Utah raises NR fees, a ton!

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
The “It’s worth what people are willing to pay for it.” line, is literally the war cry for the elite and rich of the hunting industry. I’m not saying your rich, but those words when pertaining to the hunting world are literally what’s ****** up OUR hunting world. I can’t believe any hunter, rich or poor, thinks we should keep increasing tag and license fees. Until I see that money making a difference in a legit way it makes no sense to me to keep taking more of our money. Like most things that come from our government, we are getting screwed. Unfortunately they have us divided in the public and that is their power. Again, I can’t believe anyone would be for any tag increases in any state right now. Would anyone here want to pay more on their car registration next year because the government showed you a five mile stretch of road they fixed using your registration money?
 

BrianID

Very Active Member
Messages
1,443
Idaho is also increasing their cost for nonresidents. The $130 difference isn't going to stop many from hunting general deer in Utah. It doesn't have any effect on my desire to hunt general deer in Utah. The downturn in the economy will have a much greater effect on nonresident demand for tags.

The real problem is that Western hunting is becoming more and more of a rich mans game. For someone like me that applies to hunt in Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah it can cost over $1000 in just applications fees, point fees and licenses every year. I average over $2000 per year in licenses, tags and applications in Western states. In 2018 my cost for Western tags and applications was over $5000. I would guess the pay to play in Western state big game hunting has increased by about 400% in the last 20 years. It wasn't long ago that only $5 for a point in Utah and $3 for a point in Colorado. You didn't have to pay for a hunting license to apply like you do now.

Even though I can afford it, I question my desire to hunt every year. I could instead invest most of that money for the next 30 years and have a very nice chunk of change to pay to hunt the "kings deer". However, I have no desire to pay for the "kings deer" I have the same interest in shooting a penned bull elk, beef cow, corn feed Texas whitetail or an auction tag deer with a group of guides. I see a doe killed by a kid on public land as much more of a trophy than the auction tag deer on Antelope Island. If this trend of price increase continues the next 20 years I could see myself buying 1/2 beef instead of applying for tags in all these western states.

Someone that is from Texas and use to the "kings deer" mentality will have no problem with it. Those of us that grew up hunting general tags on public land with friends and family are sad to see things change.
 

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
Idaho is also increasing their cost for nonresidents. The $130 difference isn't going to stop many from hunting general deer in Utah. It doesn't have any effect on my desire to hunt general deer in Utah. The downturn in the economy will have a much greater effect on nonresident demand for tags.

The real problem is that Western hunting is becoming more and more of a rich mans game. For someone like me that applies to hunt in Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah it can cost over $1000 in just applications fees, point fees and licenses every year. I average over $2000 per year in licenses, tags and applications in Western states. In 2018 my cost for Western tags and applications was over $5000. I would guess the pay to play in Western state big game hunting has increased by about 400% in the last 20 years. It wasn't long ago that only $5 for a point in Utah and $3 for a point in Colorado. You didn't have to pay for a hunting license to apply like you do now.

Even though I can afford it, I question my desire to hunt every year. I could instead invest most of that money for the next 30 years and have a very nice chunk of change to pay to hunt the "kings deer". However, I have no desire to pay for the "kings deer" I have the same interest in shooting a penned bull elk, beef cow, corn feed Texas whitetail or an auction tag deer with a group of guides. I see a doe killed by a kid on public land as much more of a trophy than the auction tag deer on Antelope Island. If this trend of price increase continues the next 20 years I could see myself buying 1/2 beef instead of applying for tags in all these western states.

Someone that is from Texas and use to the "kings deer" mentality will have no problem with it. Those of us that grew up hunting general tags on public land with friends and family are sad to see things change.
AMEN BROTHER!!!!! Well said and I totally agree with everything point you made.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
See post #81
Granted it is hard to cut through all the BS


Thanks a bunch for the help. I missed it.


So 15 years between price increases. Any mathamagicians on here want to calculate the inflation rates for this and see how far out of line the state is?

It's looking more and more like they should go up higher.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
Like I said, I totally agree it was time for an increase. It’s like everything else, right? I agree with the timing. My question to you is why soo much increase on some and not others. I don’t mind paying a bit more for the limited entry or OIL tags. Most, if not all of these limited entry tags are OIL tags for us Nonresidents anyways. So, I will still saddle up. I just don’t understand some of the increase justification. One more question while we are talking about Utah and not my State as you had mentioned. Why just the Nonresidents? Does that seem right? Just asking?


It got mentioned earlier, looks like next year that comes. And that's fine. But if it's 53% increase, it won't go over well either
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
Thanks a bunch for the help. I missed it.


So 15 years between price increases. Any mathamagicians on here want to calculate the inflation rates for this and see how far out of line the state is?

It's looking more and more like they should go up higher.

Just so you know, inflation over the past 30 years has held right in around 2%. Over a 15 year timeframe, if the price of a general bull tag was $398 in 2005, it would only be worth $535 today.

Out of line? You decide...
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
It got mentioned earlier, looks like next year that comes. And that's fine. But if it's 53% increase, it won't go over well either

I don't think you have to worry much about that. Resident fees have not increased like the nonresident fees have. In fact, general elk permit fees have decreased over the years. The UDWR is very aware of where the majority of their funds come from.
Resident Fees
2005---------------------------------------2020
License--------NA-------------------------$34
Gen deer------$40-------------------------$40
LE deer--------$53-------------------------$80
Prem LE deer-$138------------------------$168
Gen elk--------$65-------------------------$50
LE elk----------$280-----------------------$285
LE antelope----$50------------------------$55
Bull moose----$308-----------------------$413
Bison----------$408-----------------------$413
Bighorn-------$508-----------------------$513
RM Goat------$408-----------------------$413
 
Last edited:

goinhuntn

Active Member
Messages
521
I put in for the general deer draw this year with 3 NR points. If I draw that would be great. If I don’t draw I will eat my points & be done with Utah. The price increase is definitely not worth the quality on a general tag. Best wishes to Utah & the locals as I’m sure you could care less if you lose another NR. As prices continue to climb across western states hunting will decline & it will happen.
I love to hunt, but it will not even look the same 10 years from now guaranteed. It’s only a matter of time before its gone or exclusively for the rich. You can bank on that!!!
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
I put in for the general deer draw this year with 3 NR points. If I draw that would be great. If I don’t draw I will eat my points & be done with Utah. The price increase is definitely not worth the quality on a general tag. Best wishes to Utah & the locals as I’m sure you could care less if you lose another NR. As prices continue to climb across western states hunting will decline & it will happen.
I love to hunt, but it will not even look the same 10 years from now guaranteed. It’s only a matter of time before its gone or exclusively for the rich. You can bank on that!!!

And what drives those increases?
 

goinhuntn

Active Member
Messages
521
And why are the states trying to "grab" money?
Not going to get into a pissing match with you. It’s my opinion & I will not pay Utah’s increase. If others want to so be it. I will look elsewhere & when its gets to expensive I will quit hunting all together. I love hunting as much as anyone. When you add up the cost of gear, tags, food, travel etc, the price exceeds the reward in my opinion. I can go camping, get close to animals & take pictures. The only difference is I wouldn’t get any meat. I guess I would just have to buy some steak at the store. Eventually the average guy on a budget will be priced out of the game. Those that can afford it my hats off to you. Those of us who can’t will find a less expensive hobby or passion. It only hurts the hunting community & fish & game when they keep increasing prices. Slam me if you want my opinion is trivial in the scheme of it all.
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
The real underlying issue with price increase is that wages across the board for most middle class people have been relatively flat for quite sometime relative to the increase in price.

