Ryan Rothstein: Out-of-state whitetail tags getting harder and harder to come by – Outdoor News
If you’re even a casual out-of-state deer hunter, you’ve probably heard about western states further limiting nonresident tags and some states restricting nonresident use of public lands.
As a self-professed Western hunting addict, I’ve been closely following these issues, which have been rapidly coming to a head in recent years.
I expect no sympathy from elk hunters and many mule deer hunters. After all, the draw systems and preference point games have long been a feature of western elk hunting, and many states do likewise for mule deer. I certainly don’t expect hunters who have been forced to play that game for years to feel sorry for the plight of whitetail hunters finally feeling the sting of nonresident restrictions.
However, there’s an important distinction between the reasons behind draw systems for elk and mulies and the new, evolving draw systems for whitetails.
Both elk and mule deer are icons of the American West, and they’ve consistently drawn hunters from the east for the better part of a century. As the human population has grown and media made learning how to hunt these critters more and more accessible, hordes of hunters would flock to the mountains and coulees, necessitating many of the draw systems currently in place, simply because there wouldn’t be enough elk and mule deer to go around if everyone got a tag. These tags are limited by biological necessity.
Back to whitetails. The reason many Great Plains states are implementing tag draws has nothing in particular to do with the abundance of deer. Time and again, the decision seems to come after residents and outfitters complain loudly enough about the “out-of-towners” tromping around “our” public lands, as if residents deserve to hunt public lands more than does someone from a different state.
MORE WHITETAIL COVERAGE FROM OUTDOOR NEWS:
Three truths about training your dog to find shed antlers
Ryan Rothstein: Be ready to burn more boot leather to find sheds this year
Looking back at the biggest typical bucks in the Boone and Crockett record books
Resident complaints
The most recent examples are in South Dakota and Nebraska. A few years ago, both offered true over-the-counter tags to nonresident archery deer hunters.
South Dakota caved first, barring nonresidents from hunting public lands until Oct. 1, a full month after the general deer archery season opened. This came about after residents and outfitters threw a fit about all the (mostly Minnesota) out-of-state bowhunters coming to South Dakota for a chance at a velvet buck. Just like that, no more early-season opportunities for nonresidents.
In more recent years, their archery deer tags have become full-blown draw systems for nonresidents. Again, this came after loud complaining from some residents and outfitters about public lands being too crowded. This had nothing to do with the abundance of deer on the landscape.
Although Nebraska hasn’t fully followed South Dakota’s footsteps (yet), a few years ago that state went from being fully over the counter for archery deer tags to implementing a quota system that capped the number of licenses available to nonresidents. While it’s still possible to get tags in both Nebraska and South Dakota, it ain’t nearly as easy as it was just a few years ago.
With all this going on, it shouldn’t have surprised me when my buddy sent me a survey from the Missouri Department of Conservation that asked for input on public-land deer and waterfowl hunting. Just based on the questions the survey asked, I can already see the writing on the wall.
The survey solicited opinions on topics such as how much of a problem hunters have had with interference from other hunters while hunting in Missouri. It asked for respondents’ level of support for limiting the number of nonresident deer tags available via a draw/lottery system.
It asked for about the level of support for allowing only Missouri residents to hunt on Missouri-owned state land. It asked for the level of support for limiting nonresidents to certain portions of a season. The list went on.
Although no regulations have been instituted to date, this survey seems to be laying the groundwork to put them in place. I’ve seen this song and dance before; the days of easy nonresident tags in Missouri are done.
According to MDC, over a two-year period, residents purchased 542,532 of the permit types referenced in the survey. Nonresidents, on the other hand, purchased 84,568 permits during the same period. Who’s really the problem here?
Now, I’ll freely admit this: State agencies have every right to manage their deer herds and season structures however they like within their own state laws. I can’t do anything about that. But the decisions being made regarding nonresident hunting aren’t based on biological merit; they’re based on resident complaints.
What do the numbers say?
Let’s do some math.
While we know the survey included waterfowl permits, let’s assume those 542,532 resident permits were all archery deer licenses to make our math easy. We’ll assume the 84,568 nonresident permits were also archery deer licenses.
The cost of a resident archery deer permit last year in Missouri was $20.50, for a total resident contribution of $11.1 million and some change. The nonresident cost of an archery deer-hunting permit last year in Missouri was $288, meaning the total nonresident contribution was $24.3 million and change. Again, who is the problem here?
Not going away
Sadly, this is something we’re going to continue to see.
Residents will complain that nonresidents are coming to town and crowding up the public lands. States will cave to the residents because, ultimately, the residents are paying state and local taxes that likely go toward a portion of many state game agency budgets.
While I get the argument, I still find it deeply unfair and short-sighted.
The nonresident-versus-resident contribution to the overall state game agency just via license sales is staggering enough. Needless to say, nonresidents are paying far more than their fair share. And this is just in Missouri, which offers nonresident tags substantially cheaper than do some other states.
What those numbers don’t capture are the contributions nonresident hunters make to local, small-town economies across America. I’ve been through a lot of these towns on hunting trips, and I know what I spend in them on fuel, food, dining out, lodging, supplies, auto repair, parts, and anything else that can go wrong on a trip. There are a lot of towns out there that won’t survive if nonresident hunters no longer drop by.
Yes, residents live in these places year-round. Yes, they pay taxes there. But that’s the distinction: These folks don’t have a choice but to contribute to the local economy. Nonresidents do. How much revenue will these small-town small businesses lose if nonresidents decide it’s not worth the hassle anymore?
If Missouri moves forward – I assume it’s a foregone conclusion – to limit nonresident deer hunters, it will leave North Dakota as the lone state left standing to our south or west for quite a distance that will still offers OTC archery deer tags. If this happens, I’m almost certain North Dakota will receive an influx of even more nonresident archers than they currently experience. Don’t be surprised if that state decides that they’ve had enough nonresidents, too.
Ultimately, these regulatory efforts are treating the symptoms. Nonresident hunters aren’t the problem. The reason public lands are crowded is because there aren’t enough of them. Unless acquiring new public land becomes a priority for numerous states, don’t expect nonresident deer tags to become easier to draw anytime soon.
