Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Non-resident state tag quotas
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gonehuntingagain" data-source="post: 42319" data-attributes="member: 1206"><p>I've been reading about some of the recent lawsuits that are being used to strike down several western state's non-resident tag quota systems. This bothers me that the court can decide how a state can manage wildlife popoulations and hunting opportunities for the good of the residents in that state. </p><p>If this continues, who will end up managing wildlife populations within a state's boundaries? The courts? The Federal government? The outfitters? In Idaho, residents only get 1 tag per species unless they buy a left over non-resident tag (if any are available), or if they draw one of the few "Super Tags". </p><p></p><p>I forsee a couple of scenarios happening if these lawsuits continue: </p><p>1) There will be a quota placed on all big game tags issued and a lottery will be held to determine who gets to hunt. </p><p>2) Since non-resident tags are priced higher than resident tags, I could see the price of tags rising exponentially and only the rich will be able to hunt big game, regardless of if you are a resident or not.</p><p></p><p>Have any of you read anything else about this issue, especially in the western US where the lawsuits seem to be targeting? Also, what are everyone's thoughts about this - pro or con?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gonehuntingagain, post: 42319, member: 1206"] I've been reading about some of the recent lawsuits that are being used to strike down several western state's non-resident tag quota systems. This bothers me that the court can decide how a state can manage wildlife popoulations and hunting opportunities for the good of the residents in that state. If this continues, who will end up managing wildlife populations within a state's boundaries? The courts? The Federal government? The outfitters? In Idaho, residents only get 1 tag per species unless they buy a left over non-resident tag (if any are available), or if they draw one of the few "Super Tags". I forsee a couple of scenarios happening if these lawsuits continue: 1) There will be a quota placed on all big game tags issued and a lottery will be held to determine who gets to hunt. 2) Since non-resident tags are priced higher than resident tags, I could see the price of tags rising exponentially and only the rich will be able to hunt big game, regardless of if you are a resident or not. Have any of you read anything else about this issue, especially in the western US where the lawsuits seem to be targeting? Also, what are everyone's thoughts about this - pro or con? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Non-resident state tag quotas
Top