When everything goes up "2%" each year, and your wage increases by the same, the price of goods eventually begin to consume much of your net income. Housing and vehicle purchase are the two worst cost whores out there.

An increase in prices such as this are applauded by some, but to others it's the difference of whether your son or daughter has what they need for whatever.
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
Not going to get into a pissing match with you. It’s my opinion & I will not pay Utah’s increase. If others want to so be it. I will look elsewhere & when its gets to expensive I will quit hunting all together. I love hunting as much as anyone. When you add up the cost of gear, tags, food, travel etc, the price exceeds the reward in my opinion. I can go camping, get close to animals & take pictures. The only difference is I wouldn’t get any meat. I guess I would just have to buy some steak at the store. Eventually the average guy on a budget will be priced out of the game. Those that can afford it my hats off to you. Those of us who can’t will find a less expensive hobby or passion. It only hurts the hunting community & fish & game when they keep increasing prices. Slam me if you want my opinion is trivial in the scheme of it all.

I'm not slamming you nor your opinion, nor am I trying to get into a pissing match! You made a statement that the states are moneygrabbing and I was hoping you would explain what you meant by that. That's all.
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
I didn't notice anybody did. Did somebody have to say they did before I can post what I posted?

Awfully convenient for you to post about the state responsibility to keep up with inflation after mine explaining why normal people may have an issue with a sudden price jump and how wages hold flat compared to price increase, especially when you applaud the price jump.

Maybe just a coincidence...
 

txhunter58

Long Time Member
Messages
7,150
“We are just keeping up with other states, everyone is doing it, pay to play, supply and demand”

I have heard all the excuses but in the final analysis it is not fair for 70-80% of license revenue to come from NRs. Yes, I will absolutely agree that RESIDENTS SHOULD GET THE LIONS SHARE OF THE TAGS. But to say “I want quality game to hunt, but want NRs to pay for it”. isn’t right. Deep down everyone knows that is true, but hey “everyone is doing it....”
 

notdonhunting

Very Active Member
Messages
1,034
“We are just keeping up with other states, everyone is doing it, pay to play, supply and demand”

I have heard all the excuses but in the final analysis it is not fair for 70-80% of license revenue to come from NRs. Yes, I will absolutely agree that RESIDENTS SHOULD GET THE LIONS SHARE OF THE TAGS. But to say “I want quality game to hunt, but want NRs to pay for it”. isn’t right. Deep down everyone knows that is true, but hey “everyone is doing it....”
70 to 80 % of license revenue from NR.
TXhunter you might want to check your numbers.
According to 2019 permit numbers from the draw odds sheet. The state of Utah sold 57477 resident general season deer permits last year. Each resident had to buy a hunting license at $34 and a general season deer permit at $40, for a total of $4253298.
NR general season permits 4673. Hunting license at $65 and a general season deer permit at $268. For a grand total of $1556109.
That is only general season deer permits but that is the big money maker.
 

Adventurewriter

Very Active Member
Messages
1,177
I did'nt read all these so maybe the point was brought up believe me I'm cheaper than anyone I know but I will pay for hunting...I'm wondering how much it might help the draw odds it has to some...I have pretty much written off Utah as I'll never get drawn but maybe now???
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
70 to 80 % of license revenue from NR.
TXhunter you might want to check your numbers.
According to 2019 permit numbers from the draw odds sheet. The state of Utah sold 57477 resident general season deer permits last year. Each resident had to buy a hunting license at $34 and a general season deer permit at $40, for a total of $4253298.
NR general season permits 4673. Hunting license at $65 and a general season deer permit at $268. For a grand total of $1556109.
That is only general season deer permits but that is the big money maker.


You forgot to add in the NR from the expo.
Which is the entire reason for the expo.
 

Iowan

Active Member
Messages
406
I think many hunters out west take for granted that they are hunting on land owned by the government and cared for with government dollars. Stop and think how lucky you are to have access to even mediocre hunting on land that you do not have to lift a finger to care for. You just get to show up and hunt for the price of the license and a fraction of the taxes you pay going to this. Anyone that owns their own land, does the work year in and year out, pays the taxes, pays the mortgage and buys the equipment can tell you how 'cheap' those western public land tags really are when you know how much it costs to own/buy/manage land. I am lucky to have great private hunting ground here but I really do not want to know how much each deer costs in regard to my time/money, I could probably buy at least one or two really good auction elk tags each year. I love every aspect of owning my own land (except maybe paying the taxes and when equipment breaks) and I am not complaining but I sure would not complain if I had the option to hunt vast amounts of public land - less than 1% of land in Iowa allows public hunting. I also do not buy this argument about young hunters and families - blah, blah. Go fishing, go small game hunting, go shed hunting, go waterfowl hunting, go whitetail hunting, etc. Big game hunting is an expensive activity and if you cannot afford it find a less expensive way to get kids hunting. I suspect like many of you I started squirrel, rabbit, pheasant, duck, and predator hunting. Deer and turkey hunting came a little later and not until I was 40 and had worked hard and smart was I able to start thinking about big game hunting out west. The government provides the land for you to hunt on, cares for this land, you do not have to do any work, provides law enforcement to protect the game you want to kill, and manages the game on this land - I guess I feel a responsibility to pay enough to make sure this is done well. I am a lifetime member of several conservation organizations and I have some (frankly a lot in acres and dollars) of my land in a life estate that transfers to the State of Iowa for public access when I pass - my mentors were conservationists first and hunters second. I sure hope the people that get to hunt on the land I own now when it becomes public enjoy it and are willing to pay the meager license fees to maintain what my family donated without complaining about how expensive it is.
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
I think many hunters out west take for granted that they are hunting on land owned by the government and cared for with government dollars. Stop and think how lucky you are to have access to even mediocre hunting on land that you do not have to lift a finger to care for. You just get to show up and hunt for the price of the license and a fraction of the taxes you pay going to this. Anyone that owns their own land, does the work year in and year out, pays the taxes, pays the mortgage and buys the equipment can tell you how 'cheap' those western public land tags really are when you know how much it costs to own/buy/manage land. I am lucky to have great private hunting ground here but I really do not want to know how much each deer costs in regard to my time/money, I could probably buy at least one or two really good auction elk tags each year. I love every aspect of owning my own land (except maybe paying the taxes and when equipment breaks) and I am not complaining but I sure would not complain if I had the option to hunt vast amounts of public land - less than 1% of land in Iowa allows public hunting. I also do not buy this argument about young hunters and families - blah, blah. Go fishing, go small game hunting, go shed hunting, go waterfowl hunting, go whitetail hunting, etc. Big game hunting is an expensive activity and if you cannot afford it find a less expensive way to get kids hunting. I suspect like many of you I started squirrel, rabbit, pheasant, duck, and predator hunting. Deer and turkey hunting came a little later and not until I was 40 and had worked hard and smart was I able to start thinking about big game hunting out west. The government provides the land for you to hunt on, cares for this land, you do not have to do any work, provides law enforcement to protect the game you want to kill, and manages the game on this land - I guess I feel a responsibility to pay enough to make sure this is done well. I am a lifetime member of several conservation organizations and I have some (frankly a lot in acres and dollars) of my land in a life estate that transfers to the State of Iowa for public access when I pass - my mentors were conservationists first and hunters second. I sure hope the people that get to hunt on the land I own now when it becomes public enjoy it and are willing to pay the meager license fees to maintain what my family donated without complaining about how expensive it is.

