charlie brown

Date: 07/18/05
Contact: Geoffrey Schneider
Phone: (702) 486-5127, extension 3500
Outfitter’s Legal Action against Nevada Wildlife Commission Dismissed




View related documents and policies
A lawsuit that was brought against the State of Nevada last summer by a New Mexico outfitter that claimed the state's big game tag quota system discriminated against nonresidents has been dismissed.
The lawsuit was based on the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, which was adopted to give Congress the power to regulate commerce between states and to reduce discrimination of one state against another state’s residents, or their access to goods and services.
However, recent legislation sponsored by U.S. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada that was passed by Congress and signed into law by President George Bush reaffirmed the authority of states to manage wildlife and recreation.
Jean Taulman, Lawrence Montoya, Filiberto Valerio and United States Outfitters, Inc., sued members of the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners and Nevada Department of Wildlife Director Terry Crawforth, claiming that Nevada policy on Big Game Tag Quota Allocation discriminates against nonresidents who “suffer discrimination in access to hunting opportunities in Nevada through the imposition of quotas for each species.”
“It was hunters fighting with hunters,” Crawforth said. “The agency was spending hunter’s money to referee the fight.”
He added that one of his concerns with the issue was that he feared the result would be that the state’s ability to manage wildlife was going to constantly undergo monitoring and oversight by the courts.
“I was concerned that we were spending sportsman’s dollars for referring a fight rather than spending hunter dollars to do good things for wildlife,” he said.
With the fight drawing to an end, Crawforth said it is now important for states like Nevada to look at their systems for allocation of hunting and fishing opportunities to make sure they are reasonable and fair.
“I’m pleased that we got the legislation and the fight is over,” Crawforth said.
The Nevada Department of Wildlife is the state agency responsible for the restoration and management of fish and wildlife resources, and the promotion of boating safety on Nevada’s waters. Wildlife offices are located in Las Vegas, Henderson, Winnemucca, Fallon, Elko, and Reno. For more information, contact the agency web site at www.ndow.org.

ShatoDavis

Agreed. I hope that Arizona uses this to rethink their policy of not giving residents preference in their drawings. We own property in arizona and if the draw system is changed I may be able to finally draw for one of those monster. Crossing my fingers.

BareBack Jack

I'm glad to here that,run them out.
BBJ

manboy

they don't like it than become a resident!

Cougar Mag

Good, another loss for U.S.O.

On another note, in my opinion residents should be given preference over non-residents for drawing tags.

cherokee_outfitters

What a sad world when something like hunting gets drawn into the battle of hunter against hunter in the big corporate business of outfitting. Maybe the word "corporate" says it all. Is being a guide or outfitter enables a person to set the stage for all the rest of the hunters across the world? USO has shown the true colors of their diguise. All they want is more non-resident draw for their hunters to be able to draw a tag. This is the other end of the spectrum where the big money outfitters are going to help the anti-hunters win by taking money out of wildlife preservation and put it into lawsuits for personal gain. Hunting is becoming for the rich and the rest of us normal people are losing our heritidge day by day. USO Staff who might read this I got one thing to say. You might be the biggest outfitters in America but you've lost sight of the whole picture. Hope your proud of yourselves for wasting the hunters money and time.

Just my personal opinion on drawing. Units that aren't a draw should cater to the residents that live there. Draw units and draw states should split it 50/50. And there should not be any preference point system it should be luck of the draw.

RedAllison

CO if the draws WERE "50/50" I don't think anyone would be complaining and hauling eachother into court. The problem is that most states issue WAAAAAAAAAY fewer non-res tags than a 50/50 mixture. Argue the good and bad all you want, but the bottom line is if you are in the guide/outfitting business you better pray on your knees for the "rich hunter" as they are the ones that put food on your table or at least make your company profitable. How many "clock punchin Joes" can afford to take a week off work and flyout west for a hunt that costs anywhere from $5k too "skys the limit"? Very few, the majority of hunters who take trips out west aren't "Bill Gates" but certainly have the disposable income to enjoy such frivolities. Some might call em rich, I would call most of them "comfortable".

IMHO, the bottom line is that if ANY game department recieves Federal dollars in their departments for ANYTHING then they have a responsibility too ALL of us as citizens in the U.S.A. to try and accomodate the non-resident hunter with better odds on tags, allotments or quotas.

Now where did I put my Nomex?
RA