Idaho DFG Website

[sneaky]

Take a guess. I've paid whatever price where ever I've hunted. I have no sense of entitlement. I've said over and over that Idaho should do whatever they want. This is what I'm talking about. You don't agree with me having an opinion on the topic so you try to be insulting.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Insulting? Not hardly. I'll ask you one question. Why do you believe NR should have more than 10% of the tags in any zone?

You seriously believe newspapers report exactly what they've been told? You should know better than that just by watching the different news outlets.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Anywhere But Here!]

Even after the price increase Idaho NR tags will still be cheaper.
The only reasonable solution is to boycott Idaho elk hunting.

It just gets silly when this conversation starts. I don't know how many times I have to say it. Idaho can and should do whatever they want, it's their state. We all play by the rules put in place. If I don't hunt Idaho I just go somewhere else like I did last year. Just so happens it's easier for my father to hunt Idaho so I choose the hunt there most years so I can enjoy his last few years of hunting with him.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[KHNC]

especially when most residents don't really care if NR go elsewhere

I hope you never have to hunt out of state. But dont worry, I am no longer a fan of wolf central for my elk hunting.

 

[ez_willie]

F&G will love that thinking <sarc>...That kind of greed will guarantee changes for NR going forward.

I would like to hope so considering they have a waiting list for tags, yet you can just fill out some form apparently and have whomever you want buy the tag and bypass everyone on the waiting list. IDGF couldn't even manage their own website on a day when they knew what was going to happen. They will change one thing and that's raising prices.

 

[87TT]

Straight from the DFG website under changes proposed for the legislature to vote on;

• Give the commission the flexibility to manage nonresident distribution in general big game hunts by allowing the commission to limit the number of tags available for nonresident hunters in a zone or big game hunting unit to no less than 10 percent of the average hunter participation estimated for that zone or unit during the previous five year period. Outfitter allocated hunts would be exempted from this limitation.

 

[87TT]

I would like to hope so considering they have a waiting list for tags, yet you can just fill out some form apparently and have whomever you want buy the tag and bypass everyone on the waiting list. IDGF couldn't even manage their own website on a day when they knew what was going to happen. They will change one thing and that's raising prices.

I'd put up IDFG up against MN anyday. Can't even hunt wolves there.

 

[87TT]

Idaho DFG is awesome. They went around and held open public meetings all over the state before making the proposals. They even had one in our town of under 900 people. If you have questions, you can call the nearest office and a real person who lives here will answer the phone. I am tired of people griping about it. If you don't like it, just don't come or hunt here.

 

[sneaky]

I hope you never have to hunt out of state. But dont worry, I am no longer a fan of wolf central for my elk hunting.

Is that why you booked a hunt in NW MT?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[ez_willie]

I'd put up IDFG up against MN anyday. Can't even hunt wolves there.

I can hunt deer hunt MN for the rest of my life with a lifetime license for less than one ID elk tag, even if I move out of state its free to come back, thats how cool MN is. Can't wait to establish residency somewhere else...

 

[Anywhere But Here!]

Straight from the DFG website under changes proposed for the legislature to vote on;

• Give the commission the flexibility to manage nonresident distribution in general big game hunts by allowing the commission to limit the number of tags available for nonresident hunters in a zone or big game hunting unit to no less than 10 percent of the average hunter participation estimated for that zone or unit during the previous five year period. Outfitter allocated hunts would be exempted from this limitation.

So when each zone gets capped based off of the formula proposed the end result is no change in total number? Is that what you're saying? Is that what you really think they are proposing? You think there answer to complaints of over crowding is to not reduce total NR numbers as reps from IDFG have been quoted as saying. Their not being honest? It's fake news?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[87TT]

I can hunt deer hunt MN for the rest of my life with a lifetime license for less than one ID elk tag, even if I move out of state its free to come back, thats how cool MN is. Can't wait to establish residency somewhere else...

My Idaho combination fishing and hunting license is $11.75/ My elk tag and deer tags were $27.00 combined.
IDFG gave a grant to our local little gun club of $18,000 for range improvements this year

 

[87TT]

So when each zone gets capped based off of the formula proposed the end result is no change in total number? Is that what you're saying? Is that what you really think they are proposing? You think there answer to complaints of over crowding is to not reduce total NR numbers as reps from IDFG have been quoted as saying. Their not being honest? It's fake news?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Nothing in the posted proposal said anything about changing the statewide cap on NR tags only managing what zones they would be issued in.
I think they are being taken out of context and misunderstood. They anticipate that maybe some sales will drop because of the caps so are raising the fees to possibly cover that. I think the tags will still sell if even just as a second tag. Either way we are covered and it is about time that we catch up with other states.

