Resident vs. Nonresident
03-06-2005, 06:14 AM
#21
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: OKC Ok. USA
Posts: 501
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
I have no problem with the states setting license allocations for non resident hunters.
I do have a problem with the outrageous fees being charged in most of the western states. In some states the fees have almost doubled.
I do not excempt alot of the outfitters either for my scorn. Now I do not use outfitters when I go out west. I know the area I hunt well and haver no need, but for those who do I feel pitty. I look at most of the outfitters as like the TUNAFISH CANNING COMPANIES. let's increase the cost of our product and also decrease what we actually give. I realize prices have gone up on everything ,including access fees paid by outfitters & guides.
A cost increase is to be expected and indeed warranted ,but in all do repspect cost increase and a cut back in amount of days of hunting is screwing over thier clients.
I do have a problem with the outrageous fees being charged in most of the western states. In some states the fees have almost doubled.
I do not excempt alot of the outfitters either for my scorn. Now I do not use outfitters when I go out west. I know the area I hunt well and haver no need, but for those who do I feel pitty. I look at most of the outfitters as like the TUNAFISH CANNING COMPANIES. let's increase the cost of our product and also decrease what we actually give. I realize prices have gone up on everything ,including access fees paid by outfitters & guides.
A cost increase is to be expected and indeed warranted ,but in all do repspect cost increase and a cut back in amount of days of hunting is screwing over thier clients.
03-06-2005, 10:58 AM
#22
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Prince George, BC
Posts: 209
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
i live in BC canada, and i have mixed feelings about non residents having the right to hunt here, i mean, i feel that i myself should be able to hunt anywhere i want, so of course they have a right to hunt too, but what bugs me, and i am not saying that this happens is that i feel that the province or state should only allow a certain amount of tag to be drawn for the non resident, i mean i have been tryingto land a moose tag for about 4 years now and havent got it, luckly for me i was able to shoot a moose every year legally, but you know i still want to be able to get that 10 pionter, but it seems alot of people outside of where i live, and even in the same provine as me but they live 8 hours south of me seem to get the tags, i know it is luck of the draw, but it gets frustrating when you live about 30 min from prime moose hunting areas, and these out of towners get the draws and you dont. so like i said i have mixed feelings on this subject, i think what the wildlife guys should do (maybe they allready are) is that if you get a draw one year you should be exempt from next years draw to give other people a chance, and then of course the following year after that they can apply again, seems fair to me dont you think? i know of people that have gotten a draw 2-3 times in a row and know of others that have been applying for 10 years and havent got one, so i dontknow what system they use but i think it should change. phew, i guess i needed to vent a little, thanks for listening to my opinions.
03-06-2005, 01:10 PM
#23
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Williamsport Md USA
Posts: 419
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
You want equal then come to Maryland. We don't care if your from the west, nonresidents pay $130 for a hunting license and can shoot an UNLIMITED number of deer same as a resident. We don't even make you hire a guide.
03-06-2005, 03:50 PM
#24
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location:
Posts: 659
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
can we elk hunt in maryland? how about mountain goat ? what about bighorn sheep?
i bet a resident does't pay $130 for a tag? lets face-it every state is the same, THEY ALL CHARGE MORE FOR NON-RESIDENT TAGS. so if u don't like it don't pay it! stay home and hunt!
i bet a resident does't pay $130 for a tag? lets face-it every state is the same, THEY ALL CHARGE MORE FOR NON-RESIDENT TAGS. so if u don't like it don't pay it! stay home and hunt!
03-06-2005, 09:50 PM
#25
Fork Horn
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Nocona, Texas
Posts: 248
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
Ever think about why YOUR state seems to be "selling-out" to the non-res hunter???
Easy to see why. When I buy my non-res Colorado Elk tag, I am paying what? 8,9,10 times more than a resident pays??
All about the money. Always about the money. We should never kid ourselves otherwise.
Easy to see why. When I buy my non-res Colorado Elk tag, I am paying what? 8,9,10 times more than a resident pays??
All about the money. Always about the money. We should never kid ourselves otherwise.
03-07-2005, 10:17 AM
#26
Fork Horn
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: INDIANA
Posts: 341
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
I will also agree that the states should be able to allocate the number of permits issued to the nonresident, but the fees are becoming outrageous. I'm a police officer in Indiana and by the time I've purchased a nonresident tag and paid for the rest of my trip (without a guide) we are talking about $1000. Now don't get me wrong if I have to pay $1000 for anything I prefer it to be a hunting trip. However, I don't make much money and I have a family at home to take care of. The cost of this trip could have paid for an entire beef, enough meat to feed my family for a year. I think the thing that bothers me the most is that the price of the tag takes away so much of the enjoyment that we all strive for on a hunting trip and adds unwanted pressure and stress on the "kill" to justify the tag price. Ya, a couple of you might shoot off at the mouth and tell me to just stay home, but thats my two cents worth.