Nobody is stopping you from enjoying these lands either. But now, the gas money you would've used to come out west to hunt a bull elk in UT on public ground is going toward the license so it makes it more of a stretch for you to come out west and enjoy it with the rest of us that full well know how lucky we are to have literally millions of acres to tromp around on, at least as long as the gov't allows us to...

FWIW, money toward game licenses doesn't go into the USFS or BLM coffers. Only stamp money does to improve habitat. Everyone pays to maintain these lands through tax money because everyone has the right to use them equally.

You own your own land to hunt on. The cost to maintain for that ability isn't only wrapped up in dollars, it's also lost opportunity which is minimal as far as hunting goes. But the utility, or satisfaction you get from hunting your own ground, goes against the cost of maintaining to give more of a positive net gain.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
Utah sells more "conservation" tags than the other western states combined.

If money =great hunting, no one could argue steep prices.

Is there(maybe short of buffalo because every state doesn't have them), any one in here that would rank Utah #1 or even #2 for hunting?
 

JimNv

Active Member
Messages
503
Hunting...in 20 years or so, the sport of kings.

Anymore, unless you have your own private property, the argument about feeding your families on a tag is a moot argument in my humble opinion. Just the cost of provisioning for and traveling 130 miles and camping for 5 days, then finally getting my cow elk last year was costly. For the price of a season, unless you bag your animal early, you could buy a half a beef.

We hunt because we love to, not because we have to. Ergo, F&G entities will charge what the market will bear. Folks will spend money on the available tags. Some folks will find it cost prohibitive or objectionable. Others will see it as increased opportunities.

They do the same in Nv, too. Premium hunting states are revenue generators.
 

cbat

Active Member
Messages
390
Until game and fish agency start being funded from general fund and not license sales it will only increase. Dept are a business with budgets and funding issues. They can either A Figure out how to get general funding from state budget or B raise license fees to make up for shortfalls. It is easier to withstand fallout from raising NR fees than resident. I am a nr sitting with 20 plus points and will by the bullet and ride it to the end .
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
I also did not add residents from the Expo, so whats your point.
I only figured general deer because that is your big money maker from the sale of license.
I just pointing out NR do not carry the lions share of the DWR budget like some claim.

FWIW, there were 44 NR and 156 Res tags drawn from the Expo this year. That's 22% NR's and 78% Res. And that's typical of all the Expo's.
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
Until game and fish agency start being funded from general fund and not license sales it will only increase. Dept are a business with budgets and funding issues. They can either A Figure out how to get general funding from state budget or B raise license fees to make up for shortfalls. It is easier to withstand fallout from raising NR fees than resident. I am a nr sitting with 20 plus points and will by the bullet and ride it to the end .

Funding from General Funds? It's not gonna happen in Utah!

FWIW, the 2006 budget, which is the budget after the "big" tag increase in 2005, totaled $38,741,000. It's now almost 3 times that!
 
Last edited:

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
I also did not add residents from the Expo, so whats your point.
I only figured general deer because that is your big money maker from the sale of license.
I just pointing out NR do not carry the lions share of the DWR budget like some claim.


If you figure tgey represent only 10% of the hunters, they do.

I don't think it should be even.

I don't even think it shouldn't go up.

But $130 more for a nebo he deer tag, seems harsh.

I saw 2%inflation.

Why not just 3% yearly both R and NR. Then the fish and game can budget. So can hunters.
 

txhunter58

Long Time Member
Messages
7,150
70 to 80 % of license revenue from NR.
TXhunter you might want to check your numbers.
According to 2019 permit numbers from the draw odds sheet. The state of Utah sold 57477 resident general season deer permits last year. Each resident had to buy a hunting license at $34 and a general season deer permit at $40, for a total of $4253298.
NR general season permits 4673. Hunting license at $65 and a general season deer permit at $268. For a grand total of $1556109.
That is only general season deer permits but that is the big money maker.

i forgot which forum I was on. I was thinking about Colorado specifically for that percentage. Sorry. But the same issues apply regardless of the percentages.Give residents a lion share of the tags (Utah does) but don’t price the common man out of hunting there. Nuff said.
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
Been working. I don't just preach it I live it. That's how you pay for tags.

Me too. If what I do doesn't operate, you can't work, or at least you will not be profitable enough to buy tags. I can pay for tags too, I just understand the value of the dollar and the allocation of scarce resources...
 

Iowan

Active Member
Messages
406
There are already many people that do not have enough money to buy tags at current prices not to mention all the other costs associated with hunting. Maybe make the tags free and offer government assistance for trucks, guns, camo, etc. so that everyone (sorry the working man) can afford to go hunting (while still buying beer, cigarettes, lottery tickets, and satellite TV - talk about something that is a waste of money and overpriced- to name a few) because it is the government's responsibility to make it cheap or even better free. Under your argument this should be considered. I have been on many western hunts on public ground and loved every minute of it and never once complained about the cost of the licenses - in fact I would say they were reasonable for the experience offered. We have heard a thousand times about how expensive tags were going to hurt hunter recruitment and decreases in non-resident tags was going to reduce applicant numbers. We do not really need more hunters we need more sportsmen and women - people willing to do what is necessary to sustain habitat and leave it better for the next generation. We certainly have not seen demand for tags diminish. I will say again, the more money they generate from non-residents the harder it will be to reduce tags offered to us - if states continue to reduce NR opportunity to draw tags the price of the tag is really insignificant. I am more concerned that they are using the money we do give them wisely and have to trust that they are. I will agree with you I wish I could consistently draw great tags, they were really cheap, and I was practically guaranteed a trophy on every hunt. I do wish they were raising fees on residents too - maybe they are and I missed that comment.

Now all of this said I do have enough empathy to realize there are people that may struggle to pay these higher fees. That is unfortunate but there are ways to enjoy the outdoors and even big game hunting to counter this increase that may be unaffordable to some. Some of my favorite western hunts have been tagging along with someone with a tag when I did not have a tag in my pocket. Rather than everyone in the group getting a tag each year some may have to choose to alternate years or just buy tags for their kids. Everyone has to make choices like this in life. Some people may even choose to stop hunting and spend time with their families doing other things. For those of you claiming it is about being able to put meat in the freezer to feed your families - let me know and we will make arrangements to get you a couple hundred pounds of prime Iowa deer meat for less than the cost of the current tag.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
There are already many people that do not have enough money to buy tags at current prices not to mention all the other costs associated with hunting. Maybe make the tags free and offer government assistance for trucks, guns, camo, etc. so that everyone (sorry the working man) can afford to go hunting (while still buying beer, cigarettes, lottery tickets, and satellite TV - talk about something that is a waste of money and overpriced- to name a few) because it is the government's responsibility to make it cheap or even better free. Under your argument this should be considered. I have been on many western hunts on public ground and loved every minute of it and never once complained about the cost of the licenses - in fact I would say they were reasonable for the experience offered. We have heard a thousand times about how expensive tags were going to hurt hunter recruitment and decreases in non-resident tags was going to reduce applicant numbers. We do not really need more hunters we need more sportsmen and women - people willing to do what is necessary to sustain habitat and leave it better for the next generation. We certainly have not seen demand for tags diminish. I will say again, the more money they generate from non-residents the harder it will be to reduce tags offered to us - if states continue to reduce NR opportunity to draw tags the price of the tag is really insignificant. I am more concerned that they are using the money we do give them wisely and have to trust that they are. I will agree with you I wish I could consistently draw great tags, they were really cheap, and I was practically guaranteed a trophy on every hunt. I do wish they were raising fees on residents too - maybe they are and I missed that comment.

