Nemont

alright I am already breaking my word of not posting again. It is pretty funny that you are lecturing me on free enterprise but that is an entirely different issue.

Since you know all the answers then how should the price of tags be set. The prices are set in order to fund the F&G dept. In Montana that money NEVER goes into the general fund. Therefore it does not fund education, fire departments or police agencies, only the Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. So it does not matter to the State per se what the price of tags is, it only matters to the F&G. As far as I know there are no states in the West that have tag money going into their general fund. I could be wrong I will have to do more research.

Much of the NR dollar goes to fund the states Block Management Program which opens up private lands to public hunters by paying a land owner a per head access fee. The only other source of money that the dept. uses is a small amount of Pittman/Robertson funds. That land in the block management program is open to anyone Resident or NR. So tell me where the profit motive is?

again, Since you have all the answers then how should the state set the price of tags.

It is not a true free market in any sense because if it were the price most likely would be triple what they are going for right now. If we passed a law that said this year the combo tags in Montana for NR, all of them, are avialable to the highest bidder do you believe the price would go up or down? If the State were out to maximize it "profits" then the price of tags would actually float with demand. Do they float now? No, the FWP could make a lot more money if it did allow that to happen because there are more guys with more money willing to spend it on hunting.

While I won't stoop to your level of insulting your comprhension I will reiterate that you are free to believe Taulman and the Attorney's at Conservation Force are fighting for you and lower tag prices if you so wish. I happen to live in reality and can see that the price of NR tags will continue to escalate unless NR's quit purchasing them.

Nemont

gleninAZ

LMAO! Guess who our AZ Game & Fish is listing as a supporter for the new fee increases for non resident hunters? TAULMAN!! I about fell off my chair when I read that on AZOD.com website. He is surely figuring if a hunter can afford a $3200 elk tag they can also afford USO services. That lying piece of crap just clearly established that his attorney's letter threatening a lawsuit on fee increases was all for show. The average hunter who supports him is an absolute sucker. How do you feel about Taulman now Spyro? Think he is supporting lower fees for your next hunt or trying to exclude competition from rif raff for his trophy hunters?

SpyroAndes

Are you kidding?

I added Osama Bin Laden to the list of supporters on the Arizona Game & Fish Website.

Anyone can add themselves, or someone else, to that list.

While I don't believe for a second that Taulman isn't driven by personal motives, don't be so naive to believe that he actually added his name to that list.

Anyway, as far as the increased fees in Arizona, I don't like them. However, I figure that I am good for a sheep, antelope, elk, buff and deer hunt here pretty soon with my points in a res/non-res pool.

SA

PS. Sorry about the original.

gleninAZ

Spyro-you are right on that one. I looked and their are no restrictions on what you put down which is a little dorky but fits. You should have your best chance ever on NR tags here if they implement the loyalty program which is a setaside for the hghest bonus point holders. I have 7 for about everything so will keep my fingers crossed again. What units did Bin Laden put in for? I need the 25 million for tags.

MarkIIVT

HB2115 will die in committee for the very reason I stated. The law states that the NR tags are to be issued by unit at a percentage of the resident issued for that unit. You guys tried to take out the resident unit, when everyone has to play by the same rules.'

It is very relevant. And yes, I feel it is my duty to point out your lack of sophiostification and understanding of complex matters.

It is not anti-bowhunting sentiment, it is anti KBA sentiment. according to KDWP testimony, 85% of the the resident bouhunters hunt 2 counties or less, so what difference whould unitizing make?

The whole bill must be overturned, t-tags and all. However, bowhunters missed that with being selfish, only trying to free resident from units. The true colors showed it was about units and not the betterment of hunting in Kansas. Should have read thw bill in it's entirety, instead of opposing just a portion that offends you. THAT would have addressed t-tags then. SO in the end the KBA bitched about t-tags all the while, but when the fought it was only for freeing themselves of unit restriction. Unzipped your fly on that one.

You are constantly contradicting yourself. I hold no quarter or respect for a thing you say. I feel it is my duty to hound posters like yourself that claim to be keepers of the high ground here.

hillbillyhunter1

I don't think you're on the same subject--????????????????
as everyone else MarkIIvt

kshunter

Markiivt, you fit this joking classic,

"Buy'em books, send'em to school" and still can't post of the right topic. Even George T. himself would've laughed on that one!

The good thing is that I don't have to try to defend myself from your one-sided cowardly attacks on this one. Everybody can see you objective on this one, and no i'm NOT going to get involved in your eager immature web-forum fight. I come to the forums to talk to other hunters about my favorite pastime, that seem to love hunting as much as I do. Like I said earlier, Life's too short to be an a$$.

charlie brown

Ok, I got in this a little late I suppose, and found too many quotes to put up to even bother. I haven't been in the Big Game forum for a while, so have kinda missed this thread I guess[&:]

So, here is my view... Let the flaming begin, and don't think I am complaining, cause I am not...

I live in Nevada (as you guessed one of the states in the battle for NR rights). I live in the central part of the state. I spend countless hours every year volunteering and trying to help out and improve, in one way or another, the big (and small) game populations of the state. I spend probably at least 1 weekend a month out in the back-country, trying to find new hunting ground, in NEVADA. I do not spend this time in California, Wyoming, or Kansas. Nor do the people from those states (for the most part anyway) spend as much time here as I do. I apply for 90% of the very limited amount of big game tags available, while the NR's apply for the remaining 10%. I also apply for the limited # of NR tags in other states, and pay a higher price for that (well, when I can afford it anyway, which is usually not very often).

My point is this, I spend more time in this state, doing more for the state than people who live outside of the state. I don't expect more tags to go to the NR's while the people who live here get shafted. The same goes when I apply for other states. I expect the residents to have a better opportunity to hunt than I do. Gary Taulman is trying to take that away by not limiting the amount of NR tags. So, the people who work, play, and live in any one state all year long, and who do more for the animals of that state get shafted, and watch these high-paying people come in and hunt their animals. And trust me, for the most part people who pay big bucks for these hunts with major outfitters have no respect for anything. They will pay for their $7000, elk hunt, buy a new rifle, new Swarovski Opticks, and give them away as a tip, never to set foot in the wilds of the state again. Major outfitters don't care, they are just in it for the money, as is Gary Taulman!

kshunter

I hear you there charlie brown, but unfortunately what is ethically right or wrong doesn't matter, when it comes to greed of money and the lawsuits from some. I too do not expect to have better or equal chances of hunting that a resident of any state. I don't want to have better chances because I do not feel I deserve it more than the resident who lives in the state. But that's just the way I feel.

SpyroAndes

So if a guy spends $25K to hunt elk on the San Carlos Reservation and spends $6K on his rifle and scope, it means that he has no respect for anything?

I know an outfitter in Nevada that received a pair of Zeiss 20x60 stabilized binos foas part of his tip from a client on a sheep hunt. Actually, I heard that the client, w/ cash & bino value included, tipped him 100% of what the hunt cost. The guy shot the sheep of his lifetime and was literally moved to tears while they were taking pictures.

The issue here is you and your issues with money.

Money doesn't make a man a bad person. Money doesn't make a man a good person.

Just because a person has money doesn't mean he has less respect for the outdoors or the animals.

SA