P.S Someone give me a couple GOOD reasons why I can't hunt w/o a guide in some of the Western wilderness areas. Thanks.
P.S Someone give me a couple GOOD reasons why I can't hunt w/o a guide in some of the Western wilderness areas. Thanks.
03-07-2005, 12:05 PM
#27
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Anchorage,Alaska
Posts: 512
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
ORIGINAL: BGHUNTER00
P.S Someone give me a couple GOOD reasons why I can't hunt w/o a guide in some of the Western wilderness areas. Thanks.
P.S Someone give me a couple GOOD reasons why I can't hunt w/o a guide in some of the Western wilderness areas. Thanks.
I personally have no problem with non-residents hunting the wilderness alone as long as they leave a deposit or bond and the name and number of the next of kin, so the local people get compensation for rescuing the lost hunter because of his inexperiance.
In my area it is common for an out of stater to get into trouble in the woods whether it be hiking,biking,camping or even fishing.
I think it's good insurance for a state to require a guide for the inexperianced out of state hunter instead of a deposit on a rescue.
The way I see the price of the Non-Resident tags... You are paying for a portion of the back state and local taxes as well as other expenses that I as a resident of the state have paid for years for management of the land and animals you wish to hunt in my state.
My opinion
03-07-2005, 01:50 PM
#28
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Arcadia Ca USA
Posts: 210
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
People are being completely foolish by not believing that this thing is 100% about MONEY!
The states are robbing the non-residents because what are they going to do, vote them out of office?
USO is suing the states so he can have more guide hunts to generate more revenues.
Lets talk about reality here for just one fricking second...
In the vast majority of all western states, if not all, the body in charge of hunting (be it the Fish & Game Dept, the Wildlife Dept or what ever they call it in that state) are funded completely by revenues generated from tag fees and hunting license purchases.
The state is not appropreating funds to these departments from the State's General Fund. These Deparments are NOT like the public university system that uses monies from the State's General Fund to operate and thus that is how they explain non-resident tuitions being 3 times more.
The bodies that control hunting in these states do not follow this model of funding. A non-hunter or non-fisherman living in Tucson is not contributing to operating budget of the Arizona Game and Fish.
The Arizona Game and Fish's operating budget comes from the purchase of fishing licenses, hunting licenses and big game tags.
Now lets take it a step further, since the operating budgets of these state wildlife management bodies are not receiving funding from the state's general fund, the only monies that a resident hunter is giving this body is monies from license and tag purchases.
A resident hunter that is drawn for a deer permit north of the grand canyon will contribute a total of $48 ($25.50 license and $22.50 deer tag) to the Az G&F department's budget.
Under the new 2005 rates, a non-resident hunter that is drawn for a deer permit north of the grand canyon will contribute a total of $1319 ($113.50 for license & $1205.50) to the Az G&F department's budget. In other words, the non-resident would be paying 24 times the rate of the non-resident.
A non-resident that is UNSUCCESSFUL in drawing that same deer permit will contribute a total of $113.50 to the Az G&F operating budget. Which is more than twice as much as the successful resident contribution.
The non-residents applicants and non-residents that successfully draw tags generate much more revenue for these state bodies than the resident hunters. In Arizona, 10% of the tags are allocated for non-residents, so on a hunt with 100 tags, 90 are for residents and 10 are for non-residents. Revenues generated on that hunt, just from successfully drawn hunters...
90 residents x $48 = $4400
10 non-residents x $1320 = $13,200
What would happen to the state politicians in Arizona if they increased resident deer tags from $22 to $240?
What would happen to the state politicians in Arizona if they increased resident elk tags from $76 to $500?
What would happen to the state politicians in Arizona if they increased resident sheep permits from $184 to $1000?
You know that their days as state politicians would be numbered, HOWEVER, the VERY SAME RATE OF INCREASE happened to non-residents in Arizona.
$100 deer tags jacked up to $1200
$400 elk tags jacked up to $2400
$900 sheep tags jacked up to $5000
Here is what the more populace states should do...
I went to UCLA, a top 25 university nationally, whose current tuition is $9,000 for residents and $22,000 for non-residents (which they only pay for 1 year if they are smart and declare residency), I think that they should jack up the non-resident tuition of all the state universities from $22K to $140K per year. We will see how many kids from these western states are left in the UC and Cal State system after that rate increase.
I think that all public universities in the United States should do the very same thing. Jack up the prices for non-residents.