 

[ez_willie]

My Idaho combination fishing and hunting license is $11.75/ My elk tag and deer tags were $27.00 combined.
IDFG gave a grant to our local little gun club of $18,000 for range improvements this year

Thats good work by the IDGF, but really that money should have probably went to the people answering the phones at IDGF this past week.

 

[Broomd]

Idaho DFG is awesome. They went around and held open public meetings all over the state before making the proposals. They even had one in our town of under 900 people. If you have questions, you can call the nearest office and a real person who lives here will answer the phone. I am tired of people griping about it. If you don't like it, just don't come or hunt here.

Watch the other hand!
While the public meetings have merit, ID F&G is fiercely political and not everything is as rosy as some may think. Not every person within has the best interest of Idaho hunters, (resident or non-resident) in mind.

Some good things have happened, like the elimination of second deer tags in units like 13 and 14, but there is a ton of work to be done.
We can hope that the days of NR's showing up here and killing two deer each are about over. And rest assured that is what drive$ that 2nd tag opportunity! 2021 can't come soon enough.

 

[kiddogy]

So an article littered with direct quotes form IDFG officials is completely incorrect?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

if it's printed in the statesman it most likely is.

 

[kiddogy]

I hope you never have to hunt out of state. But dont worry, I am no longer a fan of wolf central for my elk hunting.

I never will. Idaho has all I need

 

[Anywhere But Here!]

if it's printed in the statesman it most likely is.

Funny same stuff different Idaho news outlet, reporting must be suspect in Idaho.

"But this proposal, which would still need to be approved by the legislature next year, also comes with a fee increase for out-of-state hunters because the Idaho Fish and Game commission expects to lose revenue if this proposal ended up passing with fewer non-resident hunters coming to Idaho."

"Out-of-state hunters account for 57% of the revenue generated from licenses which allows Idaho Fish and Game to provide services to hunters, anglers and trappers. Kiefer says the fee increase will depend on the numbers, but says it could be around 10%."

"Preliminary estimates from Fish and Game project the loss in revenue per year to be anywhere from $5.4 million to $9 million."

I'll say it again, Idaho can and should so whatever it wants, their state. I'll still have an opinion on it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[87TT]

First off we will. Second They have to allow for worst case scenario so that explains the dire prediction. You have to remember they are selling this to politicians so they will vote on it. They will be just fine no matter what. They can sell the leftover tags to locals and NR who want a second tag.

 

[87TT]

Once again, straight from the IDFG website;
The legislative proposals and rule must be approved by the 2020 Legislature to become effective.


If approved, the nonresident fees would include (exclusive of vendor fee):

• nonresident combination hunting/fishing license increase from $238.25 to $262.25
• nonresident hunting license increase from $153 to $183.25
• nonresident fishing license increase from $96.50 to $106.25
• nonresident deer tag increase from $300 to $350
• nonresident elk increase from $415 to $650

And I think they are still cheap.

 

[Anywhere But Here!]

Once again, straight from the IDFG website;
The legislative proposals and rule must be approved by the 2020 Legislature to become effective.


If approved, the nonresident fees would include (exclusive of vendor fee):

• nonresident combination hunting/fishing license increase from $238.25 to $262.25
• nonresident hunting license increase from $153 to $183.25
• nonresident fishing license increase from $96.50 to $106.25
• nonresident deer tag increase from $300 to $350
• nonresident elk increase from $415 to $650

And I think they are still cheap.

Yep still cheap. To my original point from many post ago, before you were part of the discussion, be careful what you wish for. If there is a loss in revenue it will affect IDFG and eventually they will come looking to recoup lost revenue somewhere. Idaho has a district advantage over every state but Colorado on cost and access. As cost creeps up other states start to look more and more appealing when making choices. With all things being equal I may still choose to come to Idaho but that may change when my father can no longer hunt and it's easier for me to get to other states. But I know you and every other resident on here don't care, we can all just go somewhere else, we get it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk