Non Residents flee Idaho

I stopped hunting Idaho in the mid 90s, when the almost doubled tag fees. Plus the fact that the herds really started to decline and have never come back.

There's always next year
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-14-11 AT 08:22PM (MST)[p]No I took my money elsewhere. Just couldn't justify the license fee just to apply and never draw. There's too many other good options out there.

I know some guys hate points, but a lot of hunters will apply and buy licenses if they feel like they're investing in a future hunt.

I'd start to buy a license again if I got a point.
 
Who ever has the final say on tag/license fees needs to seriously re-think some things. You're not going to attract the amount of non-resident hunters you/re after when tag/license fees have gone up and up and up.

Bring the price down and you'll attract more hunters which = more revenue. I don't get why that concept is that difficult to grasp. But then, there are always politics and agendas that drive certain things too. Sad to see that an already suffering deer herd will continue to suffer, as they are now losing staff and future positions as well.


BowHuntr
 
I am one of those that left when they jumped the license a big amount several years ago. I would gladly buy and apply if I could get a point like I do in every other state. Until they play the game they won't get my money. What an easy money maker and they don't do it. Go figure.
 
IDAHO USED TO BE MY GO TO STATE TO HUNT, STOPPED HUNTING THERE SEVEN YEARS AGO. NEXT TO OREGON ITS THE MOST UN-USER FRIENDLY STATE TO HUNT.......HIGH TAG FEES, LOW DRAW ODDS, NO POINT SYSTEM/NO LIC. REFUND, THEN FORCED TO HUNT AN AREA ON SECOND TIER/AREA/ CHOICE, & TOO MANY WOLVES. WITH ALL THE OTHER STATES TO HUNT IDAHO WILL BE HURTING FOR THE NON RES. DOLLAR FOR A LONG TIME.............YD.
 
Sounds like Idaho has it figured out. Create better opportunity for the residents by driving out the non res hunters. Utah needs to do that.
 
AS SOON AS UTAH DEVELOPS CRAPPY HUNTING......IT WILL HAPPEN !!!!!.................I HAD A GREAT UTAH DEER HUNT THIS YEAR. CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR..................YD.
 
The license fee is too high, and poor draw odds. They need to cut the license fee in half. Instead of "up to" 10 % for non-residents it needs to be a straight 10% or more. New Mexico will be the next state hit hard by NR, and they deserve it!
 
I COULD NOT AGREE MORE ABOUT NEW MEXICO........I KNOW OF LESS & LESS HUNTERS WANTING TO HUNT IN NM MEXICO ALL THE TIME. THEY TOO WILL JOIN OREGON & IDAHO WISHING FOR THE BIG BUCKS FROM OUT OF STATE HUNTERS. IN THIS ECONOMY THE LACK OF MONEY WILL HURT FOR A VERY LONG TIME....................YD.
 
It aint the economy...I live 10 miles from the Idaho border and haven't hunted it since 2004.The value is not there like it used to be, so I spend the money in other states.

Not complaining, just the way it is.
 
Sounds like its more about the economics, not the economy. Idaho needs a point system if they want to attract nonresidents.

I think most hunters will pay out of state fees for quality rather than opportunity, especially when funds are tight. For me Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado are the best value right now. If I didn't live in Idaho I probably wouldn't hunt it, but as a resident the opportunity is awesome!
 
They could set aside 10% for Non-residents and insitute a point system for non residents only. Leave the resident draw system alone, only have points for non-residents like WY does. The NR hunters would come back quick, I know I would start hunting there again.

For now I won't hunt ID because it costs me almost $200 more to hunt ID than CO or WY and the quality is far less. Just not worth it. Also, they need to stop the doe hunts. I know they want to give opportunity to youth, but for crying out loud they have doe hunts on lots of units where their populations are way below their targets. Stop the freaking doe hunts already and start growing some more deer.

If the quality was good enought I would pay the $500+, but right now it isn't. Lower the price, increase the quality, and/or give me some kind of incentive like a point system and my dollars will come back to IDFG.
 
You guys are right about too many wolves (and lions) and much lower deer numbers.

Frankly, I'm REAL GLAD there is no point system....it doesn't help an average Joe but makes it easier for someone with money to "buy" an eventual tag...which the guy who can't afford to apply in a lot of states will simply not be able to do.