We will see how many people in Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and the like are trying to justify the highway robbery of their game and fish departments when their state university admission become highly competitive and little Johnny can't get a college education because he didn't have the grades to get into the local state school and pop's doesn't make the $ to send him to a $35+K per year private school.
These limitations on the number of tags for non-residents, like Arizona's 10%, are rediculously low.
The mega-inflated prices for non-resident tags are criminal.
To be quite honest, while hunting is not considered "a requirement" by some, this type of taxation without representation is what caused colonies to revolt.
Nevermind that these states greed is going to be the end of hunting... once you eliminate a large number of hunters because it has become rediculously expensive to hunt, hunting will only be for the financially elite.
SA
The states are robbing the non-residents because what are they going to do, vote them out of office?
USO is suing the states so he can have more guide hunts to generate more revenues.
Lets talk about reality here for just one fricking second...
In the vast majority of all western states, if not all, the body in charge of hunting (be it the Fish & Game Dept, the Wildlife Dept or what ever they call it in that state) are funded completely by revenues generated from tag fees and hunting license purchases.
The state is not appropreating funds to these departments from the State's General Fund. These Deparments are NOT like the public university system that uses monies from the State's General Fund to operate and thus that is how they explain non-resident tuitions being 3 times more.
The bodies that control hunting in these states do not follow this model of funding. A non-hunter or non-fisherman living in Tucson is not contributing to operating budget of the Arizona Game and Fish.
The Arizona Game and Fish's operating budget comes from the purchase of fishing licenses, hunting licenses and big game tags.
Now lets take it a step further, since the operating budgets of these state wildlife management bodies are not receiving funding from the state's general fund, the only monies that a resident hunter is giving this body is monies from license and tag purchases.
A resident hunter that is drawn for a deer permit north of the grand canyon will contribute a total of $48 ($25.50 license and $22.50 deer tag) to the Az G&F department's budget.
Under the new 2005 rates, a non-resident hunter that is drawn for a deer permit north of the grand canyon will contribute a total of $1319 ($113.50 for license & $1205.50) to the Az G&F department's budget. In other words, the non-resident would be paying 24 times the rate of the non-resident.
A non-resident that is UNSUCCESSFUL in drawing that same deer permit will contribute a total of $113.50 to the Az G&F operating budget. Which is more than twice as much as the successful resident contribution.
The non-residents applicants and non-residents that successfully draw tags generate much more revenue for these state bodies than the resident hunters. In Arizona, 10% of the tags are allocated for non-residents, so on a hunt with 100 tags, 90 are for residents and 10 are for non-residents. Revenues generated on that hunt, just from successfully drawn hunters...
90 residents x $48 = $4400
10 non-residents x $1320 = $13,200
What would happen to the state politicians in Arizona if they increased resident deer tags from $22 to $240?
What would happen to the state politicians in Arizona if they increased resident elk tags from $76 to $500?
What would happen to the state politicians in Arizona if they increased resident sheep permits from $184 to $1000?
You know that their days as state politicians would be numbered, HOWEVER, the VERY SAME RATE OF INCREASE happened to non-residents in Arizona.
$100 deer tags jacked up to $1200
$400 elk tags jacked up to $2400
$900 sheep tags jacked up to $5000
Here is what the more populace states should do...
I went to UCLA, a top 25 university nationally, whose current tuition is $9,000 for residents and $22,000 for non-residents (which they only pay for 1 year if they are smart and declare residency), I think that they should jack up the non-resident tuition of all the state universities from $22K to $140K per year. We will see how many kids from these western states are left in the UC and Cal State system after that rate increase.
I think that all public universities in the United States should do the very same thing. Jack up the prices for non-residents.
We will see how many people in Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and the like are trying to justify the highway robbery of their game and fish departments when their state university admission become highly competitive and little Johnny can't get a college education because he didn't have the grades to get into the local state school and pop's doesn't make the $ to send him to a $35+K per year private school.
These limitations on the number of tags for non-residents, like Arizona's 10%, are rediculously low.
The mega-inflated prices for non-resident tags are criminal.
To be quite honest, while hunting is not considered "a requirement" by some, this type of taxation without representation is what caused colonies to revolt.
Nevermind that these states greed is going to be the end of hunting... once you eliminate a large number of hunters because it has become rediculously expensive to hunt, hunting will only be for the financially elite.
SA
03-07-2005, 02:58 PM
#29
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Anchorage,Alaska
Posts: 512
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
You are a non-resident coming to my state to use my resources.
Why come here? The animals you want to hunt not where you live?Don't have enough where your from?
It seems simple to me that you seek an area with less people and/or more animals.
Less People = Less Residents to buy Licenses and contribute to the Keepers of the animals.
