Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
PRWoody

Curt Wells article in ODN??

9 posts in this topic

Did anyone else read his article last week were he

criticized the non-resident archery fees in Minnesota.

He felt that the reciprocity charge was not fair and

bias to firearm fees at only $135.

Well, Curt if you don't like the fee, don't archery

hunt in Minnesota. Funny how his home state sticks

it to non-resident waterfowl and upland hunters.

Maybe the word hyprocrite comes to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually his article was stating that it was unfair for archery deer hunters as they had to pay a higher fee to hunt the state than rifle hunters. I just paid $216.00 for my ND bow license, he pays that here in MN and said he can live with that, but what he doesn't understand is this, if you are from ND and want to rifle hunt, you pay only $135 not the $216... I think he's got a point... it should be an across the board fee for deer hunting be-it archery or rifle, + that equals more revenue for the DNR.

Good Luck!

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labs,

Got no problem with the same reciprocity fees for non-resident firearm season. But, I would believe you would see a big uproar from alot of groups that have non-resident

family member and friends coming back to Minnesota for the

deer season.

Just my .02 cents.

Woody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the article and what he stated I agree with. If anything the gun season should require a higher fee than archery. there are always people going to get mad when things are changed but what is the reasoning to let a out of state hunter take the field with a gun at a cheaper price then letting that same out of state hunter in the field with archery equip. confused.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun fee should be higher, bow less but how about just getting in line with the other Western sates. I mean, you can go to Colorado and bowhunt for elk for far less then a whitetail in Iowa. It sure doesn't make sense to me. Granted, I'm talking about a cow elk tag for over the counter prices but I'd sure rather have a cow elk in the freezer then a 240lb buck. Can't eat the antlers although they sure are nice to show off. Not trying to peeve anyone but c'mon, a cow elk for roughly 300 or a 430 for a whitetail tag? We have to get to our legislators and not let happen to hunting here, happen like it has in Europe. Only rich people hunt over there because the cost is so high and they own all of the land. We as sportsmen have a voice lets get on the bandwagon and get the right guys in office to help our concerns rather then shut out other hunters. Sorry for the rant, but a deer, is a deer, is a deer(again, not looking for a fight here) whether it has antlers or not as they are all trophies in my book. We can all help make a difference with regards to fees and management but we all have to band together on this.

Tunrevir~ cool.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Curt had a good point but the real problem is states ramping up their non-resident fees for out of state hunters, its an easy revenue source, the non-residents can't vote, and as long as the non-residents keep paying the high non-resident fees, the states will keep raising their non-resident fees. Pretty soon only the rich will be able to hunt out of state.

I think what Minnesota should do is take advantage of what non-resident sportsmen are after, fishing. Structure the license like SoDak does for pheasant hunting, give them a 5 day license, then charge them for another 5 day license. Right now a non-resident can buy a YEARLY fishing license for $35!!! Thats too cheap. Charge them more and put the money right back into preserving our resources!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got the book right in front of me. It says $135 for non-resident archery or firearm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bow license reciprocity thing is new this year, and it is only for archery licenses as I understand it. I think it is a great idea to apply to all licenses. I love to hunt and fish, and buy both a MN and WI fishing and hunting licenses, small game, archery, gun, trout stamps, you name it. I live right by the border, so to me it doesn't make sense to just hunt and fish one state. I have also hunted a fair bit out west. What I am sick of is the stick it to the out of staters attitude of many sportsmen. Charging non residents more does not mean that our own license fees will be less. Let me repeat that. Increased fees from non residents does not mean that our DNR will charge us less. Anybody that thinks that a government entity works that way is delusional. Anyone who is an avid sportsman will sooner or later be hunting or fishing somewhere as a non resident. That is why I like the reciprocity thing. In theory anyway, maybe this will cause some political pressure in neihboring states for them to keep fees down for Minnesotans.

That's my piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess one rationale for charging more for out-of-state licenses is because the out-of-state hunters buy all of their supplies in their home state. Minnesota hunters can be relied on to buy hundreds of dollars of hunting supplies and ammo each year, thus generating tax revenue. If I were to go hunting in ND or SD, I would be fully equipped and ready to go before I set foot in their state, thus not injecting much money into their states.

Another issue, is you do not want to be the low-cost state in the region. If out-of-state tags were only $30 or $40, who knows how many extra hunters would be overwhelming our WMA's. It would be trespassing city! If you are coming from SD or ND, hunting in Minnesota's large forests is a different experience that many people would like to try. You need to price it high enough to keep non-serious hunters away, while still making it affordable for real people.

The simple thing to do for the legislature is to pass a law that says that for surrounding states, our out-of-state fees will match theirs. Very simple, and no one can complain about biases.

While we are sorta on this subject, I would not object to license fees (resident fees) being increased in Minnesota if that money goes directly into land acquisition. I don't watch the DNR budget closely, but I would like to see more money go to buying land (not CRP or other land reservation). I would be willing to pay for that. Management and IH tags seem really cheap. I am not complaining, but if Management tags were $20, would that kill anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • Sherman
      That's A Mounter!
    • ZachD
      I did that with tango and saw a world of difference ... I started at Sand Pines and they helped me tons. The kid brought me out kept all the pheasants caged and would plant one at a time in a easy spot where I could see where he planted. I would let tango out we would flush it shoot retrieve come back I would put him in the car and we did that 3 times. After that he then planted the rest of the ones I bought and we found all but one. Next spot I brought him was Golden Meadows and they were helpful as well I had them flag the general area the pheasants were planted. I went there a couple times and each time they used less flags and planted the birds farther away from the flags they did have out. Until the last time I went used no flags at all.  
    • Twins Guy
      As if there was any question...definitely be careful on those high current lakes.  I went through (walking) on Koetter tonight. Thankfully I only plunged one leg in to the hip and was able to scramble away.   Its a spot I have been a dozen times in the past few years.  I knew the ice got thinner in this area but was always passable and I followed a 4 wheeler or tank track and then a foot/sled path so I thought I would stay dry.  I was ON the path when I got wet.  Had picks around my neck and glad I did even if I didn't use them (happened SO fast).  The walk back to the car was more than a little nerve wracking.  Not sure I'll ever fish that spot again.  And in the future I wont be so trusting of other's tracks.  Spud on...   tg
    • onceacop
    • ANYFISH2
      Wow, darn near could fit your pinky in her mouth! Must of really stressed your 1lb line.