testtest

The Problem With Non-Resident Fee Increases

Talyn

Emissary
Founding Member
Contrary to what the author of this article thinks access to public/federally-managed land is a non-issue. No non-resident is being denied access. The author's ignorance on how wildlife resources are managed is telling.

Based on his back-ground it looks like he can afford non-resident fees, and he can likely access privately-owned for-fee hunting lands that lock-out residents, aside from those private lands in "a "block-management program"; and in many instances prevent the general public from accessing public lands by out-of-state land owners.


A state's wildlife resources are managed by the states according to the North American Wildlife Model, and the Public Trust Doctrine.



State agencies regulate hunting and fishing to conserve wildlife populations, ensure sustainable ecosystems, and provide safe, equitable access to natural resources. These regulations are funded by license fees and equipment taxes, which support habitat restoration and scientific management, upholding the American System of Conservation Funding.


Key reasons for regulation include:
  • Conservation and Sustainability: Regulations prevent overharvesting (e.g., season limits, quotas) that previously led to population collapses in the late 19th century.
  • Population Management: Controlled hunting and fishing help manage population levels to prevent disease, habitat destruction, and nuisance issues, according to The Wilderness Society.
  • Funding Conservation: License fees and specialized taxes provide primary funding for State Fish and Wildlife Agencies, supporting habitat protection for all species, not just game animals.
  • Safety and Order: Regulations ensure safety for hunters, anglers, and the general public, as noted in the State Fish and Wildlife Management Authority overview.
  • Equitable Access: Management ensures that wildlife resources are available for public enjoyment and subsistence.
State agencies hold authority for managing wildlife within their borders based on the Public Trust Doctrine, which states that natural resources are preserved for the benefit of all citizens.

 
Last edited:
maybe i am an asssss
but if you are not a resident of a state you are hunting or fishing in... hmmm pay a non resident fee
i know some states like wyoming stick it to you at state campgrounds, but its not that bad
part of the fee or license is a chance that maybe, just maybe the person will read the rules for that state and be knowledgeable about limits etc
being close to Louisiana, their fishing rules are different from texas
but its easy to cross over in some areas and not understand if its killed there, it has to comply with those rules, even if you walk 20 feet to be back in texas.
education is the KEY factor to save your wallet later
but maybe i read the article wrong and its crotchety friday setting up my computer to be like it was before
 
The article's author is a wealthy media type in CO, and hunts all over the world so he's not hurting for $$.

There's plenty of hunting opportunities in CO, which charges high non-resident license & tag fees, so he's not hurting for places to hunt in-state.

And since he likely films his adventures he can write off some expenses.
 
Being a simple minded individual, a resident supports the state daily the non resident does not. I see the fee as income generator for the State Wildlife while keeping resident costs down. If the cost of the non resident fee bothers you the solution is simple, don't buy the tag.
 
Back
Top