THAT BEING SAID (and we have WAY too many predators and not enough deer and the cost is high), you can find a mature buck on public land with an over-the-counter tag and you can do it every year.

Honestly, it's not even "almost impossible". It is PHYSICALLY demanding but they are here. I hunt on public land with OTC tags (I can't draw either.), don't own horses and 4-wheelers won't go where the deer are.

If you get into our higher (8,000 to 9,000) back country, 3 miles or more from the trail head, you'll find a mature buck.

I'm not promising 200 inchers but something 165 B&C (or better) at least every other day is almost certain...and after you miss 4 days in a row, you'll find 3 big ones each of the next two days. They really DO exist on OTC tags.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
We hunted Idaho for 20 + years and stopped going because the wolves are hurting deer numbers. The fees are to high but if they would control the wolf numbers we would go back.


Government doesn't fix anything and has spent trillions proving it!!!
Let's face it...After Monday and Tuesday, even the calender says WTF!
 
Colorado, Wyoming and Montana are just better cheaper options for me not so much the economy, just felt I was getting ripped off because they could. The last big jump was the end for me.
 
I was born and raised in Idaho and have almost given up hope. I knew the fish and game was not concerned about the resource when the nonresident tag numbers dropped due to lack of quality hunting and they started selling those NR tags to the residents for a FEE...

I hope maybe now with no money maybe they will see the light.... Idaho has HUGE potential still.....

Robb Wiley
Non Typical Outfitters
 
I started hunting Idaho in 1989, till
2000, I quit because deer numbers
steadily dropped and tag fees and
license fees kept going up!

I dont think we could ever have it
come back like it was in the late
80's early 90's, but make it
affordable and I will be back.

I also would like to see them set
10% of the tags aside, and give non-res
a bonus point on controlled hunts. It
would make it easier for me to give them
the $150 license fee to apply.

P.S. Quit Killing Does!!!!!!!
 
WHAT YUKON DALL SAID.......JUST AS LOUD!

"If God did not intend for man to hunt animals, he would have made broccoli more fun to shoot"
 
It will be interesting to see what Idaho does, if anything, next year to deal with this. That kind of loss of revenue hurts, that with a huge cry from hunters to improve quality and cut tags has got them in a pretty bad situation.

Non-resident License sales are a part of it and by giving non-residents a true 10% on controlled hunts and a point system would help with revenue without issuing more tags but I doubt it would be enough to overcome the millions lost in over the counter deer and elk tag sales.

Idaho fish and game needs to cut tag numbers and at the same time increase revenue, the only way I see it happening is to drastically raise resident license and tag fees and try to capture more non-resident money that is going to other states who have more to offer for the money.

The article reguarding non-residents leaving due to the economy seems to me like their best attempt at shifting the focus of the real problem away from the division of wildlife.
 
Wow, there are a lot of good responses here. I just got back from hunting the Clearwater for 4 days. Bucks were not rutting yet, and I ended up shooting a little 4 point. I've hunted Idaho a lot over the years but haven't for the past few. For me, it is just hard to justify the $478.00 for a deer tag which usually results in shooting a so-so deer. If you go to their website, they still have all of their 1500 whitetail tags left and 6,126 of their 12,015 general tags left. Their was a few year period 5-7 or so years ago where they always sold out. I wish they would drop their tag prices a bit and start a point system as well. It would be nice if someone could send the proper authorities a link to this thread to get some actual hunters responses and input.
 
What is it about $150 just to apply? Apply for an average unit, with a 10% draw odds??? If it take 10 years to draw, that would be about $1500 in apps fees plus the tag you buy?

Idaho has screwed up IMO. I like the fact that you do have to choose OIL or the deer, elk, antelope. I think its a good idea and gives one better odds for drawing some of the OIL units.

To me, NR's are a great benefit to a state. I continue to be amazed that "in state" residents (Utah included) can be ignorant to NR's. NR's are a benefit to the STATE!

I will say it again, there is not a perfect draw system. However, the closest I have seen is Nevada. I hate buying a license but at least, my points are squared every year and my chances increase.....
 
