thndrchiken

Pa resident hunting license is $20 and nonresident is $101. Resident doe permit $6 nonresident $26. 500% increase in fees. Who do you think is putting more money forth into the game commission or dnr pots and local economy, the resident or nonresident? Not to mention that muzzleloader and archery stamps are at almost a 100% increase over residents.

Pro-Line

I live in Ohio, and own a farm in WV. I am absolutely sick and tired of the argument that out of staters are raising land prices in areas. Hell, that's good for your local economy. If you own land, it just made you money.

It also chaps my a$$ that many residents think that our land is their own personal hunting preserve. A couple years ago I found a stand and feeder directly in the center of my land...left by a neighboring resident. Can I press charges...sure if I want my cabin burned to the ground. LOL

When I first started buying non-res license in WV, they were $35 or there abouts. Now I'm well over $300 for license and tags for deer and turkeys. Not that I'm complaining...but last year they raised the resident licensed around $5-$6 and you would have thought they emptied the residents bank accounts.

All that said...if a local asks me to hunt, I say yes. Way I look at it...I didn't have a place to hunt before I bought land, and probably wouldn't have become a hunter if someone hadn't let me hunt.

But, to answer your question, if non-res hunters weren't allowed...it would hurt the economy in WV terribly. You take 100,000 hunters at $200 each for license and that's $20 million in license sales alone...not to mention the gas, food and accessories. It would be a blow.

WWhunter

I have hunted in many different states and I don't see a problem with non-resident hunters. I have several that hunt right next to my land in Minnesota and they are a great bunch of guys. Actually nicer than some of the locals. What I don't like is locals that think they own everything including other peoples private land. I had a guy stop in this year to ask about hunting and I said go ahead...even told him where to go. Funny thing is is his family is from the local area and had told him I was the biggest a$$hole there was. I asked him how would they know....I've never even met them and they have never bothered to ask about hunting. But they sure are good about trying to sneak on or shoot deer out of their car windows in my fields.

Another thing I think they should do is make it a recipricol fee for non-residents. Whatever their state charges me to hunt there that is what my state should charge them. For example I would have to pay $290.00+ for a deer tag in Colorado, therefore anyone from Colorado should have to pay that same ammount for a deer tag in MN. By the way MN has one of the cheaper non-resident tags that I have seen.

WW

JagMagMan

Here in Texas, Resident Liciences would probably go way up, lease prices might come down, because a non-res licience is about 200$ and many land owners might come down a little on leases to replace the non-residents. But it ain't gonna happen!

petasux

Looks like the Iowa DNR would lose about $2,472,000 in revenue on either sex tags and $841,750 on antlerless only tags.

djschuett

Wow, that's a lot of greenbacks for a state with a relatively small population!

The surprising thing is that here in Iowa, an out of state hunting license is only $63 more than in-state.

However if you want an any sex deer permit you're looking at $221.50 vs $27 for an in-stater. These prices include the General license and the habitat fee.

For as much as Iowa is thought of as a Mecca for trophy bucks, you'd think they'd charge more!


Also keep in mind a lot of the money that states take in from out-of-state hunters, like my $100 to pheasant hunt in MN, goes directly towards programs like CRP and toward the purchase of more public hunting lands, so local hunters benefit immensely!

timbercruiser

In our club of 18 members in Alabama I think 11 are out of state residents. Non-resident license are $254. The additional food, lodging, etc they spend adds up, so I would say the monetary hit to the fish and game department would be high statewide.

Kybuckhunter

For the states that get over run by out of state hunters, like mine and a few others, then you should see how frustrating it is to deal with. Most residents here only hunt thisstate. They could care less how muchmoney the state brings in when they are being over taken by non resident hunters. Most of the pressure here comes from the southern states that want to come to Ky to kill their dream buck like they see in all the magazines. Our public land is hunted to death and the residents are just fed up with not being able to have a decent place to hunt in their own state.

I for one would pay double what I do now to hunt my state if they would limit the number of non residents. I'm not looking down on them but I think the hunters of this stateshould come first.

Most people around here have stopped hunting Higginson & Henry (a 5000 acre wma ) because it gets completely over run with NR's. I mean at least 10 to 1 or more. I just hope as deer herds and big buck opportunities increase in other state that it spreads the pressure around more.

Newhunter1 at work

They are raking in the money and this next season it's supposed to go up again. Guess what...people will pay it. [X(]

one on one

in my area, barbour co.al. thereare out of town hunting camps everywhere. mostly good old boys from florida, and they bring the check book when they come. i know thelocal land owners wouldn't be happy. and i wouldn't be able to plant there food plots.