Your Opinion

[ChesterCopperpot]

The convolution of "privileges" as "rights" is the braidwork of entitlement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dougas]

The logistics are not my concern.

Why not make it your concern and be a part of the solution? You seem to be passionate about this, why not do something about it?

I would like to see how your idea would work at a government level.
Here in Oregon, hunters lobbied for the right to use government lands that were landlocked by private land. Now, in most cases, all people can use a right of way through private property to access them. People who enjoy our public lands had a desire and did something about it beyond complaining on a website. The people took action and accomplished that goal.

[merriamsman]

You've missed the whole point. Have a good evening.

No, I get you absolutely. And we fundamentally disagree. You believe you have a right to all opportunities allowed on federal land as an American citizen regardless of whether or not you have residency in the state where that federal land is located...and regardless of whether or not the opportunity you're taking advantage of may strip that same opportunity from someone who actually lives there. In the end, the law disagrees with you, for now, and for that I'm thankful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well said.

[merriamsman]

The convolution of "privileges" as "rights" is the braidwork of entitlement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chester, you are just making too much sense.

[Prospector]

You know, we just arguing to be arguing. Our conversations aren't gonna change a thing. "For that you are grateful"- absolutely- right up to the minute you don't agree with it either or it doesn't protect your personal intrest. Truthfully, I could see closing Mississippi to all NR hunters. It would actually be personally better for me if it did. BUT it is  a step in the wrong direction to limit a citizen in one way while telling another it's ok based only on where they live. Please don't throw the word " elite" at others when you believe that is the right way to handle this.
As a resident you get proximity, cheaper tags,and the beauty of your state all year. As a NR, I'll gladly pay more, incur travel costs etc to expierance the beauty of your state for a limited time.
Sorry, but not sorry

[ChesterCopperpot]

The convolution of "privileges" as "rights" is the braidwork of entitlement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chester, you are just making too much sense.

Selfishness is always shortsighted and the saddest part of all of this is that they can't see far enough down the line of their own "logic" (evidenced by the, "The logistics are not my concern," type statements) to realize they're arguing for bigger government. They're arguing for federal hands clenching its fingers around a game species. And that's the very last thing any of us should want for any species. When the federal government steps into game management that game species is in dire straits. They can't see it so won't admit it, but that's the inevitable end of that line of logic if game population and hunter demand continue at their current opposing trends. In the now it's, "I want access to the same privileges of resident hunters on federal lands in a given state." And that's perfectly fine if the resource can sustain that pressure. It can't. The answer to that is quota hunts. Quota hunts with equal opportunity granted to residents and nonresidents (which is why I asked that question a ways back, because like it or not that IS what they're proposing) is a burden that cannot be expected for states to carry. So who carries it at that point? That's the inevitable end to that line of logic. And it's not just arguing to be arguing here. This is a very real threat and it's something that we're already witnessing as opportunities are stripped away as a result of nonresident demand exceeding population thresholds. It's happening in certain states with turkeys (that demand issue being greatly compounded by steep and so far unalterable population decline). It's happening in places like Colorado with elk. So to be clear, I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I'm arguing because this line of thought is a very real threat. But none of that will matter to the ones spewing this nonsense because as Captain Hook said of children, "He took my toy! She hit my bear! I want a party! I want a cookie! I want to stay up! I want, I want, I want, me, me, me, me, mine, mine, mine, mine, now, now, now, now!"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Prospector]

How is saying it's ok for the STATE government to make the rule not more government?!? The way it is or was is less government! That is Americans can all use American lands the same as any other American! And the dissidents, err, I mean Americans,have every right to travel to utilize americas land in other states as well.

[Prospector]

and while we are spouting the differences between privileges and rights, it it still a privilege for a resident to hunt their home state..... not a right. No more, no less

[PalmettoRon]

I personally prefer allowing government closest to the people they serve to be making most decisions.

The last time I checked, it is state wildlife agencies that monitor and manage wildlife on federal lands such as USFS and BLM land, not the US Fish and Wildlife Service. State wildlife agencies are funded by the citizens of that state, not citizens of the US at large.

Since those state agencies are managing wildlife on federal land, I'm fine with those same state agencies deciding what are the best policies for managing wildlife and that includes hunter access, both resident and nonresident.

Much of the west is owned by the federal government and western residents have less access to private land than many of us back east.Those citizens are funding their wildlife agencies and I feel should have an advantage over nonresidents.

I say all of this as one who loves hunting out west on public land. In a lot of the western states it's hard for even the locals to draw big game tags.
I drew an AZ elk tag years ago and had a great hunt. I may not live long enough to draw another tag, but I'm cool with that if some AZ young man gets drawn over me.

As far as turkey hunting goes, most states are still accessible for NR hunters, but rather than turning wildlife management over to the feds and licensing to the feds, I would prefer to leave things up to each state as they know far better what is best rather than some DC bureaucrat.

[arkrem870]

I wonder what influenced so many non resident hunters to converge on big cypress all of the sudden.

[Prospector]

Mississippi is a prime example of the squeaky wheel gets the grease. We have a whole bunch of that here for sure.
Mississippi and Florida residents I think have more dog in this than most other states- at least in regard to turkeys anyway. Oh well, guess I'll just be content with my poor MS easterns and give up dreams of expierancing other states... just be sure yall return the favor🙄

[deerhunt1988]

I am now a Florida resident that lives within 90 minutes of the Big Cypress NATIONAL Preserve.  It is a non-resident circus during March and some sections are now in a quota system.  These quotas are available equally to ALL.  I get no special edge on an application.  Since this is federal property I should not.  A simple concept.  I can't even imagine the screaming if Florida decided to reserve the first two weeks of the spring season in Big Cypress to residents' only.

Funny you mention this, because this could be changing soon to the benefit of residents. Then you'll be living in a commie state that restricts NR access to federal lands.

[deerhunt1988]

Hmm?  The spring 2025 Big Cypress regs already posted on the FWC site.  Must have missed any major changes.  Florida loves the non-residents cash.  They won't be restricted to any real degree and a resident won't get one extra second of hunting time over a non-residents. Bet ya.

Maybe not in spring 2025, but its being considered for future seasons. Bet ya.

[deerhunt1988]

The entire quota system needs a tweak. Screwing with non-resident money won't be a big part. Too much money involved.

As a NR who has been playing the quota game there since 2007, I whole heartedly agree. NR need to be limited to 10-20% of the available quotas. There was motion in the past year to make NR buy a turkey permit before even applying, but I guess that fell through?

[arkrem870]

I wonder what influenced so many non resident hunters to converge on big cypress all of the sudden.

Gee I don't know.  The WA couple I met at BC was in about 2006.  THP was still in short pants.  Meateater was still a concept.  Nobody even heard of YouTube.  I was the only one at the Bear Island camp with a Florida tag on my truck.  LOL at the "all of a sudden".

I'd laugh but it's not funny. Enjoy your quota hunts. I'm out