Now all of this said I do have enough empathy to realize there are people that may struggle to pay these higher fees. That is unfortunate but there are ways to enjoy the outdoors and even big game hunting to counter this increase that may be unaffordable to some. Some of my favorite western hunts have been tagging along with someone with a tag when I did not have a tag in my pocket. Rather than everyone in the group getting a tag each year some may have to choose to alternate years or just buy tags for their kids. Everyone has to make choices like this in life. Some people may even choose to stop hunting and spend time with their families doing other things. For those of you claiming it is about being able to put meat in the freezer to feed your families - let me know and we will make arrangements to get you a couple hundred pounds of prime Iowa deer meat for less than the cost of the current tag.


You are mistaken only in that it does hurt hunter recruitment. And like it or not but that is a driving force in conservation.

I'm 70 miles from the Wyoming border.

But I could care less about wilderness there because they chose to make accessing it cost prohibitive.

You care about what you know about. It's human nature.

NR should pay more. But the reality is the NR is paying 9x more now. 11x more next year.

It has zero to do with anything other than weak politicians knowing you as an NR can't vote them out.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
I've got three hunters I am training. They know if they want to hunt it costs money. They know when they need money they will have to work for it. They know it will be more expensive the older they get. These are pretty simple concepts and I'm not surprised almost all kids understand them.
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
I've got three hunters I am training. They know if they want to hunt it costs money. They know when they need money they will have to work for it. They know it will be more expensive the older they get. These are pretty simple concepts and I'm not surprised almost all kids understand them.

And then one day, those hunters grow up and get a mortgage, a wife, and young hunters they are training. But then, they lose that job to a decrease in market demand for the product their company makes and soon realize that tag fees should be redirected to buy shoes, clothes, and food for their young hunters in training so they can pay their mortgage and electric bill until they find another job like they had before to buy tags all the while the economy sucks.

The End.
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
Welcome to reality roadrunner. They know there aren't guarantees and life ain't fair. They can handle it.

Thanks, taxi, I had no idea how the real world worked.

And we all have you to thank for shedding light on how markets work and the cause and effect of pricing for a decency commodity.
 

LT

Member
Messages
76
Yea RoadRunner, surprised that you don't know about reality! you should get a high paying job that never has downturns. then after you get that high paying job, get on the internet to tell others that they are less because they can't afford to pay out of state prices. Then after you are superior to everyone , give lectures about how life works all while being an unsympathetic prick.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
I save my sympathy for people who actually deserve it. Not a crybaby who thinks his situation should dictate the price of an item he doesn't have to have.
 

LT

Member
Messages
76
I save my sympathy for people who actually deserve it. Not a crybaby who thinks his situation should dictate the price of an item he doesn't have to have.
Im with you! I can't believe some people don't have enough money to spend on NR tags. Screw all those people that are being priced out of a sport that they enjoy. LOSERS. not you and me, we have enough money to do what we want when we want. lets just keep telling people how worthless they are because the amount of money they have or rather DONT have. Hahahah.
 

BrianID

Very Active Member
Messages
1,443
Tristate and Iowan,

I actually feel bad for the two of you that you didn't get to grow up in an area with public land hunting. The "kings deer" seems like a great idea if you have never experience anything different.

Yes, the "kings deer" model does allow for much better micromanagement of the animals. I could easily afford to purchase a large piece of hunting property or pay to hunt premium private land every year. However, I would still rather hunt for dinky deer on public land than pay to hunt giant bucks on private land.

Financially it would make much more sense for me to pay for private land hunts than take the time to scout and work for public land bucks. I guess I think that a deer shouldn't be payed for with $$ but with hard work and skills I've developed. I also happen to believe that the guy that isn't as financially well of as me has the same right to hunt the same deer I do.
 

HORNhunter7

Member
Messages
30
I agree with road runner. With millions of people now unemployed and nobody really sure what's going to happen with the virus yet, let alone what's going to happen with the economy, you'd of thought Utah DWR would of held off. Montana jacked up NR tags a few years ago, Idaho's raising them now so only fair that Utah does the same. People losing jobs , lots of small businesses going T. U. and Utah picks now to increase tags prices. Bad timing for sure.
 

Iowan

Active Member
Messages
406
Although we did not have much public land hunting I am old enough to have cut my teeth knocking on doors to get permission - hundreds of times - it taught me a lot. In the 1980's and 1990's this was still possible. We did hunt waterfowl on public land and all my deer hunting when I started was on public land. It is simply completely different than what hunters out west get to enjoy. I have also had the pleasure of many hunts out west so I have had the best of both worlds. Over my life I have probably hunted 50% private 50% public (lots of waterfowl hunting when we were young on public). I do wish Iowa had more public land which is why I have donated one of my farms for future public access. My point is that I have no problem paying higher license fees for the privilege of hunting on public land - I feel it is my responsibility in fact to make sure I am paying enough to sustain the land and game that lives there. I have no issue with Tristate but we are making two very different arguments - mine is about our responsibility as hunters to also be willing to fund conservation.

The first 3/4 of your last paragraph is ignorant. I would guess you have never been on a DIY whitetail hunt? I will guarantee I spend 5X the effort working the land, scouting, placing stands, doing prescribed burns, shed hunting, etc. annually than you do for your public land bucks. I have been out west on many successful hunts and done the work and scouting that you imply whitetail hunters do not need to do. I have proven over and over that we can get it done on western public land hunts/draw hunts - all but two DIY. If taking a big whitetail is so easy I await the photos of your DIY whitetail hunt, I am happy to send you photos of our hunts out west. I will even help get you started by giving you names of people that may give you permission to hunt on their land. I have done both - whitetail hunting is a lot about the land you have access to and hunting out west is a lot about the tag in your pocket.

If you have the resources to buy a large or small piece of hunting land I strongly encourage you to consider it. The reward of improving the habitat, increasing game numbers, and if you are so inclined some day donating it for future public use have proven extremely rewarding for me. The hunting piece is great too but not the best part. It can be frustrating at times dealing with trespassers, poaching, property taxes, equipment expenses, significant time, and expense but I would do it again in a second - I have two daughters getting ready to start college on four year staggered terms, so no more land purchases for me for at least the next 8 years.

It sounds like you really appreciate having access to the public lands available in most western states. I know I crave spending time out west on those public lands too. Good luck in 2020.

Blazing Star at PG.jpg


Burn West Prairie 2018.jpg


PG Prescribed Burn April 2, 2011.jpg
 

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
It just cracks me up that there are still people that believe their tax/fee money they pay to the government gets used responsibly. Many people are being sent out to yell from the mountain tops about the Pittman Robertson Act. Although this tax does congregate a large amount of money to the funding for “”“Conservation “””, I encourage anyone who is defending government fee increases to look into how that money is spent. I’m not saying some good doesn’t come out of it but these funds, especially at the state level, are terribly mismanaged and very inefficiently used. I have a challenge for you guys defending the increase and preaching about how life is supposed to work. Give your children 10% of you paycheck every week for them to decide how it should be spent to help the house. You are not allowed to give them any advice or help them make any of their decisions. Let me know how that goes. THAT IS HOW YOUR GOVERNMENT WORKS!
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
I save my sympathy for people who actually deserve it. Not a crybaby who thinks his situation should dictate the price of an item he doesn't have to have.

No you don't. You tell people to go to work when they "lawfully" can't.

If you indeed had sympathy, you would say "these are tough times for sure and it sucks they hiked up the tag price this year which may keep some from being able to go. Even if their household income is compromised, a lower priced tag would at least lend itself to add some sense of normalcy in all the chaos."

Understand, student, that even taking a job at Kroger's filling online orders and stocking shelves will have its consequences when people can suddenly go back to their normal jobs and cause a disruption in the food supply chain.

