With them planning on jacking up the NR fees, the residents better hold onto their seats in the next couple of years.

If it is signed into law I'll quite putting in for Utah other than my LL.

 

With them planning on jacking up the NR fees, the residents better hold onto their seats in the next couple of years.

If it is signed into law I'll quite putting in for Utah other than my LL.

This ride started for residents in 22 when they took out trail cams and salt. And every year it’s gotten progressively worse. Can’t wait to see what chit they shove down our throats next year

 

Yikes. I bought a license every year just in case. Boy, now I'm not so sure. That's nuts.

My communication to the Gov.

I recently learned that hunting and fishing fees for out of state hunters/fishers will double this year. I've had an out of state combination license for me and my kids for several years as I come back to Utah from Nebraska to visit my aging parents. I usually take my dad fishing or go hunting with my brothers. At double the cost for me, and my kids, that becomes financially impossible. I will drive the extra and go to Idaho where fees are a little more reasonable.

I understand slight increases, but fees DOUBLED. Being in the outdoors is becoming a rich man's game. The legislature continues to increase costs, attempt to block public access, and other things that force normal people out. Please do the sensible thing and VETO this egregious money grab. I already can't afford to big game hunt in Utah and lost all of my points, now it's impossible to fish and bird hunt.

 

Yikes. I bought a license every year just in case. Boy, now I'm not so sure. That's nuts.

My communication to the Gov.

I recently learned that hunting and fishing fees for out of state hunters/fishers will double this year. I've had an out of state combination license for me and my kids for several years as I come back to Utah from Nebraska to visit my aging parents. I usually take my dad fishing or go hunting with my brothers. At double the cost for me, and my kids, that becomes financially impossible. I will drive the extra and go to Idaho where fees are a little more reasonable.

I understand slight increases, but fees DOUBLED. Being in the outdoors is becoming a rich man's game. The legislature continues to increase costs, attempt to block public access, and other things that force normal people out. Please do the sensible thing and VETO this egregious money grab. I already can't afford to big game hunt in Utah and lost all of my points, now it's impossible to fish and bird hunt.

You might want to think of picking up the 5 year combination license, at least then you can go fishing and hunt birds.

 

Wow, and I thought I was paying through the nose just to buy points as a nonresident for other states. $240 for a nonresident hunting license? Fukc all the way off. This is crazy. I’m not even a nonresident of Utah and that still pisses me off.

 

As a non resident that usually buys a license and puts in for hunts… this will be the end for me.

 

In 2019 a nonresident gs bull or spike tag was $393. In 2020 it increased by about 1/3 to $593. In 2025 it’s set to go to $1226!!! $1226 for a general season elk tag? What. The. F***! You reckon these other western states will follow suit? I’m starting to think it was a waste for me to ever get started in this nonresident points game. Everything is getting too stupid.

 

Many already did. Utah is late to the party.

 

Idaho has been ratcheting up their prices too over the last few years, if Utah does this I am afraid that Idaho would follow suite and I'd be out in both states!

 

You are a Utah resident though, right?

 

Welp, its one way to deal with point creep.

I'm sure that approach may be coming for us residents too.

 

I'm afraid you are most likely correct......

 

Sent a message to the governor.

 

If something is valuable (wanted by many and not enough to go around) and limited the price is bound to go up. Not sure why they waited this long.

 

True. Funny how quickly hunters will suddenly drop the right wing/capitalist ideals and bust out the manifesto when it comes to keeping hunting affordable. 😂

 

A few thoughts:

1- Anyone saying "other states will follow" have not been paying attention to what other states have already been doing to nonresidents. I really need to cash in my Wyoming antelope points and just be done with that state forever. I committed to helping my brother this year on his and me doing mine next year, or this year would be the year. I hope that doesn't become a costly decision! Utah's jolt here is big, and I don't think they should have done it that drastically, but Utah certainly is not starting this frenzy. Caddis8 is correct, Utah is late to this party and has been a total bargain before these changes. And yes, I fully expect this trend to continue and I will likely stop putting in for tags out of state as a result of this.

2- I don't really think this was an "11th hour" sneak it through situation. This is the legislature's omnibus state agency fee bill that is passed every year. Every state agency has to receive authorization from the legislature to change their fees, including the DWR and the Wildlife Board. This is a giant bill addressing hundreds of state agencies and their fees across the board. Of course, the public was unaware of this and I think that is crappy, but I don't think this one is as sneaky as some of the other crap we see. However, I don't think this is the legislature creeping into DWR business, like some of the other bills we've seen over the years. I don't think this would have happened without the DWR asking them to do it.

