States battle it out for most expensive non-rez turkey tag! Oklahoma now $349.

[deerhunt1988]

I was on the Oklahoma Wildlife Dept. website trying to find the new non-resident regulations for turkey next spring. Noticed they've added a new $100 Non-Resident Game Bird permit for non-residents hunting game birds on WMAs. That effectively makes Oklahoma $349 for a single turkey.

Non-resident annual hunting - $209
Non-resident turkey - $40
Non-resident game bird permit - $100

For a total of $349! To my knowledge, the most expensive tag for a single turkey to date. This bypasses Arkansas's $325.


You can view the non-resident license prices here:
https://www.wildlifedepartment.com/licensing/regs/license-fees#nonresident

And the new Game Bird Permit regulation here:
https://www.wildlifedepartment.com/hunting/regs/regulation-changes

The madness knows no end. Other states will take notice and respond accordingly in the future.

And to think a certain subset of turkey hunters helped bring this upon us all. Sad, sad, sad!

[Yoder409]

Well, I guess I don't have to research Oklahoma any further.   

[silvestris]

Yep, a certain subset, and a lot of them.  More than the flocks can stand.  The most dangerous thing in the world is loose lips.

[blake_08]

I live in Oklahoma, and there's no way I'd pay that kind of money to hunt turkeys in this state. Ridiculous. There's much better hunting for less money in other places. It's truly sad what turkey hunting is becoming, and scary how fast it is happening.

[Tail Feathers]

Dang shame. 

[Dtrkyman]

 

[arkrem870]

Imagine that.....loose lips do sink ships.

[akp]

And non residents have to now sign in online before hunting WMAs.

[bwhana]

I'm playing the devil's advocate to a degree with this reply so don't shoot the messenger, but with decreasing hunting land in general across the country resulting in more crowded lands for resident hunters, something has to change from the good ole days of free for all. If that means pricing out non-residents, so be it. Have YouTubers contributed to the problem, certainly in some situations, but you can't rationally put the sole blame on them. Reduced pressure and harvest is good, no matter how is achieved. Everything cost more than ever and to expect licenses not to follow suit is burying your head in the sand. Just think about how much the vehicle you drive to hunt in costs now versus a few years ago. Everything goes up!

I personally believe the biggest issue is the state agencies and biologists have been asleep at the wheel for far too long and they rode the population boom without enough study on keeping it up and now all of the sudden need more time and $ to study and find solutions as they panic. I would love to see states close an entire season with actual population surveys before and after to prove beyond a doubt that hunters taking gobblers is a significant cause of the population declines. If you don't shoot any for a year and the population is still trending down, it kills that argument permanently and forces them to address the other factors faster. The reduction of non-resident hunters is just an easy knee-jerk action that may not change the population trends at all.

In the end, we all want more birds, but very few present factual solutions beyond the usual suspects.

[Gooserbat]

I'm just saying that it's a train wreck down here

[deerhunt1988]

And non residents have to now sign in online before hunting WMAs.

Which is kind of silly to only require non-residents to check in. Several states have WMA Check-In for all users, which provides extremely valuable data. So now they are going to gather non-resident use, but not resident use? What baseline are they going to compare the non-resident use to? They really should just require WMA check-in for all. They are leaving good data on the table.

I imagine they will use the non-resident use data to eventually go to a draw/quota system, which was first proposed. Personally, I'd much rather see a draw/quota system rather than trying to price out non-residents. With WMA Check-In for all hunters, they'd get a great idea of what quotas should be. I guess since they didn't go the draw/quota route from the start, they figured the new $100 Game Bird permit would help alleviate some NR numbers.

Ultimately, their resident hunters who travel out of state will suffer too as other states respond. "Oh, Oklahoma can get $350 for a turkey and $700+ for a deer? We can too!"

I'm all for states getting a handle on non-resident pressure. They owe it to their resident hunters. But this route of pricing people out is bad for the future of hunting.

[Dtrkyman]

Is there state land in OK. that is worth that price tag anymore?  A certain popular one was a total mess a decade ago when it probably still had birds!

[GobbleNut]

Is there state land in OK. that is worth that price tag anymore? 

...Probably is somewhere, but not to my knowledge...that is, in terms of the quality of hunting I would expect when paying the increased license fees. On the other hand, IF the quality was there, I would have no problem paying an extra hundred or so dollars for it.

In the meantime, wildlife managers will likely accomplish reducing hunting pressure...at least a bit...by the license increase.  That is their intent, I suspect. They could take some of the other measures we have discussed ad nauseum such as limiting permits and/or going to a drawing...or further shortening season lengths (can't go any lower on the bag limit).  I am guessing none of those options would suit most of us  turkey hunters, either.

As it is, at least a nonresident can still grit his teeth and pay extra cost and go hunting...if he knows somewhere that there is a turkey in OK... 

[Swampmonkey]

I mean if your a South Carolina resident wanting to hunt in North Carolina your gonna pay $385.
10 day hunt- $75
Nonresident big game - $310
(If you want the year that's $125 vs $75) I mean you can kill 2 but good Lord