Most of these Western States with good game populations don't have the resident population of people and/or hunters to contribute and benefit from the non-resident and in turn my area is kept pristine and full of animals for you to hunt.........At a Price.
Seems simple. Play here, Pay Here!
You are coming here because we offer something you don't have and you wish to.
Seems like simple economics to me. You want to drive the Benz you will pay.
If you can't afford or don't wish to pay, stay at your own state and use your own resources from your state at a resident price if you don't think it's worth it to play here.
For you non-whining non-residents who do hunt here and contribute Thanks... It your $$ that helps keep this place a fine place to hunt.
Why come here? The animals you want to hunt not where you live?Don't have enough where your from?
It seems simple to me that you seek an area with less people and/or more animals.
Less People = Less Residents to buy Licenses and contribute to the Keepers of the animals.
Most of these Western States with good game populations don't have the resident population of people and/or hunters to contribute and benefit from the non-resident and in turn my area is kept pristine and full of animals for you to hunt.........At a Price.
Seems simple. Play here, Pay Here!
You are coming here because we offer something you don't have and you wish to.
Seems like simple economics to me. You want to drive the Benz you will pay.
If you can't afford or don't wish to pay, stay at your own state and use your own resources from your state at a resident price if you don't think it's worth it to play here.
For you non-whining non-residents who do hunt here and contribute Thanks... It your $$ that helps keep this place a fine place to hunt.
03-07-2005, 03:00 PM
#30
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WC FL
Posts: 26,323
RE: Resident vs. Nonresident
ORIGINAL: mybigredford
i live in BC canada, and i have mixed feelings about non residents having the right to hunt here, i mean, i feel that i myself should be able to hunt anywhere i want, so of course they have a right to hunt too, but what bugs me, and i am not saying that this happens is that i feel that the province or state should only allow a certain amount of tag to be drawn for the non resident, i mean i have been tryingto land a moose tag for about 4 years now and havent got it, luckly for me i was able to shoot a moose every year legally, but you know i still want to be able to get that 10 pionter, but it seems alot of people outside of where i live, and even in the same provine as me but they live 8 hours south of me seem to get the tags, i know it is luck of the draw, but it gets frustrating when you live about 30 min from prime moose hunting areas, and these out of towners get the draws and you dont. so like i said i have mixed feelings on this subject, i think what the wildlife guys should do (maybe they allready are) is that if you get a draw one year you should be exempt from next years draw to give other people a chance, and then of course the following year after that they can apply again, seems fair to me dont you think? i know of people that have gotten a draw 2-3 times in a row and know of others that have been applying for 10 years and havent got one, so i dontknow what system they use but i think it should change. phew, i guess i needed to vent a little, thanks for listening to my opinions.
i live in BC canada, and i have mixed feelings about non residents having the right to hunt here, i mean, i feel that i myself should be able to hunt anywhere i want, so of course they have a right to hunt too, but what bugs me, and i am not saying that this happens is that i feel that the province or state should only allow a certain amount of tag to be drawn for the non resident, i mean i have been tryingto land a moose tag for about 4 years now and havent got it, luckly for me i was able to shoot a moose every year legally, but you know i still want to be able to get that 10 pionter, but it seems alot of people outside of where i live, and even in the same provine as me but they live 8 hours south of me seem to get the tags, i know it is luck of the draw, but it gets frustrating when you live about 30 min from prime moose hunting areas, and these out of towners get the draws and you dont. so like i said i have mixed feelings on this subject, i think what the wildlife guys should do (maybe they allready are) is that if you get a draw one year you should be exempt from next years draw to give other people a chance, and then of course the following year after that they can apply again, seems fair to me dont you think? i know of people that have gotten a draw 2-3 times in a row and know of others that have been applying for 10 years and havent got one, so i dontknow what system they use but i think it should change. phew, i guess i needed to vent a little, thanks for listening to my opinions.
mybridgeford, I agree with you,but it all goes back to Money.When I use to go to Alberta,
last time in 1995, it cost me over 6k.That's all including,Trip cost,Outfitters,$800 t0 $1000 to have
it mounted, Tips for the guides and all the rest we spent in Alberta.Now count all the nonresident
hunters that go every year,it's in the Millions of $$$'s..
Tell all the Outfitters,Guides,Taxidernmist, Hunting Tags and all that make a living at it, in BC and other parts,that you want to controll nonresidents...I wonder what they have to say!!
WE feel the same as you here in Florida,about the Salt Water Sport Fishing.But the State and everybody
is making Millions.Half the time we half to move out further to fish,cause of the nonresident's bunched up
where the easy fishing is best.I don't care how much they have to pay,they will still come!!
It's not the hunters Fault....You have to have your Law's changed,but they are making MILLIONS with
Nonresidents!!!!