3- Because of #2, there is zero chance the governor vetos this bill. He'd be veteoing fee changes for every state agency across the board. It ain't happening. The communication with the governor should likely be "instruct the DWR to not implement the full fee increase...blah blah blah." See #4.

4- Here is the bill that passed this, you can see for yourself what it encompasses:

SB0008

le.utah.gov

The wildlife stuff starts on line 4319, to make it easy for you to find it. But to start out, the legislative language says the following: "(All nonresident fees for the Division Wildlife Resources may not exceed, but may be less than, the amounts stated in the division's fee schedule.)" Candidly, I'm not 100% sure what this means, but it leads me to believe the legislature is only authorizing the DWR to establish the fee up to this level, but not above it. I could be wrong, but I think the DWR could come in less than what is in the fee schedule, if it chooses.

5- I've got my theories on this, and I think it's all part of the same plot on many of the other changes we've seen recently. However, I'm going to put it in a different post than this one.

 

A few thoughts:

1- Anyone saying "other states will follow" have not been paying attention to what other states have already been doing to nonresidents. I really need to cash in my Wyoming antelope points and just be done with that state forever. I committed to helping my brother this year on his and me doing mine next year, or this year would be the year. I hope that doesn't become a costly decision! Utah's jolt here is big, and I don't think they should have done it that drastically, but Utah certainly is not starting this frenzy. Caddis8 is correct, Utah is late to this party and has been a total bargain before these changes. And yes, I fully expect this trend to continue and I will likely stop putting in for tags out of state as a result of this.

I realize that other states have been increasing their prices and Utah has historically been a good bargain, but these proposed (probably already solidified) price increases ate everyone else's lunch. Utah is basically the wolf of wall street guy telling the other state game agencies, "those are rookie numbers." If all I want to do is buy a point I can actually do that fairly cheaply in Wyoming (for now anyway) where Utah nonrezzies will have to spend $240. In Wyoming a regular nonresident elk tag price is $707, where Utah is looking to become $1226 and most of our gs elk opportunity is only for spikes! A nonresident Wyoming deer tag is $389 and now Utah is looking to charge eight hundred and something. Don't white knight for Utah. This is a complete joke. Utah leap frogged everyone when it comes to non-resident cost. We are now the new leaders (assuming Spencer L. C0cks) signs off on it. When I ask if other states will follow suit, I'm asking if they are going to attempt to equal or exceed us again. I'm guessing they will.

 

Waaaay back in the day when dad was alive, we would talk about this kind of stuff around the campfire on our hunts. Back then, he would grumble and predict that in the not too distant future, hunting would be for only the very rich and the average Joe six-pack would be excluded. Back then, my younger self would say that it may eventually happen but not for a while and some of the grousing was a bit "alarmist". Between these kinds of developments and the suspected imminent loss of a lot of our public lands privileges, it looks like he will be telling me "told you so" when we are at the happy hunting grounds. Or maybe I'm becoming like Dad myself also.

The interesting thing is that if such a thing occurred, I thought (or was told to think) that the downfall would come from wild eyed PETA types winning over a majority of the public sentiment. I now believe that is wrong. The events that will lead to most hunters demise from the game will be crafted by US, and will have been voted for by US.

 

Utah really hasn't been behind the curve on NR pricing. This is the 4th significant increase since 2019, and works out to about a 400% increase over those 6 years. Sure, many other Western states have been ratcheting up too in this same time frame, but none that I can remember have been this drastic over the same period. By example, Alaska did a 100% NR increase in 2018, but it was the first increase since like the early 90s.

I'm no peasant, but this one leaves me pretty pissed. I'll let the OIAL prices slide (moose in Alberta and Newfoundland suddenly are about the same cost for the same size expectations without needing to win the lottery though), and maybe even the LE. Honestly, I'll likely stop applying for those as I've got zero chance in drawing as a NR anyway, and now building the point bank just took a major cost increase, on top of the hit on the back end from winning. But given the demand and supply issue I bet those draw odds don't improve much. I do kinda think you'd be a moron to pay +$700 for a Utah buck pronghorn tag, given other options in better states.

But the GS deer/elk, antlerless, hunting license itself, swan, bear etc. Those are flat out absurd. I've been planning, and building GS deer points, in order to do some fun fall buck hunts with Grandpa for my cupcakes starting in 2026, and should've been able to get each of them tags 3-4 times before they hopefully move out of the house. But now that it's going to be $836 for a GS tag (and x2 + $240 if Mamacake or I need to be in a group to up their points) to probably go shoot a forky, f---- no. It's cheaper per person door to door (and more fun) to go down to SE AK and shoot multiple sitka blacktails each than to just buy one GS deer tag. Hell, the savings are big enough when it's all 4 of us to fully pay to bring my dad up and buy his NR license and tags for two bucks and a bear.