There is a certain arrogance you portray that gives the oil and gas industry the bad name it has, the biggest crybaby's in the work force when it comes to belly-aching about price...
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
I'm pretty sure everyone here knows government agencies pi55 money away. But if you think anyone can go 15 years without raising their prices and all they have to do is tighten up the belt a little and they will be okay, you are delusional.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
No you don't. You tell people to go to work when they "lawfully" can't.

If you indeed had sympathy, you would say "these are tough times for sure and it sucks they hiked up the tag price this year which may keep some from being able to go. Even if their household income is compromised, a lower priced tag would at least lend itself to add some sense of normalcy in all the chaos."

Understand, student, that even taking a job at Kroger's filling online orders and stocking shelves will have its consequences when people can suddenly go back to their normal jobs and cause a disruption in the food supply chain.

There is a certain arrogance you portray that gives the oil and gas industry the bad name it has, the biggest crybaby's in the work force when it comes to belly-aching about price...
And this is what is wrong with America. The "Roadrunners " have infected us. Providing every excuse for why work can't be done and begging for sympathy from the producers. Absent of shame or perspective. For deer tags. 🙄Unbelievable.
 

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
I'm pretty sure everyone here knows government agencies pi55 money away. But if you think anyone can go 15 years without raising their prices and all they have to do is tighten up the belt a little and they will be okay, you are delusional.
As I previously stated, it’s not necessarily the raising of fees, it’s how expensive they already are before the raising. I laid out my scenario earlier in the thread of the costs for a father son, and years they have to wait, to hunt a general deer tag(nonresident) in Utah. At the new rates that will easily be a $3000 trip that takes 4-5 years to draw. And a huge portion of that is fees to the state. And I’m supposed to feel like the government is doing the right things with that money? And from what I see on these forums, every Utah resident complains about how poorly managed the herds are in their state. So yah, I can see how from your point of view it makes sense to raise them.
 

nontypical

Long Time Member
Messages
3,329
Not to interrupt you guys' argument, but I read every post on this thread( another 30 minutes down the drain), and have yet to see anyone from Wyoming griping about Utah raising nonresident tag prices.

Just sayin'....
 

txhunter58

Long Time Member
Messages
7,150
Guys, you will eventually realize you are talking to a brick wall and you will never even loosen a brick. Logic and reason don’t mean a thing. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but sooner or later you will come around to the realization that the “ignore” feature is a really good thing.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
Txhuner58, I thought you already hit ignore ? So what do you care if other people and I converse? What are you afraid of?

Beat it. The grownups are talking.
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
It just cracks me up that there are still people that believe their tax/fee money they pay to the government gets used responsibly. Many people are being sent out to yell from the mountain tops about the Pittman Robertson Act. Although this tax does congregate a large amount of money to the funding for “”“Conservation “””, I encourage anyone who is defending government fee increases to look into how that money is spent. I’m not saying some good doesn’t come out of it but these funds, especially at the state level, are terribly mismanaged and very inefficiently used. I have a challenge for you guys defending the increase and preaching about how life is supposed to work. Give your children 10% of you paycheck every week for them to decide how it should be spent to help the house. You are not allowed to give them any advice or help them make any of their decisions. Let me know how that goes. THAT IS HOW YOUR GOVERNMENT WORKS!

And I have a challenge for you guys claiming the Pittman-Robertson money is NOT being efficiently used for conservation to look into how the money is spent. Show us how it's wasted!
 

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
I dibt
And I have a challenge for you guys claiming the Pittman-Robertson money is NOT being efficiently used for conservation to look into how the money is spent. Show us how it's wasted!
I don’t disagree that Pittman Robertson act has a good impact. But we’re talking about state permit fees here. My reference to Pittman Robertson act was meant to mean that that is our only war cry as hunters. We need to look into where all moneys are being spent when talking about government taxes and fees. Not all the license and permit fees are going to Pittman Robertson.
 

BrianID

Very Active Member
Messages
1,443
Iowan,

I started to write a long response but came to my senses and realized I have no interest in getting in a pissing match with you. We would probably get along very well around a campfire.

I agree that many whitetail hunters put in significant time and sweat equity into improving their property and scouting. Many of them have also spent very large amounts of $$ to benefit all the wildlife of their property. I'm personal just not too interested in that style of hunting.

My time and effort into hunting doesn't hold a candle to the time and effort some of the whitetail junkies have put in. In a good year I only get to spend about 100 days enjoying public western lands. I have hunted whitetail in 5 different states and have great respect for the animal.

I have no problem paying more for a tag personally. I just hate to see teenagers and young guys in their 20's or guys that have fallen on hard times being priced out of hunting. I used to be one of those young guys that didn't have the financial resources to pay the type of $$$ that it now requires to do an out of state hunt. I really appreciated growing up in an area that had abundant public land with equal hunting access regardless of economic status. I just think it is sad that Western hunting is becoming more and more of a rich mans game.
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
I dibt

I don’t disagree that Pittman Robertson act has a good impact. But we’re talking about state permit fees here. My reference to Pittman Robertson act was meant to mean that that is our only war cry as hunters. We need to look into where all moneys are being spent when talking about government taxes and fees. Not all the license and permit fees are going to Pittman Robertson.



It's true that not all the license and permit fees are going to projects supported by Pittman-Robertson (or Dingall-Johnson). And it would be great if all the salaries and benefits to the DWR staff, the vehicles, the buildings, the equipment, the utilities, the contracts, the travel expenses, the supplies, maintenance, and the data gathering and communication expenses were paid from General state tax funds, but that ain't gonna happen in Utah (or anywhere else for that matter).


While I don't have the latest budgets from all the western states, I did get a few of them 7 years ago (2013) and at that time, Colorado had the highest funding from their General Funds at 19% of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife budget of $185,353,286, But some of that came from their state lottery, so their budget was more than 2 times Utah's DWR budget of $78,580,924. California came in at 17%. Idaho only listed Other Income at 14%, then Utah at 8%, then Wyoming at 6%, Oregon at 5%, and Nevada at 1.4%. Of course, some of the figures listed on their budgets may be from lotteries and/other state funds, but ALL of them rely on licenses and permits AND federal funds for the vast majority of their funding and to attempt to make any kind of drastic change in their funding would not go well with them nor with the non-hunting and anti-hunting public.

Additionally, I'm pretty sure that most hunters already realize they are paying for more than conservation projects when they buy their permits, just like you know when you drive up to McDonalds, you're not just paying for a Big Mac.


I've worked with some of those folks on some of those kinds of projects and I've seen the results and I personally think I'm more than getting my money's worth from the UDWR. But if you don't agree, then I guess you have the options to go elsewhere or to quit going at all OR you can try to change the system. Whatever you decide, I wish you well.

Edited: If you want to know more about the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act just search for Pittman-Robertson on Google or your search engine for a simple to detailed explanation or description. There's lots of them!
 
Last edited:

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
Guys you do not want general fund money paying for wildlife. The more that happens the more the antis will get to say what does or doesn't happen with the wildlife.

Right now one of the best arguments that governments around the world do listen to, is the argument that antis can't find a way for the wildlife to fiscally support itself without hunter dollars. So far hunting is the most lucrative way to pay for wildlife management and protection. Photo safaris don't even come in a close second. Botswana tried listening to the antis. The antis told them the photo tourism business was going to cover the government losses of revenue. It didn't take long for Botswana to see through the BS. Botswana is opening up hunting again. Thankfully before to much damage was done.

Because we pay for all the wildlife agencies they listen to us. You don't want that to stop.
 

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
I a
It's true that not all the license and permit fees are going to projects supported by Pittman-Robertson (or Dingall-Johnson). And it would be great if all the salaries and benefits to the DWR staff, the vehicles, the buildings, the equipment, the utilities, the contracts, the travel expenses, the supplies, maintenance, and the data gathering and communication expenses were paid from General state tax funds, but that ain't gonna happen in Utah (or anywhere else for that matter).


While I don't have the latest budgets from all the western states, I did get a few of them 7 years ago (2013) and at that time, Colorado had the highest funding from their General Funds at 19% of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife budget of $185,353,286, But some of that came from their state lottery, so their budget was more than 2 times Utah's DWR budget of $78,580,924. California came in at 17%. Idaho only listed Other Income at 14%, then Utah at 8%, then Wyoming at 6%, Oregon at 5%, and Nevada at 1.4%. Of course, some of the figures listed on their budgets may be from lotteries and/other state funds, but ALL of them rely on licenses and permits AND federal funds for the vast majority of their funding and to attempt to make any kind of drastic change in their funding would not go well with them nor with the non-hunting and anti-hunting public.

Additionally, I'm pretty sure that most hunters already realize they are paying for more than conservation projects when they buy their permits, just like you know when you drive up to McDonalds, you're not just paying for a Big Mac.


I've worked with some of those folks on some of those kinds of projects and I've seen the results and I personally think I'm more than getting my money's worth from the UDWR. But if you don't agree, then I guess you have the options to go elsewhere or to quit going at all OR you can try to change the system. Whatever you decide, I wish you well.

Edited: If you want to know more about the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act just search for Pittman-Robertson on Google or your search engine for a simple to detailed explanation or description. There's lots of them!
I appreciate the insight. In 2020 the UDWR exists and functions before the fee increases. I would like to see what their plan is with the new money starting in 2021. Show me, that the new money from fee increases is being used in a effective and efficient manner and I’ll eat all the crow you can serve.
 

notdonhunting

Very Active Member
Messages
1,034
Elkfromabove excellent post.

It just cracks me up that there are still people that believe their tax/fee money they pay to the government gets used responsibly. Many people are being sent out to yell from the mountain tops about the Pittman Robertson Act. Although this tax does congregate a large amount of money to the funding for “”“Conservation “””, I encourage anyone who is defending government fee increases to look into how that money is spent. I’m not saying some good doesn’t come out of it but these funds, especially at the state level, are terribly mismanaged and very inefficiently used. I have a challenge for you guys defending the increase and preaching about how life is supposed to work. Give your children 10% of you paycheck every week for them to decide how it should be spent to help the house. You are not allowed to give them any advice or help them make any of their decisions. Let me know how that goes. THAT IS HOW YOUR GOVERNMENT WORKS!
You statement is very true there is wasted money in government agencies but the claim it is especially high at the state leval is very inaccurate. Are you claiming the Federal Government is more responsible for the money they spend. I supposed if you think 25 million of the 2 trillion dollar stimulus bill goes towards the Kenedy Center or how about Sylindra i think that ran the federal government a bill of over 500 million or how about the study of why kids don't like food that had been sneezed on, that came to 2 million. I think I will trust my money with the State of Utah, that balances there budget every year.

I will justify the permit raise.
Is the average citizen in this country income the same today or more than it was 10 plus years ago, is the supplies and utilities the same or more today as it was 10 plus years ago, does that Ford F150 cost the same or more today as 10 plus years ago.
I will answer that everything cost more today than it did 10 plus years ago.
You can argue who should be paying for the increase funds but the fact remains the DWR should have raised the budget 5 years ago and probably still should be raising it today.
Your 10 percent to help run the house is no comparison to the DWR and the state government of Utah.
The better comparison is the kid has to earn his own money to take care of the pets but the parents puts restrictions and tells the kid how it has to be done.
As I previously stated, it’s not necessarily the raising of fees, it’s how expensive they already are before the raising. I laid out my scenario earlier in the thread of the costs for a father son, and years they have to wait, to hunt a general deer tag(nonresident) in Utah. At the new rates that will easily be a $3000 trip that takes 4-5 years to draw. And a huge portion of that is fees to the state. And I’m supposed to feel like the government is doing the right things with that money? And from what I see on these forums, every Utah resident complains about how poorly managed the herds are in their state. So yah, I can see how from your point of view it makes sense to raise them.
Not everyone thinks the DWR is doing a terrible job and I am not the only one that fells that way.
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
I a
I appreciate the insight. In 2020 the UDWR exists and functions before the fee increases. I would like to see what their plan is with the new money starting in 2021. Show me, that the new money from fee increases is being used in a effective and efficient manner and I’ll eat all the crow you can serve.

At this point I can't give you any specifics, but I'll check around and see what I can come up with. However, I do know that the 2 new GPS collaring projects (Migration and Fawn Mortality) will generate quite a few on the ground projects. I also know that they are continuing to build guzzlers to add to the 900+ they already have. (They added 15 last year in the Southern Region.) And I also know they are continuing to build escape ramps on I-15. Just 2 weeks ago, my daughter had to go to an orthodontist appointment in Salt Lake City which is 260 miles north from our home and she didn't want to go or drive alone and didn't want to stay overnight, especially with the Covid-19 social distancing and stay at home regulations/directives. So, I went with her to drive up in the dark and she drove back home in the afternoon. On the way home we happened to see 2 UDWR crews working on the side of the freeway about 200 yards apart. She asked me what they were doing and I told her about wildlife escape ramps and why they were needed. And just to pass the time, for a while, we counted some of the escape ramps already built. At one 5 mile stretch, we counted 19 on one side. (The other side didn't have any, so I assumed it must be a one way migration route.) I also know they are continuing to replant the Brian Head fire area. In any case, I'm sure the money will be used wisely.
 

lif

Active Member
Messages
131
At this point I can't give you any specifics, but I'll check around and see what I can come up with. However, I do know that the 2 new GPS collaring projects (Migration and Fawn Mortality) will generate quite a few on the ground projects. I also know that they are continuing to build guzzlers to add to the 900+ they already have. (They added 15 last year in the Southern Region.) And I also know they are continuing to build escape ramps on I-15. Just 2 weeks ago, my daughter had to go to an orthodontist appointment in Salt Lake City which is 260 miles north from our home and she didn't want to go or drive alone and didn't want to stay overnight, especially with the Covid-19 social distancing and stay at home regulations/directives. So, I went with her to drive up in the dark and she drove back home in the afternoon. On the way home we happened to see 2 UDWR crews working on the side of the freeway about 200 yards apart. She asked me what they were doing and I told her about wildlife escape ramps and why they were needed. And just to pass the time, for a while, we counted some of the escape ramps already built. At one 5 mile stretch, we counted 19 on one side. (The other side didn't have any, so I assumed it must be a one way migration route.) I also know they are continuing to replant the Brian Head fire area. In any case, I'm sure the money will be used wisely.
Hope you’re right. I just see a lot of bad decisions made in tag allotment alone to wonder who we are paying to make these decisions. Appreciate the insight though. I’m always up for education on things I just assume.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
I don't have any ussue with permit increases.

I actually think it would be helpful to just apply a %increase yearly.

It helps R AND NR decide their budgets. Help a DWR do the same.

But, we see a 53% increase for deer a10% increase here, 15% there, it's obvious that the raises aren't tied to funding issues, they are tied to an accountant.

I love accountants. An accountant is out making me dinner right now. But dear God, they look at everything different.

Slap a 5% yearly increase on both R and NR yearly and be done.

