Non-Resident Draw Caps

[Straight Arrow]

In Montana, it was the legislature that decided 10% is fair and imposed that cap. The Montana FWP agency and its Commission then complies.

As many of you know, wildlife "belongs" to the residents of each respective state and management is entrusted to the appropriate state agency which also provides hunting privileges and regulates hunting ... on behalf of the residents of the state ... regardless of any federal land wildlife habitat within the state. We all contribute toward the federal lands and recreation on those lands is pretty much open to all, regardless of state residency. However, hunting is an entirely different deal and that's just the way it is. If you are a hunter residing in Montana, you probably like that deal. If you live in New Jersey, perhaps not so much.

 

[BuzzH]

My only complaint with tag caps is when states use the "up to" bullshit.

Montana has an "up to" 10% of the available tags. It should just be a flat 10% of available tags.

I've no problem with any state setting a cap, but when states impose an "up to" cap, theoretically, they dont have to issue a single tag to NR hunters...and that flat isnt right.

 

[Craig S.]

This is the best response I have ever gotten from a topic I have started! Lots of great thoughts & ideas on here.

Do you guys know if the state wildlife agencies hold a national convention? You would think they would...


Hunters decreasing from 1991-2006:

Arizona
-11% Resident Hunters
-20% Non-Resident Hunters

Colorado
-35% Resident Hunters
-13% Non-Resident Hunters

Montana
-8% Resident Hunters
-20% Non-Resident Hunters

New Mexico
-27% Resident Hunter
+44% Non-Resident Hunters (What the hell did they do? Is it the no bonus point system or outfitters bringing folks in to hunt?)

Wyoming
-32% Resident Hunters
-10% Non-Resident Hunters


Non-Residents were decreasing at a lower rate, except for AZ & Montana. Not sure if it has anything to with caps, but it's a trend that is growing even faster with this economy. One reason is probably because folks that apply out of state typically have a higher income or value hunting more than the general resident hunter.

I again am pro-resident, but I believe some states will have to raise fees across the board because of the decline in hunters (this will cause an increased reduction in hunters again & it's usually the local joe that throws it in). It almost seems like for budget reasons they would want to set a flat percentage of Non-Residents & Residents. The only tricky thing would be the draw in AZ because the bonus point system.

Any thoughts...

 

[jlmatthew]

The numbers are hard for me to believe with Colorado. It seems like the mountains are getting more crowded not less, and drawing tags is for sure getting harder. 5 or 6 years ago you could easily draw some great GMU's as a 2nd choice, and those days are long gone now.

 

[Craig S.]

JL- Remember these are just percentage decreases (hunting licenses sold) & they have nothing to do how many hunters are out in the field during a season. Colorado issues a boat load of tags & has adopted the quantity over quality thought process.

Also, many of the checker board & private lands our Grandpa's could hunt are no longer accessible. This causes more crowding & it is an issue in most western states. Thank God we have some clusters of continuous public land! Many Units in Northern Arizona are going to continue to have more & more access issues because of all of the checker board land.

 

[6speed]

With the new NR wolf tag deal I wonder if it will help boost Idaho's NR numbers.

 

[spook12]

One problem as i see it is that many states have become more restrictive with nonresident tags available thru the drawing process ,because they have made it easier for nonresidents to get tags without entering the draws . As a nonresident just make sure you have enough cash and buy a landowner tag,or let an outfitter secure tags for you.As for me i will keep applying on my own. whether or not a state allows more or less nonresidents is not the issue as i see it,are those nonresidents on equal ground!