These recent NR price hikes in UT, ID, AZ, NM, MT, WY, and CO all bring me to a position that I have long resisted much to many of my AK resident friends' chagrin over the years. I'm no longer friendly or sympathetic in any format to NRs getting "fair" treatment in hunting and fishing up here in Alaska. Why should a UT resident be able to buy an otc AK moose tag for $800 plus a $160 license (less than a UT GS buck deer) when a UT moose costs an AK resident $4,484 + $240 on top of needing to win the lottery?

I started working this week on my AK state legislators and RHAK reps pushing for them to go for the throat on NR pricing. And I am far from alone. Right now my pricing position is still "moderate" compared to many I'm talking with and I'm arguing for $15k sheep; $10k bison, muskox, moose, goat, and brown bear; $5k caribou; $1k black bear, elk, and deer. Plus a 400% increase in the fishing, hunting, and trapping licenses.

 

So you want to price every middle class person out of ever hunting in your state? Why would you ever want to do that? How about helping us campaign to bring all non-resident fees down around the country so it's not just a sport for the super rich?
I'm fine with limited quotas for non-residents, and I'm fine paying double or triple what residents pay. But the 10x or 20x gouging is out of control.

 

I've advocated for more direct relationships and agreements between states for years now. If we want prices for non-resident licensees to remain reasonable then we need to be sharing costs & privileges officially instead of informally. We need a multistate compact.

I don't like these increases but without some form of binding agreement we are going to continue to see states stick it to stakeholders who have no vote in future outcomes. And there will always be hunters willing to pay the sticker price no matter how many protest by not participating.

 

Like I said, we've identified the enemy, and his name is cake-eater!

Or something...

 

I've argued with lots of folks in Alaska, including the decision-makers, for years against the "unreasonable" restriction on NRs requiring them to be guided or hunt with a close relative who is a resident for brown bear, sheep, and goat.

That's done for from me. Not gonna advocate any more for improving NR benefits in AK.

 

I've argued with lots of folks in Alaska, including the decision-makers, for years against the "unreasonable" restriction on NRs requiring them to be guided or hunt with a close relative who is a resident for brown bear, sheep, and goat.

That's done for from me. Not gonna advocate any more for improving NR benefits in AK.

Please no, pretty please? At least a couple of years till I come up? It's becoming compelling for me to move there. Serious.

 

I keep hearing rumors this was pushed by legislators to fund some of the bills they have passed recently to deal with access or acquisition of hunting/wildlife lands. That doesn't make it right.

Here is a response from a UDWR social media post. I'm not a fan of the word "our" in relation to a public agency. Nor do I like the term "market value" in relation to wildlife held in public trust.
"SB8 was passed during this past legislative session, which allows our Division to increase nonresident license fees up to double the previous cost. The bill does not mandate that those fees will automatically increase by double. Our division is reviewing the budgetary needs of our agency and the intended goals of the legislation (to purchase public land for the specific use of protecting wintering wildlife populations) and will evaluate each fee based on those needs and relevant market values of neighboring states. This legislation is designed to give our Division the tools needed to manage financial responsibilities for the foreseeable future."

I personally think these potential increases are garbage for many reasons and because it breeds posts like JC's. Tit for tat and that is that. Too soon the impact across the board is too great for the majority of hunters to hunt. It makes me sad to think how this impacts my kids' opportunities to hunt.

If they need funding to protect sensitive areas, I think everyone should throw in an extra $5 or $10 a year and carry the burden. Taking back the $500,000 from the wolf lobbyists each year would be the best place to start.

 

I agree with everything you wrote, Packout. And to be clear, it isn't just this latest UT increase to blame for my changed position. It's the cumulative actions of UT, ID, AZ, NM, MT, WY, and CO over the last handful of years, and this one is the final straw.

+15 years ago I applied for tags in all of those states (plus NV, OR, and WA) most years. That's been whittled down to only Utah for the last few years. And that's pretty much dead. I have little confidence that DWR will resist maximizing the price authority on these tags. Maybe not all at once, but they'll be at the ceiling in short order, maybe 3-5 years, if they don't go for it right away.

Tit for tat in economic game theory is a great way to ensure the worst outcomes for all players. But it's even worse for a player that takes the hit and keeps trying to cooperate.

 

All this is going to do is to stop the vast majority of non residents from hunting Utah. This will also affect the outfitters who are guiding on public lands and perhaps even the CWMU's.

