silentassassin

Has anyone else heard that the tags in Illinois were going up to $475?

snowman69

I am from Canada so I haven't herd nothing ,but I was wondering what tags are you talking about that would cost you $475. It has nothing to do with me I was just hoping you could clarify for me thanks.

adams

For resident or NR tags? If it were NR tags I could understand it, they've got some trophy animals and if you want your crack at one you've got to pay up. "tax" the out of staters to fund the DNR programs (if that's where the money really goes) but if that's for a resident tag I would be up in arms if I were a IL resident. The animals belong to the people of the state and as a tax paying resident I think a tag fee over 100$ is rediculas. I'd start screaming now!!!

silentassassin

Sorry, for not clarifying. Yes I am referring to the cost of NR tags.

silentassassin

If that is the case then they can kiss my A. It's not evn the money it's the principle behind it. They are just getting a little too big for their britches. I know it won't make any difference because many people are willing to pay it and they will still sell out on permits but if that's the case they won't be getting any of my money. Which will suck becasue I will have to start looking for somewhere else to hunt[:'(][:@][:@][:@]

snowman69

well I guess if they raise for you guys which stinks but you have to take it as you pay to play. I wonder where the governments are going to get all that money from after peta bands bowhunting

adams

IMO that's supply and demand. I'm not particularly happy about it but if the money is earmarked for DNR projects such as securing more state lands, habitat improvment, stocking programs then I can live with it. If you want a shot a trophy animal then that's what you pay to increase you odds but if the money is meant to fund public school or budget deficets that I am against it 100%.

Unfortunately I truly believe the money will be spent on the later and IMO it's an unfair burden to be carried by NR sportsmen.

1865

Why? States don't have a lot of opportunity to raise funds at no impact to their taxpayers. If you(the state) have something that people outside your state want, and will pay for, don't you owe it to your constituents to make that money to be used wherever it is most needed? If you don't think it is worth it, don't pay it. But I don't see where the state raising prices on something to make more money is any different than Remington raising the price on a new rifle because it is in high demand. And no, I don't live in Illinois.

adams

LOL, you took the question right out of my mouth.

The fees for tag paid by sportsman have IMO been abused for years. I can understand you argument and respect it but IMO I would only support such an increase if it were for the good of the DNR. I'm not saying you view isn't valid(because it is) I just don't agree with it is all.

DNR all over the country are having budgets cut and the money raised by their managment practices and enforcement of the game laws is distrubited throughout the general budgets of the particular states in question. I don't agree with this. If the money is raised by the DNR then I believe it should stay within the DNR. That's my opinion anyways.

Double Creek

Adams, it's not a matter of supply and demand statewide. Yes, of the 15,000 tags sold last year, I would guess 70% were sold to NR hunters hunting in Pike, Adams, Brown, Calhoun, Greene, etc counties in the West Central portion of the state. However, areas like Southern IL gets very little pressure and are over run with deer. I think they should have gone to a zone system, like IA.

They are trying to reduce numbers of NR hunters, but the overwhelming majority are hunting one small portion of the state. This sucks for hunters wanting to hunt the less popular areas.

I agree with Silent, $475 is too high.