I remember having to get up early in the morning in December and trying to get through on the phone to buy your tag because if you waited very long they where sold out. Not anymore.
And then to blame it on the economy, that's nuts. Look at other states there not hurting. But the biggest looser isn't to the Idaho fish & Game, it's to the business. When I was going to Idaho to hunt, there was usually 4 of us in our party, and we probably spent $200 plus dollars a piece on gas & grocery's or motels. How much revenue are they costing the people up there. If they think it's just the economy problem, nothing will ever get done. They need to man up and do there freaking job. Or the people of Idaho needs to demand to get people in there that will fix things for everybody.
 
Its seams to me everyone has a point. They need to cut tags get rid of the wolfs and downsize Game and Fish. I like how Wyoming run there's. ARROWHNTR is pretty much right on. The only thing I disagree is raising cost to residents. They need to downsize and find better ways to manage the revenue they get in.
 
The license just to apply is around $150, each species applied for is another $15 or so, then it seems like there's a bunch of convenience fees ontop of that, then your tags fees are ontop of that. Seems like the last time I applied for Idaho it was over $200 just to apply.

If you know you're gonna buy a general tag it's not too bad I guess. There are some good general hunt opportunities. But all this talk of money plays into the economy argument.

In general I just hate throwing $200 out there just to apply with no points to show for it.

Now that being said I don't like all point systems. I think Nevada has the best system going.

New Mexico is about to be in the same boat as Idaho.
 
Idaho is the perfect example of a greedy fish and game unit managing themselves right out of jobs. They are arrogant and ignorant about hunting, I hope the loss in revenue costs them a bunch of jobs. They are suffering from the basic principle of supply and demand, they made prices too high for their product which is not as good as others on the market, as a result demand has dropped, and will continue to drop until they do something to fix it.
 
TRUE MARBURG........BUT THE SAD PART ABOUT THIS IS ONCE A HUNTER VACATES A STATE IT MAY BE 10-15 YEARS (IF EVER) BEFORE HE RETURNS. IN THE MEAN TIME HE HUNTS SEVERAL OTHER STATES. THE LOSS OF REVENUE TO THE LOCAL BUSINESSES IN THE VACATE PERIOD IS VERY COSTLY........YOU WOULD THINK SMART FISH & GAME DEPTS. WOULD KNOW THIS.......................YD.
 
We hunted Idaho all most every year for about 10 years we stoped going because of the price to quality ratio was getting out of whack.we still go some where, nevada or colarado they are getting our money now,if Idaho was more reasonable we would probably hunt two states every year with idaho being the the one gauranted tag every year.
I wish there was some place to leave a comment about them using the economic downturn as the reason we dont hunt there anymore, because that not the reason we dont go there.
 
Why hunt Idaho with a $140+ annual license to buy, not very good draw odds, can't apply for all big game species after purchasing an expensive license, generally poor general-area deer herds, up to 10% cap for non-residents, and most importantly, states that really treat non-residence hunters pretty well all around them. I would much rather send my money to Wyoming where I can buy a bonus point every year and have a pretty good feel for when I can hunt, or to Colorado that has great deer herds and a very reasonable fee to apply each year. I even like Nevada with it's low tag numbers just because I know that at some point my $200/yr fees will turn into a great tag.

Idaho still has the best moose and bear hunting opportunities for non-residents, and some great back-country hunting for someone who willing to hike a bit. But compared to the states competing for my hunting $ Idaho comes up short and is only on my list every 5 years or so.

I would certainly start buying a license every year if there were a bonus point system, even if just for non-residents.
 
Unless Idaho goes to an actual non-resident quota - tags set aside in a non-resident draw (like Colo, Wyo, Nev, Utah), a point system will be of no real benefit.

I used to apply every year for either sheep or mtn goats, but quit when the cost to apply got so far out of whack.
 
You guys don't really need "to leave a comment" with F&G. WE DO. (They just don't listen.)

I've been on a number of advisory boards for a long time. Nothing you guys have said is not being said. (They just don't listen. Notice a pattern???)

We really don't need to cut tag #s...we need to reduce predator numbers. They kill far more animals than do guns....but we F&G these things ALL the time.

Not all residents dislike non-residents. I've personally "telephone guided" several non-residents to deer in Idaho.

