Nailer, with a "house of horns" you are probably more well off than the average Joe. I hope so, because if your hopes become reality, you can expect nonresident fees to continue to escalate at a drastic level. Seen the "caps" that Utah is going to institute including a $3200 tag for elk??? Courts have upheld the right for states to charge more for nonresidents, and the letter from USO questioning that is mostly blowing smoke so far.
For the average hunter, doing away with quotas for nonresidents means much higher prices any way you slice it. As they say, be careful what you wish for, you may get it!
No, I don't consider it fair for nonresidents to pay 70% of license revenue, but I don't think it is unfar for residents to get the LION's share of tags in their state. Legally, the state does own the animals, not the feds.
And why are you using Montana as an example? It IS an easy state to draw so what is your point to even bring it up? You certainly don't come off as very credible when you state that nonresidents pay 80% of Montanas fish and game budget when a little research showed it to be not even close to that level.
txhunter58
venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)