The way Utah did this looks shady on the timing, and in the increases.

And yeah. 1 Leo driving around a 4 door f250, is waste.

A short bed f150 for one guy will do just fine
 

roadrunner

Very Active Member
Messages
2,208
Slap a 5% yearly increase on both R and NR yearly and be done.

That's where I got schooled in not knowing about the real world. Wages have been relatively flat for decades with perhaps a 2% to 3% increase each year to match inflation (same as no price change and no increase in wage).

You bump up a tag fee by 5% year year and in 10 years it's roughly a 50% price increase and maybe a 20% increase in wages.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
Guys you do not want general fund money paying for wildlife. The more that happens the more the antis will get to say what does or doesn't happen with the wildlife.

Right now one of the best arguments that governments around the world do listen to, is the argument that antis can't find a way for the wildlife to fiscally support itself without hunter dollars. So far hunting is the most lucrative way to pay for wildlife management and protection. Photo safaris don't even come in a close second. Botswana tried listening to the antis. The antis told them the photo tourism business was going to cover the government losses of revenue. It didn't take long for Botswana to see through the BS. Botswana is opening up hunting again. Thankfully before to much damage was done.

Because we pay for all the wildlife agencies they listen to us. You don't want that to stop.

I disagree...the anti's already have a seat at the table and always have. May as well make them pay for it.

Apparently you don't attend commission meeting and legislative sessions, even in Wyoming, Montana, etc. the anti's show up and they have an impact with decision makers.

Want a classic example of the funding (no money from the general fund) not making a difference in Wyoming? Listen to the 2019 season setting meeting regarding moose permits in the Wood River. An old bag from the area, kept after the commission long enough that the commission reduced moose permits in that drainage...against the recommendation of the Wyoming Game and Fish.

How about the outfitters? They don't pay a single red cent toward funding wildlife in Wyoming...ZIP...not a penny. They have a pretty big influence on the Legislature, Commission, and Game and Fish...yet pay nothing.

You're living in denial if you think funding matters all the time, it simply doesn't. Wildlife in the United States is held in trust for the citizens of the State it resides in, not held in trust for those that pay the bills, rather, ALL CITIZENS.

In theory, I agree with you that those paying the freight should get the priority...buts its not always the reality, many, many times its not even close to reality.

So, my thoughts are if the anti's, outfitters, etc. already influence decisions makers, already get their way on things, and no question have a seat at the table...they may as well pay for it.
 

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
5,016
That's where I got schooled in not knowing about the real world. Wages have been relatively flat for decades with perhaps a 2% to 3% increase each year to match inflation (same as no price change and no increase in wage).

You bump up a tag fee by 5% year year and in 10 years it's roughly a 50% price increase and maybe a 20% increase in wages.


The counter argumentcan be made. 2005 I believe was the last bump. So that's a 26-39% increase via inflation.

Im not set on a number, just a concept of that increase being smaller over a long stretch.

Guys can't sit in the weeds bitching about deer counts using models not actual eyes, then hold funding levels at 05' levels.

If you want more eyes that costs money.

I'll assume next Yr R gets numbed.

I guarantee a deer tag won't bump 53%.

If you don't the it to an inflation rate, or similar, you end up with a situation like now, the agency needs increased funding as we close the economy.

Next time it could be a recession. Or a massive earthquake, or......

In the absence of funding, the DWR turned to a loan shark($FW). They charge a pretty steep fee for what they do
 
Last edited:

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
I disagree...the anti's already have a seat at the table and always have. May as well make them pay for it.

Apparently you don't attend commission meeting and legislative sessions, even in Wyoming, Montana, etc. the anti's show up and they have an impact with decision makers.

Want a classic example of the funding (no money from the general fund) not making a difference in Wyoming? Listen to the 2019 season setting meeting regarding moose permits in the Wood River. An old bag from the area, kept after the commission long enough that the commission reduced moose permits in that drainage...against the recommendation of the Wyoming Game and Fish.

How about the outfitters? They don't pay a single red cent toward funding wildlife in Wyoming...ZIP...not a penny. They have a pretty big influence on the Legislature, Commission, and Game and Fish...yet pay nothing.

You're living in denial if you think funding matters all the time, it simply doesn't. Wildlife in the United States is held in trust for the citizens of the State it resides in, not held in trust for those that pay the bills, rather, ALL CITIZENS.

In theory, I agree with you that those paying the freight should get the priority...buts its not always the reality, many, many times its not even close to reality.

So, my thoughts are if the anti's, outfitters, etc. already influence decisions makers, already get their way on things, and no question have a seat at the table...they may as well pay for it.


I know antis show up at those meetings. You have noticed you are still hunting, correct??? That's because the guys are listening to the people who are funding everything. Do antis get their way sometimes? Yep. But the vast majority of the time they get brushed aside. They don't pay so they don't count.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
I know antis show up at those meetings. You have noticed you are still hunting, correct??? That's because the guys are listening to the people who are funding everything. Do antis get their way sometimes? Yep. But the vast majority of the time they get brushed aside. They don't pay so they don't count.

Care to explain why Colorado has no spring bear season? No trapping?

Why you cant use hounds to run lions in Oregon?

No lion hunting at all in CA?

Do I need to go on?

All those states get nearly all their wildlife and fisheries management money from hunters and fishermen.

Seems to me the influence of who pays the bills there didn't really seem to matter.

You're overplaying the importance of where the funding comes from.
 

elkfromabove

Very Active Member
Messages
1,689
I disagree...the anti's already have a seat at the table and always have. May as well make them pay for it.

Apparently you don't attend commission meeting and legislative sessions, even in Wyoming, Montana, etc. the anti's show up and they have an impact with decision makers.

Want a classic example of the funding (no money from the general fund) not making a difference in Wyoming? Listen to the 2019 season setting meeting regarding moose permits in the Wood River. An old bag from the area, kept after the commission long enough that the commission reduced moose permits in that drainage...against the recommendation of the Wyoming Game and Fish.

How about the outfitters? They don't pay a single red cent toward funding wildlife in Wyoming...ZIP...not a penny. They have a pretty big influence on the Legislature, Commission, and Game and Fish...yet pay nothing.

You're living in denial if you think funding matters all the time, it simply doesn't. Wildlife in the United States is held in trust for the citizens of the State it resides in, not held in trust for those that pay the bills, rather, ALL CITIZENS.

In theory, I agree with you that those paying the freight should get the priority...buts its not always the reality, many, many times its not even close to reality.

So, my thoughts are if the anti's, outfitters, etc. already influence decisions makers, already get their way on things, and no question have a seat at the table...they may as well pay for it.

Actually, the anti's, outfitters, non-consumptives, etc. ARE paying for the management of wildlife! The amounts of general funds I quoted are only the state amounts sent to the UDWR for the UDWR's budget. But, in fact, most all of the projects that the UDWR is doing are also funded by several (or many) public entities on local, state and federal levels out of their own budgets. Those escape ramps I talked about are not just for the benefit of the deer, they also provide added safety for the thousands of motorists who drive that freeway, and because of that, UDOT (Utah Dept of Transportation) pulls money out of their budget to help pay for them! UDOT also builds and pays for the $1M wildlife overpasses for the same reason. We're not just saving the deer, we're saving people!

The planting of the wildfire burn areas, prescribed burns, P & J lop and scatter, translocations, etc. is also funded by the federal agencies who manage the public land; Forest Service, BLM, etc. Hunters do a lot of the work, but those agencies also reach out to nonhunter organizations to get volunteers to help with that work.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

So, how does all of this work?


