Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Non-residents hunting Federal Public land??

Hardcorehunter

Hardcorehunter

UL Shelter/Stove Geek
Why does it cost $500 for a non-resident to hunt elk on Federal public land in CO but a CO resident only $40? The last I knew I paid federal taxes so how am I a nonresident on my land that I pay taxes on? I am not singling out CO as all states pull this crap. Enlighten me with this logic.
__________________
 
According to the laws of our great land the state own the wildlife. You are not paying to hunt on federal land you're paying to hunt the state's deer/elk which just happen to be on ferderal land when you shoot them.

Same reason licenses are issued by states and not landowners. When they migrate it become a federal issues and they make you buy a federal duck stamp.
grin.gif
 
Still a CO non-resident or whatever state that issues the tag. Not much different from a NR landowner in most states.
 
States are responsible for managing fish and game in that state unless the species is federally listed under the Endangered Spieces Act.

Since the states manage those species they dictate the price, season, cost etc for fish and game irregardless if its on federal, state or private lands.

Since you like the topic here is one thats even better. In WY, you are required to hire a guide as a non-resident if you want to hunt in a wilderness area.

Basically it means you have to pay a ton of dough to hunt the good stuff. They claim its because people get lost, but I don;t buy it. Tens of thousands of people hunt, hike, camp in wilderness areas in other states and they seem to get by just fine without a guide. Basically the guide lobby in WY got the law passed so you and I have to hire them to hunt the good stuff versus doing it on our own.
 
That's only about $175 less than what it cost for a Colorado resident to hunt whitetail deer in Iowa on public land and they only get to do it about once every 3 years. You can buy a cow tag for under $300 if money is an issue. If you want sticker shock look at the Montana high demand deer/elk tag.
 
[ QUOTE ]
States are responsible for managing fish and game in that state unless the species is federally listed under the Endangered Spieces Act.

Since the states manage those species they dictate the price, season, cost etc for fish and game irregardless if its on federal, state or private lands.

Since you like the topic here is one thats even better. In WY, you are required to hire a guide as a non-resident if you want to hunt in a wilderness area.

Basically it means you have to pay a ton of dough to hunt the good stuff. They claim its because people get lost, but I don;t buy it. Tens of thousands of people hunt, hike, camp in wilderness areas in other states and they seem to get by just fine without a guide. Basically the guide lobby in WY got the law passed so you and I have to hire them to hunt the good stuff versus doing it on our own.

[/ QUOTE ] Basically the guide lobby in WY got the law passed so you and I have to hire them to hunt the good stuff versus doing it on our own.
Exactly.
 
Makes sense. Ia claims they own the animals in our state too. We just don't have any federal land that has big game hunting on it, so if a non-resident wants to hunt deer here in IA on public land it is all state owned property; not federal. I am curious as to whether any federal tax dollars go to the CO elk herd? To stir the pot a little more; how well would the CO elk herd do without my federal tax payed land to live on?
I would implement a different nonresident fee for the hunter on Federal land if we had big game hunting in the state of IA on Federal land. Example: Nonresident hunting on federal land has a reduced fee than the nonresident who is hunting IA public or private ground; after all, that non-residents taxes are supporting the deer on the federal land
 
Furthermore, it irritates me that IA charges a non-resident $400 to bowhunt deer in IA. I would like to go to MN and hunt with a buddy but they have the reciprocancy law; whatever a state you are coming from they charge the same fee. Ever since the world record deer was killed in IA the state got cocky with their prices. We are all Americans and should be able to enjoy traveling and hunting. Out of state hunting is getting to be a "rich persons" hobby. Too bad.
 
There is federal land along the Mississippi in Iowa and you are right it should cost everyone the same to hunt federal land but you know it will never, even with federal law enforcement on those lands. I'd like to know where the state fits into the picture at all?
grin.gif
 
Here is one to think about. How do you think it would go over if you visited Yellowstone to see the wildlife and camp and they looked at your driver's license and charged residents 1/10 - 1/20 of what they charged non-residents. We all know how long that would last. Hunter's always get the the shaft and we as a group always sit back and take it. A State should not be able to descriminate against any citizen of the US that uses Federal land for recreational purpose regardless of the type of recreation. Whether it is camping, fishing or hunting fees. I feel that the fees on Federal land should be the same for residents and non-residents but should be determined by the State that land is in. That way the State DNR would have to answer directly to the resident hunter's as well as non-residents. If the Federal government decided these rates the large outfitter's (like USO- that cater to big money hunter's) would have too much lobbying power. What a particular State charges for tags to hunt on state or private land should be up to the State. IMO.
 
SOunds like a good arguement but at the same time, it is in CO and CO should make the law for it and the price it should cost a NR. Same should be for any state, regardless if the federal or state government owns the land. Just my opinion.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, it irritates me that IA charges a non-resident $400 to bowhunt deer in IA. I would like to go to MN and hunt with a buddy but they have the reciprocancy law; whatever a state you are coming from they charge the same fee. Ever since the world record deer was killed in IA the state got cocky with their prices. We are all Americans and should be able to enjoy traveling and hunting. Out of state hunting is getting to be a "rich persons" hobby. Too bad.

[/ QUOTE ] MN needs to lower their price. ;-)
 
Federal Gov. has no control over hunting on the land (federal land, BLM) as far as I can see. It's all politics as usual for everyone.
 
[/ QUOTE ] MN needs to lower their price. ;-)

[/ QUOTE ]

But Iowa don't/shouldn't?? Maybe I'm reading into it wrong and you ment it as a joke.
 
It was a joke, see the typed in smiley face. ;-) I think we should stop selling NR licenses all together and not have to worry about it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
the guide lobby in WY got the law passed so you and I have to hire them to hunt the good stuff

[/ QUOTE ]

guide lobby....now there is a word that makes my stomach queasy
 
[ QUOTE ]
I think we should stop selling NR licenses all together and not have to worry about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here we go...
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we should stop selling NR licenses all together and not have to worry about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here we go...

[/ QUOTE ] Hey it worked before we stated selling them to everyone. Not everyone has to sell to nonresidents ya know, this isn't federal park land. I'm sure someone will take this personal but it's not about any one person or persons.
 
I think that anyone wanting to pay state resident income tax should be able to hunt for the same fee as a resident. I know, I know- they still aren't paying the sales tax year round, the extra fees for road tax, license plates, property tax, and putting up with lower local wages than you can make in where you choose to live.
 
federal land situation is no different than a non-resident land owner. a topic that has been beaten to death. i don't think that a NR landowner should get the same rights as a resident. should they get some sort of advantage over a non landowning NR? possibly. i don't see a big problem with a NR being treated as a NR landowner on the federal lands


G6, and people accuse me of stirring the pot
grin.gif

could make for some entertaining discussions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom