$1,149.84

I think the golden rule should be resident pay 10% of the non-residents.

Click to expand...

Straight Arrow said:

NoWiser, thank-you for your strong support of RMEF ... and wildlife habitat in many different states and places. Your perspective regarding R and NR license costs is certainly understood. For whatever it's worth, there are many resident hunters who would gladly pay more; albeit not dollar for dollar relative to NR costs. It is realized that NR license fees pay for something like forty percent of FWP revenues, so it's critical. Another reality is that regardless of resident hunting license fees, Montana is a "welfare state" in that our population numbers do not add up to enough revenue to fund much of what is required and desired. It's double-edged in that we like sparse density and open spaces ... which incidentally attract visitors to our state. So the dilemma results in Montana gladly accepting financial support from more populated states ... and hunters who reside there.

Click to expand...

Schism said:

My concern is out of the 435 US Representatives and 100 Senators, Montana has 1 Representative and 2 Senators. Even if you can get all three to vote no on PLT issues, have fun convincing a majority of the 434/98 other legislators when their constituents feel disconnected from public lands, specifically those in western mountain states.

Say a group of state legislators want federal land transferred to the state. Say that same group of legislators is in charge of setting R and NR tag prices...

Some of the posts in this thread have hit sensitive spots for R's and NR's alike. Like it or not, we all need to stick together and work toward solutions. Unfortunately we as hunters are our own worst enemy when it comes to working together on some of these issues as we are all competing for a finite resource. I can't claim to have any answers but I believe it will require creative thinking and flexibility of both R's and NR's to reach a viable solution.

Click to expand...

Schism said:

My concern is out of the 435 US Representatives and 100 Senators, Montana has 1 Representative and 2 Senators. Even if you can get all three to vote no on PLT issues, have fun convincing a majority of the 434/98 other legislators when their constituents feel disconnected from public lands, specifically those in western mountain states.

Say a group of state legislators want federal land transferred to the state. Say that same group of legislators is in charge of setting R and NR tag prices...

Some of the posts in this thread have hit sensitive spots for R's and NR's alike. Like it or not, we all need to stick together and work toward solutions. Unfortunately we as hunters are our own worst enemy when it comes to working together on some of these issues as we are all competing for a finite resource. I can't claim to have any answers but I believe it will require creative thinking and flexibility of both R's and NR's to reach a viable solution.

Click to expand...

BlakeA said:

This^^^

Look what happened in WY for elk this year. They increased the fees and they continue to not only sell out, but set records for number of apps. People had zero problem spending $1300 almost $1400 after you buy the archery stamp for a GENERAL elk tag. Everyone thought prior to the draw that the regular draw would see the increase in apps and not the special. Wrong. They both saw an increase. There is wayyyy more interest in western big game hunting right now compared to even 5 years ago.

Click to expand...

Big Fin said:

At first, Mrs. Fin kept a running total until it quickly surpassed $100K, at which time the point was well made. And it hopefully illustrates the level of commitment many folks make toward this lifestyle, a lifestyle greatly enhanced by large public landscapes and tireless conservation efforts. I remember Mrs. Fin almost pushing me out the door a few times for public meeting about hunting, fishing, and access, with her parting remarks of, "We didn't move here and make such a large financial sacrifice (she calls it an investment) to see this stuff go away. Get your butt down to that meeting and give them an earful."

As polite and modest as she is, when you mess with hunting, fishing, public access, you get to see an entirely different side of her. Her unwavering commitment to those principles gives some insight as to why she is equally committed to our advocacy platforms. Yes, I've far outkicked my coverage.

Click to expand...

brownbear932008 said:

Can't agree with this I think what you see in Wyoming is people burning points they were sitting on and getting out of the game.

Click to expand...

Straight Arrow said:

That was the theory and argument against I-161 over seven years ago prior to it passing. Over that span of hunting seasons do you have any evidence / data to support that theorized "threat"?

Click to expand...

BlakeA said:

So you don't think WY has been receiving hundreds of more apps each year over the past few years and did not set a record for most NR apps this year? To each their own but to me, spending an extra $576 to "burn" my points in the special and get out of the game to go hunt a general unit instead of staying in the game and buying a point for $52 makes zero sense. We will never know but I would bet the majority of guys spending $1400 on the general elk tag have the cash to spend and just really want to go elk hunting. Had nothing to do with them getting out of the game and being done with Wyoming elk hunting completely. Just my .02

Click to expand...

Straight Arrow said:

NoWiser, thank-you for your strong support of RMEF ... and wildlife habitat in many different states and places. Your perspective regarding R and NR license costs is certainly understood. For whatever it's worth, there are many resident hunters who would gladly pay more; albeit not dollar for dollar relative to NR costs. It is realized that NR license fees pay for something like forty percent of FWP revenues, so it's critical. Another reality is that regardless of resident hunting license fees, Montana is a "welfare state" in that our population numbers do not add up to enough revenue to fund much of what is required and desired. It's double-edged in that we like sparse density and open spaces ... which incidentally attract visitors to our state. So the dilemma results in Montana gladly accepting financial support from more populated states ... and hunters who reside there.

Click to expand...

Nonresident fees actually account for 70% of FWP budget.

Click to expand...

Hunters are important to FWP because license sales provide more than two-thirds of the agency’s funding, with nonresidents paying two-thirds of that amount.

Click to expand...

brownbear932008 said:

Can't agree with this I think what you see in Wyoming is people burning points they were sitting on and getting out of the game.

Click to expand...

Racklover said:

I wonder if the CWD outbreak will impact sales

Click to expand...

Jamen said:

Well what I gathered from sifting through 4 pages of posts has been very insightful. I can see the argument on both sides, I for one have not hunted outside of ND in my 26 years. Economically never had the opportunity to do so growing up. But I have capitalized on what ND has to offer me.

Residents argue if you don't like paying the prices then move here. NR argue they fund a lot of the game and fish in the respected states they are talking about. Both of which I feel are right, I think everyone makes sacrifices in where they live and I do agree some states salaries are different than others. But not to the degree in difference in tags prices(not saying the salary % differences should be the same as tags). My profession is the opposite I have seen jobs in CO that would pay me more than double. Several years ago ND raised their resident deer tags from $20 to $30. I was hoping they would raise it even more. I personally wouldn't mind paying $100-200 for a buck tag and a doe $50-100. I have been fortunate to have drawn an elk, moose, and mule deer tag here(along with several white tail). And paying $30 for the tag is very minimal to what those experiences are.

I never really realized what my father was trying to tell me growing up that hunting will be a rich mans sport again once I get older and I should enjoy these days while I can. I have seen it first hand, before it would take a knock on a door and ask to go shooter the mallard in the farmers slough or the rooster that landed in some grass. Now there is an increasing number of those people saying no. Lots of factors to why they say no a lot can be said for "bad" sportsman. People who do not close gates leave trash tear up roads fields etc.

So for now I will be enjoying what my state has to offer and if im lucky to bow hunt mule deer every year if time allows. I do appreciate everyone's efforts in their own home states and those who do work or contribute to other states. We as hunters need to stand together because at the end of the day we are all in the same fight who like to enjoy the outdoors!

Click to expand...