ALL that being said....we really DO have animals on OTC tags and they can be hunted every year.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
I have cut back my Idaho hunting to about every other year, depends on what States my kids draw. The one thing I do like is the reduced price for youth. It will off set the total price it takes to hunt as a family there. With that, when hunting with kids you need to see animals. Deer hunting is so poor to what it was in the past. My kids will not shoot does and really don't get too excited with two points. If we are hunting meat we will go after elk. The elk hunting has been good to us in Idaho. I would rather pay the higher fee to hunt branch antlered bulls then spikes in Utah. Deer quality is way down, I do not see the numbers like I use to and would agree with BigMedicine coment above.

"Also, they need to stop the doe hunts. I know they want to give opportunity to youth, but for crying out loud they have doe hunts on lots of units where their populations are way below their targets. Stop the freaking doe hunts already and start growing some more deer."
 
With very limited funds to hunt in the Western States those states with non-refundable up-front licenses to buy, dismal draw odss, etc will not see my dollars. I know some will say good riddance more tags for me, but they are just hurting the local economies. Lots of discussion about thses topics in the New Mexico forum when they cut non-resident tags and added non-refundable up-front licenses just to apply. Bottom line less non-residents will hunt there period.
 
I have to say this article blaming it on the economy is laughable.

There are 7 reasons I have quit giving money to Idaho. Wolves, high NR fees, wolves, lack of NR quota, wolves, no point system, and wolves.

Granted the wolf problem might be more appropriate in the elk forum, but for many non-residents the deer and elk opportunities go hand in hand.
 
There waiting period is only a year, you draw a good tag you should have to sit out at least three years. They want the overpriced hunting license as often as they can. The only thing keeping me around is the youth option.
 
"up to" 10% for Non-Res, poor draw odd's, a worthless hunting license if you don't draw, voucher system sucks (everyone should have to pay-to-play up front), 2nd draw is a joke as it is well into August before complete, Wolves destroying the herds and no bonus points!!! I've hunted Idaho yearly from 1994 to 2006. For the money, I've gone to Montana and they're damn glad to have me and my money!

For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.

Thomas Jefferson
 
Lots of good construcive coments here usually the treads about Idaho and the whole resident non resident thing dont go so smoothly.

It seems like from a lot of the comments on here just giving 10% of the tags would go a long way to boost non-resident license sales and revenue, that with a point system for non-resident only and they might actually start getting some of that money back. People are willing to pay as long as they feel like they are getting something for there money.

I look at Nevada as a perfect example for me, I have put in for Deer, elk, antelope and goats for 11 years, thats $2,200 in licences and tag fees alone alone plus 2 deer tags roughly 800 and 1 antalope at 350. So in 11 years I have spent $3350 total or $1120 per tag I have had there.

Non-resident controlled hunt applications can make a huge differance in revenue to the division and Local economy if done right. Plus once you have a license a reasonably priced OTC deer, elk, bear or antalope tag for a couple hundred bucks is not to bad of a deal.
 
As I have said, I don't disagree with what you guys are saying (except bonus-points), because I've said the same thing to F&G and local news folks more than once.

But, I've a question. Since it is (apparently) sometimes difficult to draw ANY tag, why do you NOT take advantage of OTC tags and so much public land. (I'm not trying to get MORE competition out there for the big deer, just to understand why.)

Within 4 to 5 days, almost anyone, who has some experience & is hunting hard, can get a 4 and 1/2-year old buck...OTC tag and public property.

I know I'm "hooked" on hunting sufficiently that I'd find that pretty appealing.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
I used to do that gb22, but its now an unlimited draw in the area I like to hunt, and I'm not willing to participate. A few friends still do it, and we had hoped the change would help..well it looks like it had the opposite affect,as this year was more crowded than ever.

A guaranteed 10% would be HUGE to me, I would be putting in for strictly OIL tags if we had 10% set aside..The moose tag I want has had 1 NR tag given in like 8 years.
 
GB22 I am not disagreeing with you at all that Idaho has some pretty good general hunting! And you can get a good buck or bull if you work hard for it and have the time. Usually if it's general hunting I'm doing though I have opportunities in my home state to do that for a lot less money with similar or better quality. With my comment on points I am refering to some of the controlled hunts and oil hunts. It's pretty hard as a non resident to shell out 200 a year for ten years and have someone else put in there first time and have the same odds. That's a big reason a lot of people quit putting in for Idaho and took there money elsewhere.