Note that EVERY RAC has a representative from the BLM, Forest Service, Elected official, and one or more non-consumptive, public at-large, agriculture and sportsmen reps. A few also have tribal representatives. We have everything from a Hogle Zoo rep to a BYU Professor. (Note their email addresses.) Is it perfect? It never is when humans are involved, but it's the best system we've been able to come up with and it's a great system for allowing public input. You just have to show up and speak up!

(The Wildlife Board isn't as diverse as most of us would like to see, but that's another matter because they are appointed by the Governor while the RAC members are appointed by each of the 5 Regional Directors.)

In any case, though hunters are the key contributors, we aren't the only ones paying for the management of wildlife. And we aren't the only stakeholders. We shouldn't forget that!
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
Care to explain why Colorado has no spring bear season? No trapping?

Why you cant use hounds to run lions in Oregon?

No lion hunting at all in CA?

Do I need to go on?

All those states get nearly all their wildlife and fisheries management money from hunters and fishermen.

Seems to me the influence of who pays the bills there didn't really seem to matter.

You're overplaying the importance of where the funding comes from.

You ought to see what the state of Oregon did about mountain lion hunting. Guess what they make more money than they ever did off of it and they kill more cats than they ever did. What do you know the money prevailed there.

You are picking laws passed in states which allow public referendum votes for law. That is a different problem altogether. That's the opposite end of the spectrum of me showing where people paid off officials to get what they wanted. Either way its BS and you know it. You are grasping at straws hoping someone else can start paying for your good time.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
elkfromabove,

I agree with you about Utah, but even in states like Wyoming, where the GF gets no general funding, lots of interests that provide no funding whatsoever, have a lot of influence and IMO, in many cases an undue amount of influence.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
You are picking laws passed in states which allow public referendum votes for law. That is a different problem altogether. That's the opposite end of the spectrum of me showing where people paid off officials to get what they wanted. Either way its BS and you know it. You are grasping at straws hoping someone else can start paying for your good time.

What state doesn't have a ballot initiative process? How did having funding come from mostly licenses, PR/DJ, change the outcome?

And no, its not about wanting someone else to pay for "my good time" its about asking everyone that has a seat at the table to pay for that seat.

If they're going to influence the legislature, commission, and GF agencies, and impact our wildlife decision making process, then they should have some real flesh in the game.

Its not that anyone doesn't get what your point is, its your failure to believe that there are significant outside influences that aren't money driven in game management decisions.
 
Last edited:

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
All states vary in what can or can not be put to public referendum. You would have to see their state constitutions to see each ones differences.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
"Its not that anyone doesn't get what your point is, its your failure to believe that there are significant outside influences that aren't money driven in game management decisions."

Then you missed my point altogether. You were to busy arguing instead of reading. I SHOWED YOU SPECIFICALLY HOW AN ANTI GROUP SHUT DOWN AN ENTIRE COUNTRY'S HUNTING. Do you think I don't know that we see-saw along with these jackwagons trying to shut us down??? I showed you from the beginning of this thread if you would learn how to read. What I am arguing is that more times than not the group that pays the most money prevails. Even with your own example of lion hunting in Oregon I showed you how money prevailed.

Slow down BuzzH. You are getting off on being argumentative. Go back and read what I posted.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
"Its not that anyone doesn't get what your point is, its your failure to believe that there are significant outside influences that aren't money driven in game management decisions."

Then you missed my point altogether. You were to busy arguing instead of reading. I SHOWED YOU SPECIFICALLY HOW AN ANTI GROUP SHUT DOWN AN ENTIRE COUNTRY'S HUNTING. Do you think I don't know that we see-saw along with these jackwagons trying to shut us down??? I showed you from the beginning of this thread if you would learn how to read. What I am arguing is that more times than not the group that pays the most money prevails. Even with your own example of lion hunting in Oregon I showed you how money prevailed.

Slow down BuzzH. You are getting off on being argumentative. Go back and read what I posted.

Did money prevail when the WYGF Commission jerked 3 moose tags against the recommendation of the GF to satisfy a local who didn't want "her boys" shot?

Didn't think so...

Wilderness guide law in Wyoming? Passed by outfitters that pay NOTHING into GF funding.

Outfitter sponsored tags in NV, NM, etc. that provide precisely zero funding to the respective GF agencies.

Want me to go on or are you still just wanting to argue?

BTW, I'm using the fact that hunters and anglers are flipping all the bill for wildlife management here in Wyoming. It reduces the influence of those that aren't, including the legislature...but it doesn't eliminate their influence, not by a long shot.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
Ah, a troll battle. Which little guy will get in the last word!!!!!!!!!!!

sorry founder, couldn’t help myself.

Do you have any thoughts on the subject? Anything to add?

I don't mind having a discussion with tristate, he's no threat and actually does provide more than you do.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
Look you think I told you this was some magic silver bullet to defeat antis and I didn't. If you think Outfitters don't bring millions of dollars into states from outside the state and that doesn't get them some swing with government decisions then you are being delusional. Millions of dollars injected into local economies from foreign parties is VERRRRRY important to politicians.

I guarantee you when you go ask for special consideration for your , demographic, or interest group, from the government you don't want to do it while being a pig on their teat. When their choices are to eliminate your activity because it will save them money so they can spend on studying earth worm poop, or whatever else they waste money on, your chances are being diminished.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
Look you think I told you this was some magic silver bullet to defeat antis and I didn't. If you think Outfitters don't bring millions of dollars into states from outside the state and that doesn't get them some swing with government decisions then you are being delusional. Millions of dollars injected into local economies from foreign parties is VERRRRRY important to politicians.

I guarantee you when you go ask for special consideration for your , demographic, or interest group, from the government you don't want to do it while being a pig on their teat. When their choices are to eliminate your activity because it will save them money so they can spend on studying earth worm poop, or whatever else they waste money on, your chance are being diminished.

I know you didn't say it was the magic silver bullet and you also conceded the point that anti's and a host of others get their way while paying nothing.

That's the point...

You don't believe the anti's and others should pay for their influence, I do.

That's fine.
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
I think that every time an anti sets foot in front of a lawmaker he should look like an unhinged emotional driven manipulator who is unwilling to put his money where his mouth is.

One thing I bring up every time I talk to a politician or a lobbyist about anti-hunting is I remind them that anti-hunters could inject billions into wildlife also, voluntarily, and choose not to. They could buy the auction tags. They could flood the draws. They could lease up the private hunting lands. They don't do it. But we do it. Year after year after year. Billions upon billions of dollars, me and you and everyone on this forum voluntarily pay into the system to keep it running. I'm not sure there is any group in America that voluntarily contributes as much to all 3 levels of government as hunters do. I always remind them siding with the antis is siding with a group who wants control for nothing.
 

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
3,730
Tristate...here's a story you'll like.

Last year at the GF commission meeting regarding the limited draw trapping areas. The gal that leads the push against trapping, drew a bunch of the trapping areas.

Some anti's aren't opposed to paying...
 

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,265
"Some anti's aren't opposed to paying... "

I agree. Thank God they are a tiny minority but they are the minority that keeps me up at night.
 

GoHigher

Active Member
Messages
344
I have lived and hunted in Utah, Alaska, and Nevada. The Utah Fish and Game Department is clearly the dumbest out of the bunch. If they think they are going to make more money off the backs of NR hunters, they are probably going to be surprised. How many NR hunters are going to start looking at other states and not even apply or buy a point for a Utah NR big game species (unless they have a pile of bonus points already accrued). Its left to be seen, but this is probably going to back fire. Common sense is really lost on these DWR guys.
 

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