outfitter or rich boy who buys his trophies then you should be working against the USO position. After they sell/kill the very finest bulls in each unit here and get paid big premiums for it they will move on to the next state. After we are down to a bunch of cows and bachelors will you want to hunt here so bad? I think we need to keep one of the best and least selfish and non-political game management systems in the country as it is so you will have a chance at that 400 bull.

PLB and Glenin-

Don't you see??? This is our point!!!!

If anti's are trying so hard to keep us from hunting .. and residents are fighting to not allow non-residents to hunt, how the hell can we win? If this is the future of hunting .. then I really hope you enjoy it in Arizona. Because according to your logic every state in the Union can and should make it EXTREMELY hard for you to hunt outside of it. I've been to Arizona, other than a shot at a truly large Bull ... the hunting quality and diversity is very weak in comparison to most states west of the Mississippi ... hell, even compared to East of the Mississippi.