Hunting out of state has always been a money loosing proposition for the non resident, but we do it because we love hunting. I know that the amount of money that I spend down in Arizona is quite a bit more than it should be, but even having to purchase a hunting license along with my tag still isn't too bad. Even deer and elk tags for the non resident are not out of sight yet.

Looking at the cost of a bison tag in Utah now for the non resident I can see most non residents doing ranch hunts now where you have a guide to do most of the work for you. I know a ranch down in Texas where you can do a bison hunt for $4500, and that includes guides and a 3 night stay in their lodge.

Utah may of just shot themselves in the foot if this bill was to provide more money for the DWR.

 

Looking at the cost of a bison tag in Utah now for the non resident I can see most non residents doing ranch hunts now where you have a guide to do most of the work for you. I know a ranch down in Texas where you can do a bison hunt for $4500, and that includes guides and a 3 night stay in their lodge.

Utah may of just shot themselves in the foot if this bill was to provide more money for the DWR.

There are reservation hunts and hunts in Canada for B&C eligible wild bison that are guided and only about double the proposed new tag fee ceiling for Utah.

But I'm pretty sure Utah would still sell every single NR OIAL and LE tag at triple the proposed ceiling. The demand is there. Utah will lose out on hunting license revenue and some app fees though, but I bet in the long run those are not big budget driver dollars.

 

I keep hearing rumors this was pushed by legislators to fund some of the bills they have passed recently to deal with access or acquisition of hunting/wildlife lands. That doesn't make it right.

Here is a response from a UDWR social media post. I'm not a fan of the word "our" in relation to a public agency. Nor do I like the term "market value" in relation to wildlife held in public trust.
"SB8 was passed during this past legislative session, which allows our Division to increase nonresident license fees up to double the previous cost. The bill does not mandate that those fees will automatically increase by double. Our division is reviewing the budgetary needs of our agency and the intended goals of the legislation (to purchase public land for the specific use of protecting wintering wildlife populations) and will evaluate each fee based on those needs and relevant market values of neighboring states. This legislation is designed to give our Division the tools needed to manage financial responsibilities for the foreseeable future."

I personally think these potential increases are garbage for many reasons and because it breeds posts like JC's. Tit for tat and that is that. Too soon the impact across the board is too great for the majority of hunters to hunt. It makes me sad to think how this impacts my kids' opportunities to hunt.

If they need funding to protect sensitive areas, I think everyone should throw in an extra $5 or $10 a year and carry the burden. Taking back the $500,000 from the wolf lobbyists each year would be the best place to start.

I did find the relevant language in the bill ("All nonresident fees for the Division of Wildlife Resources may not exceed, but may be less
than, the amounts stated in the division's fee schedule") which makes me wonder how often the agency doesn't utilize the maximum fee allowed. Anybody know the answer to that? I can understand the agency response above but I'm skeptical they won't seek a way to maximize their revenue in the face of rising expenses (as we've seen the last 4+ years).

 

If anyone, resident OR non-resident, that is complaining about this POSSIBLE fee increase and you also went to the Expo and supported such commercialization of our wildlife then you really need to think if you are going to attend or not next year.

 

SPOT ON MRSHANE!

 

 

I hope that the DWR uses discretion and their brains on this one. Yeah they could probably up the OIL or LE tag costs a little and be ok within reason but not the general tags nor the huntin license--that's just stupid. I hope reason prevails and they don't max this out to stupid levels.

I really don't want Governor @johnnycake enacting some retaliatory tag tariffs on us poor pitiful Utard peasants!

 

I hope that the DWR uses discretion and their brains on this one. Yeah they could probably up the OIL or LE tag costs a little and be ok within reason but not the general tags nor the huntin license--that's just stupid. I hope reason prevails and they don't max this out to stupid levels.

I really don't want Governor @johnnycake enacting some retaliatory tag tariffs on us poor pitiful Utard peasants!

But governor JC promises a bidet in every pit toilet

 

If we are peasants that makes Johnnycuck the king and you know what the peasants must do when they have had enough of the King's sh**

 

I ain't skeered, and I'll be damned before I let you eat some of this cake.

 

before I let you eat some of this cake.

Boy, you better quit playin around. 😏

 

As of right now, I think we might be getting too chicken little with this. The legislature is merely allowing price increases up to this level. It doesn't mean that the dwr will necessarily take them that high. I THINK they know they won't be selling $1226 spike tags or 800 dollar gs deer tags and hopefully know that a $240 hunting license is beyond retarded. I hope.

 

See post #18, point #4.

I’m guessing the public can still have some influence here, but I don’t know that.