MT license fee increase

[laker1]

Like Montana,Minnesota Fish and Wildlife gets almost no funds from taxes,except Minnesota has a fraction of a percent of sales tax that goes to a Legacy fund for habitat. So both are mainly funded by what license fees bring in not sales taxes.

I agree Montana charges what the market will bear. There is a lot of rich folks,the price is no object. 20 years ago the Ranch I use to hunt before guides took over on was getting from the Guide $1750 per buck mule deer shot plus I believe $3000.00 to lease the ranch.

The ranch owner hated the guide and the system but said the money was too good to turn down. I don't blame him.

Back in the 70's there was a study and agreement in much of the western states the resident to non resident fee ratio should be $1.00 to $5.00 ratio.

It is what it is now,but like I and many famalies who use to do the hunting trip in the fall and than come back once or twice the other seasons to vacation. I know many families just quit going all together. That is a big loss of money not being spent in the state.

[MontanaMax]

For that fee disparity between residents and non-residents, here is something to keep in mind. Montana is rich in game animals but not in capital or industry. For eaxample, Montana starting teacher salaries are lowest in the nation (even lower than Mississippi) http://www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state/

This disparity applies across all occupations and jobs (with the exception of the Bakken Boom area around Sidney). You'd be surprised at the percentage of Montana hunters who rely on the fall harvest for subsistance. And I can guarantee you those prices for horn hunts you quoted are not being paid by Montana residents. Recreation is a luxury which naturally costs more, and our Commission is well aware of this when setting all license fees. I doubt many who do not already live here would consider moving to Montana to make 30% or more LESS than they currently make at their jobs, just so they could pay resident hunting fees, a smart move.

[harvey lee]

MY point with all of this is the states with the huge increases are doing nothing more than making hunting a rich mans sport just for the almighty dollar.

I am sure the states like the added revenue but it will ruin hunting for the average fellow or gal.

I still go outstate to hunt, I just had to adjust the states I hunt to the ones who are not quite as greedy as some others.

Then they also get considerable more for the business's in those areas like cafe's bars, gas stations and on and on.

[superbee]

The NR fees are high, but I am happy to pay the fee to hunt such a game rich state as a visitor and I am not rich. I see lots of hunters with high priced gadgets that are far more expensive and provide a lot less enjoyment than my Montana tag provides me each year. The best thing about the higher prices are that I have been able to get my tag year after year now.

[harvey lee]

That's great that you are fine with these crazy fee's.

I would guess the reason you can get a tag year after year is that the majority of the hunting population can either not afford those fee's or refuse to pay them.

There may come a time when you will say, wow, these prices are nuts.