I am by no means saying Idaho should go to a points system for residents, most don't want it and that's fine a hunting license is cheap for them and they will most likely use it reguardless if they draw a controlled tag,, but a points system for non residents makes sense financially for Idaho and non-residents.
 
Even if I were a non-resident, I'd not vote for a points system...but everybody gets to vote their conscience.

My "expectation" was that it was pretty difficult to obtain tags for many guys, hence they want to hunt elsewhere. Ours (tags) are EASY to get. IF home-state tags are always available, it does make sense to hunt at home.

So, do most of you out-of-state guys hunt "at home" and someplace else? If that's the case, I suppose I'd have exactly the same opinion.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
arrow, you bring up a good
point, the residents tags are
dirt cheap, the f&g could make
a little more money by charging
them more.
 
I still hunt Idaho but and strongly considering going elswhere. Price of the tag has nothing to do with it for me. I am not rich by any means but would pay more than what they currently charge for a better quality hunt! I love Idaho and love to hunt there but quality is declining and will probably start hunting elswhere soon.
 
It's: Cost vs Value

If the Value's there, we'll spend the money.

When Cost vs Value is out of balance spending goes up or down.

When Value exceeds Cost, buyers spend, when Cost exceeds Value buyers will not spend.

You can measure the Value of nearly any opportunity by the behavior of the buyers.

It's the same in Idaho or Somalia, during any economic condition.

DC
"Road Blocker Extraordinaire" and "All Those Other Things"
 
As an Idaho resident I would gladly pay NR rates for my resident tag if it meant their would be less people in the hills. We residents have it cheap and I realize that we rely heavily on NR dollars to keep our tags cheap. I don't want to see the F&G lower NR rates to increase funding, I'd rather they raise my rates.

Everywhere I go in the Idaho I see Washington plates. And most of the guys I talk to have bought two NR deer tags $600 worth. I talked to a WA camp this year that had 5 guys, 2 tags each who have been hunting the gen rifle hunt for the last 15 years in this area. They fill all their tags with 3-5 year old deer...nice deer out of a very small area. Frankly I'm amazed the area still produces with such concentrated over harvest.

I hope they raise the resident rates rather than catering to the NR. Sorry NR no offense, if you don't wanna come here anymore I'd be happy to make up some of the lost revenue as a resident.
 
+1 bigmedicine
make a point system for nonresidents to get the money, the problem I see now that I said that is im from idaho and put in with my dad from oregon. still liek the idea though
 
Idaho fish and game has their head firmly planted in the sand. If they think the loss of revenue is strictly from the down economy, their wrong! They raised prices to non residents as the economy tanked and the quality of the OTC hunt has continually gone down. A points system is not the answer, Quality management is the answer. Supply VS demand comes to mind! Its flat out more expensive for a non resident to hunt Idaho than comparative states!
 
None of these are problems that more deer (bucks come with increased numbers) wouldn't solve......reduce things with teeth and claws and have some strategic feeding areas.

Problem solved and everybody's happy. It really is that black and white.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
I agree gb however how do we get it done?

Current management plans for predators aren't gonna do it and I don't think it is a new concept your preaching so how does it get changed?

I have hunted ID in the past when we don't draw CO or NV and have even when we do draw elsewhere. The deer hunting IMO is declining fast and I believe as others have said the reason for decline in license sales is NOT the economy but value for price of the hunt. It is still worth it IMO but it might not be much longer.

Let us know how we can help.

Also in answer to your question above , yes we hunt general for blacktails in our home state and then hunt out of state also.

Bill

Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
 
As a nonres,Idaho offers nothing in return if you don't draw.It's really that simple.I don't mind paying other states(Nv,Co,Ut,Az,even Iowa,for crying out loud!!)because I am buying points for a future hunt.IMO,that is THE BIGGEST reason NR quit applying in Idaho.If a poll was taken,that would be the number 1 reason,with quality a close second.Even in Vegas when you throw money away you have a possible chance at some sort of return on your investment.Until Idaho F&G realizes this and starts a point system for nr,they will continue to row upstream in an ever faster current.Bottom line.End of story.
 
I wish I had a definitive answer. I've made these claims and given them studies performed in several states (which I'm sure they already had) and nothing gets changed.

The high-dollar-auction-tags are actually part of the problem, rather than the solution, because they pander to those with the most "clout" and leave the average Joe out. We DON'T need more "quality" hunts and more LEs.

We need more deer. The only thing of which I can think is a lot of people complaining and even VOTING for legislators to whom we've made this an issue.

There are a great many special-interest groups with inordinate power compared to their actual numbers. In the west, WE (hunters) could be a huge factor in electing state legislative candidates...or the governor.

If we demanded (by our money and our votes) that our respective F&G departments started working for those who pay their wages (hunters & fishermen), we could have a lot of clout.

Before that will happen, we need to tone down some infighting and we need to become "organized" in support of MORE OPPORTUNITY, which can only come through GREATER NUMBERS, instead of supporting high-dollar groups, that often exist to provide fantastic opportunities to their founders or at least to their financial backers, through what is now called "quality" management.

Nobody likes big bucks more than I....but big bucks result from increased populations as surely as night follows day. I'm old enough to know what the sustained (20 year) harvest rates were during the mid 50s through the mid 70s (and later). The major differences in MANY ares, then to now, is fewer cattle and sheep on the range (won't hurt deer numbers), fewer roads (won't hurt deer numbers) SOME, although not a lot in many places, new houses (can impact but be negated by minimal feeding efforts) and a LOT more coyotes, lions and now wolves.

We need to demand of our F&G departments that these things be solved. Hound hunters will "hate" me but they support large populations of cats...because they want to be able to run them. They are quite effective here (Idaho). We need to be equally effective.

We do have the VOTES to do this.

We would be the largest "special-interest" group in the west, if we'd try.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-16-11 AT 01:20PM (MST)[p]The current situation in Idaho is a direct result of greed and arrongance on the part of IDFG. Extremely high license costs, and the opportunity is only avearge.

A point system is not the answer. Don't you guys realize that there are thousands of unsold deer tags this year? And there were even a number of moose tags with 100% drawing odds. Of course it is hard to draw a sheep tag, or one of the very best units for elk hunting. Preference points won't change that - there will always be too few sheep tags and too few 375+ bulls running around. The current randowm draw system is the best when you have no way of ever getting past the "max points" group. For all the rest of the hunts in Idaho, antelope, most deer and elk tags, etc., there simpy are too many tags available for the population. Idaho is managed for opportunity, not top quality, and while quality needs to be improved, going to points or more limited entry units is not the answer.

And BTW, while currently a non-resident, I lived in Idaho in the past, and hunted it as both a resident and nonreident throughtout the 90's and early 00's. I still hunt Idaho if tags don't pan out in other states, but it is a fall back, not a first choice.
Bill
 
I accessed the IDFG website and went to the "contact us" section. I referenced this thread (with this link), along with the following:
"I recently read a news article where Mr. Jim Unsworth attributed the lack of NR license sales to the "Economy"
However, I would strongly disagree with His statement. Please research the following link (a popular hunting forum) that lists the true reason for our, the NR's, displeasure with your current management practices".

I know it won't make a difference, but it won't hurt to send in a few complaints I guess????
 
You're right. BUT I think you're right...they care more about the what is politically correct (yeah, wolves) and national publicity than they do about the population of the animals which WE, the people who created and fund the agency, hunt.

The F&G will actually kill trout in our rivers and creeks. If they aren't of the correct genetic strain, a sterile creek seems to be preferable....not to a fisherman, who funds the agency, but to the "experts" and newspapers.

Our F&G panders more to "THEM" than to those of us who fund them and love the resource.


Within the shadows, go quietly.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-16-11 AT 07:18PM (MST)[p]Thanks Woodruffhunter,
When I started this thread, I was going to send it to them if we got any responses (55 at last count), so thank you!
Can't say it won't make a difference- at least they will know some people weren't fooled by the economy baloney.

The Christian
 
Points create a perceived value. Guys feel like they're getting something. Sure they may not be worth much now, but they might be in the future.

I guarantee Idaho would see an increase in applications if they went to some type of point system.

If you're listening IDFG Nevada has the best/most fair system of all.
 
Nevada also has some of the best quality hunts for the money too. Idaho needs to control tag numbers in more areas instead of unlimited hunts in order to improve quality. Non Residents will start investing in this state quickly if they did that.
 
LOW ODDS I decide to spend my money in other states that gave me a better chance to draw a good hunt in. I love hunting up there.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
less hunters = more bucks for those who work for there bucks,my group,has been tagging out on mature bucks while others who insist on driving around ,or not getting off there atvs ,whine about the lack of deer,stay out of idaho there is no mature deer
hee-hee
 
Got a PM from bern, guess what wasn't in it..................

Pictures.

Bill

Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-02-11 AT 02:57AM (MST)[p]For me, it was more the attitude that you can just increase nonresident tag and license costs to bring in more money while leaving resident prices intact. If it were an across the board price increase where everyone shared the pain... Maybe. Of course the fact that the current nonresident price too high for the current value/quality of the hunt is an issue.. but I could swallow that if they didn't have the bad attitude...
 
The economy doesn't slow down the hunting commnity to much when it comes to buying tags....we're going to hunt.

It is a matter of where. Idaho has priced themselves out and they don't seem to care much which makes it an easy choice to apply in the other states with comparable or better game management.
 
I just got there mail pack about how great their hunting is, looks like NO changes were made for 2012.
 
I guarantee the cost of an Idaho Lic and tag have nothing to do with whether my non-rez family and friends hunt in Idaho. Its all about quanity & quality,of which Idaho has very little of either!!
 
Really some great response so far.
I'll add my 2 cents.
I live within minutes of the Idaho line, (yes, a dreaded WA resident). I have a good friend who is a hunting maniac that lives in Idaho, our houses are less that 2 hours drive apart.
I could hunt Idaho every year if I wanted to. My buddy's opinion is, that for the price, its not worth it for me to come over and hunt with him. Heres one thing that stumps me: Idaho F&G says that the Panhandle elk herd (most hunters I know have the opinion that it ain't what it used to be!)is at or above objective, yet they have cut hunting time out of the season there, as well as drastically reduced either sex elk season. Why reduce opportunity if the herd is in such great shape?????

I took two of my sons to Wyoming this past fall for pronghorn.
Bottom Line: its not the economy that is keeping me from hunting in Idaho! Its that lack of quality.
Lastly on a points system, many seem to think that there is only one type of system, one like Colorado uses where the most points draw first until there are no tags left.
There are lots of systems such as WA where you get points but you always have a chance to draw regardless of the number of points you have. Or Utah where half of the tags are in the random draw and the other half in the points drawing.
Stop making us buy a license that is useless if we don't draw the hunt we want, maybe just increase the application fee instead.
 
I live in Cache Count, UT close to Idaho and used to hunt deer and/or elk almost every year for about 8 years. The unit I liked to hunt for deer previously had two-point restrictions with an unrestricted archery hunt, but changes in hunt management (not predators, not habitat, not weather, not economy) ruined that. The area that I hunted for elk saw increased pressure due to unlimited hunting, which turned me off. I think the elk hunting area still has good potential (despite wolves, habitat, and weatehr), but other states have stolen my interest.

I would like to continue hunting ID every year, but my appetite for new hunting experiences has outgrown my wallet and time. My two kids are getting older, more expensive, and I try to find the best possible life experiences for them also. General season rifle hunts, on public lands, have been disappointing for us and the absence of bonus points for controlled hunts has negative effects on my willingness to fork over more money to ID.

For me, the most important factor in my choice of out-of-state hunting is hunt management.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

A5FB5FF3-6FC0-4B4A-ADA1-4E1C6D1110C2.png
39CF1278-093B-4351-8A40-E22D4318A741.jpeg
3E3B109D-B43A-407E-A029-483048C497DF.jpeg
AZ elk 2.jpeg
Screenshot_20221119_210920.jpg
5A47E1CB-F94F-4FCA-A2E3-D8FD45E4C816_1_201_a.jpeg
IMG_1739.jpeg
Mexico Mega Muley
20230122_180041.jpg
Arizona Strip Beast
4BE7FB82-33BF-4E1A-BF52-9B567CFE2148.jpeg
IMG_1657.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom