nonresident deer tag cost

[skee0025]

Maybe it isn't so much the public land, as it is that seemingly anybody can go buy 5 acres and hunt it. Make the minimum parcel size 160 acres, or no gun hunting on any parcel smaller then 320 acres.

That would kill hunting on many peoples property. If we're going to toss out crack pot ideas why not require anyone recieving government payments or those claiming moneys for crop destruction by wildlife to open their lands for public hunting.

[minky]

Not a bad idea!

[hockeybc69]

Not that much of a crackpot idea there skee....

Bich and get subsidized for your losses.... hmmm.

How about bich and the solution the DNR recommends(requires) is to let people in to take some deer out. Lotta good it does to pay them for the losses now, and next year, and next year.....

I LIKE IT!

[minky]

If the DNR pays for crop damage, letting people into hunt should be required.

[Jameson]

Don't pay anyone for crop damage. Pay people to walk around pushing the deer on opening day.

[mntatonka]

Not that much of a crackpot idea there skee....

Bich and get subsidized for your losses.... hmmm.

How about bich and the solution the DNR recommends(requires) is to let people in to take some deer out. Lotta good it does to pay them for the losses now, and next year, and next year.....

I LIKE IT!

No one gets paid for crop damage from deer as it is...

[hockeybc69]

Then what is this for? Maybe not being paid directly for the bushels of crops lost, but indirectly they are being subsidized for losses with this program.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/grants/habitat/wildlife_damage.html

[brittman]

To the original topic at hand. Minnesota should go reciprocal on NR deer tags. Charge what the neighboring state charges for tags.

If ND charges $250 for gun or bow, then a ND pays the same to hunt deer in MN.

Use the additional funds towards deer management.

[minky]

I agree, it's only fair.

[creepworm]

To the original topic at hand. Minnesota should go reciprocal on NR deer tags. Charge what the neighboring state charges for tags.

If ND charges $250 for gun or bow, then a ND pays the same to hunt deer in MN.

Use the additional funds towards deer management.

What additional funds? MN does not have good enough quality hunting or fishing to charge such large sums and not lose basically all non residents.

[creepworm]

Then what is this for? Maybe not being paid directly for the bushels of crops lost, but indirectly they are being subsidized for losses with this program.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/grants/habitat/wildlife_damage.html

According to that, crop farmers are not eligible. Only specialty farmers (apples, pumpkins, strawberries, etc.) and stored forages (silage bags, hay bales, etc.) are eligible for the "subsidies". Even then, they are eligible for up to $750, so basically nothing. I would bet very little money exchanges hands through this program and it is mostly used for permits to kill the deer causing the problems and for set up of fences to deter the deer.

[mntatonka]

[

According to that, crop farmers are not eligible. Only specialty farmers (apples, pumpkins, strawberries, etc.) and stored forages (silage bags, hay bales, etc.) are eligible for the "subsidies". Even then, they are eligible for up to $300, so basically nothing. I would bet very little money exchanges hands through this program and it is mostly used for permits to kill the deer causing the problems and for set up of fences to deter the deer.

It's not even used for permits to kill the deer, that's an entirely different program. It can be used for up to $3,000 towards fencing, but that was something like 100 yards of fence the last time I checked.

[Powerstroke]

Short answer - NO, long answer, STILL NO!

The deer and wildlife in this state needs management, not more money.

[JeffB]

Pricing out the nonresidents would do on thing. It would make sure a persons grown children didn't come home to hunt with you. Or the brother that moved out of state wouldn't join you. Most the nonresident hunters I know come home to hunt with family. I don't currently have anyone that come from out of state to hunt with me, but hope my kids continue to come home to hunt if they move out of state.

[smsmith]

I think increasing the non-res license fee now would result in a net decrease of funds...not increase.

Improve the hunting here first, then put some thought into fees. My buddy from WI comes to my place and hunts, but wouldn't if the cost went up. Asking folks to pay much more than they currently do to sit and watch squirrels isn't very realistic.

[candiru]

Pricing out the nonresidents would do on thing. It would make sure a persons grown children didn't come home to hunt with you. Or the brother that moved out of state wouldn't join you. Most the nonresident hunters I know come home to hunt with family. I don't currently have anyone that come from out of state to hunt with me, but hope my kids continue to come home to hunt if they move out of state.

Just buy a lifetime license before you leave the state. I wonder if allowing people to do this is costing the DNR money.

[minky]

If all the nonresident hunters stop coming to MN wouldn't that leave more deer for resident hunters?

Just throwing this out there.