wow a freind has a problem

[Ohio farms]

Kellory, are you talking about Ohio? Resident land owners hunting on their land in Ohio are required to make a homemade tag for deer and turkey, but are not required to buy a hunting license. As for waterfowl, they do not need to buy the Ohio waterfowl stamp, but must buy the Federal waterfowl stamp. *(If you were not talking about Ohio....never mind)

[kellory]

Yes, Ohio. I was not sure on waterfowl, because I haven''t had the opertunity yet. I have 30 hand made tags waiting for deer who wish to wear them now.

[Homunculi]

i do not know off hand but, jimmy is an old fella he is the one that told me he has to buy an non-resident lic to hunt his own property ...
and with kentucky being a common wealth and some taxes are very high on things .. that reduces the taxes on other things ...

far be it from me to think because you own it you can hunt it .. but i was thinking along the lines that you own property and pay taxes in that state for that property just like the residents do... i feel you should at least get the break that residents do ... or a better break than a complete non-resident..
and just because your residence is in another state you get metaphorically bent over the rack for higher priced tags and lic ...

i think for iowa to do what they are doing is completely wrong (i do not know the situation as to why they do it that way other than jph saying it is for political gains) you buy the tags ... end of story yes they are a little pricy but not as pricy as other states .. if i read correctly for iowa you pay the money up front and are not guaranteed to get tags .. that is a boat load of money out the window.. they got the money and you get squat if you do not get a tag ... but there is hunting lodges you can pay 2-5k even more to go on a hunting trip and be almost guaranteed to have a successful hunt ,, but what is the fun in that ?
i understand the dept of natural resources are there for a reason and bag limits and laws are in place so that all can enjoy hunting and species are not wiped out and properly managed ... i respect those laws and enjoy my hunting ...

i guess what i am getting at is (and this is not a political forum i know ) that gov an state agencies bend us over every chance they get ... and i know there is scum (i call them pig vomit) that break the rules over hunt ... hunt out of season ... hunt on others properties without permission ... that is why we have the laws in place we have ... but the flip side to the argument is the people making the rules who never hunted in their lives and while they are in office make changes to the rules then we have to bend over backwards making sure we follow them are legal ...

or
i guess is just bugs me that our rights are slowly but surly being eroded away with every passing year and supposed intelligent collage educated bureaucratic .. socialist indoctrinated piece of garbage.. that seems to think we as a people cannot think or take care of ourselves without them ...
sorry i know this is not a political forum ... and i do not mean to rant or be on a tirade ...
i do not think i will ever be in that situation to own property in another state unless i hit the lottery but it was interesting to find this out.
thanks for the replies ...
H

[Ben Sobieck]

The law varies state-to-state, but I wouldn't say it's uncommon for a non-res landowner to pay a non-res price to hunt. I know people in Minnesota who own hunting land in North Dakota. They must buy a non-res license to hunt their property.

[pgchambers]

PGCHAMBERS, it this part you are wrong for me. " As far as "if you own it you can hunt it". Even resident land owners have to pay for a license to hunt their own property. It would just be less because they live here." Land owner write thier own tags with no fees, my son must buy a hunting permit, but no deer tag. My father, who used to own the property, now gets shafted, and must buy hunting permit and deer tag to hunt what used to belong to him. And the size of the property plays no role in the fees. I have 9 acreas that I can hunt, for any game fee free,(I don't know at this point if waterfowl is included or not, but as there is no water , I will not worry about that) I must follow all bag limits.

Landowners in WI have to buy licenses for deer, bear, and turkey. I think coyotes may be open season, and I am not sure about other licenses because I don't buy them. Like I said in a later post, this is more complex than I initially gave it credit for. I still basically support non-resident fees, but the state to state complexity makes it hard to feel strong about it. I do know I support the states each making there own laws. I don't want the federal government involved.

As far as Ohio, can a landowner hunt any land with their no fee tag, or do they have to get a fee tag if they are hunting property that is not their own? I think it would be unfair to people who don't own land for them to be able to hunt other land without paying.

EDIT: Your post does imply you can only hunt your own land for free, so nevermind. I do think your father presents a tricky situation, though. I would be in favor of "grandfathering" landowner privileges if the land was sold to a family member. The "tricky" would be in defining how close the relationship would have to be. I don't think if you sold your land to a total stranger, you should still have landowner privileges, though.

[pgchambers]

Homunculi,
I am flip-flopping on my original post on this. I was basing my views on WI laws. I see your point about landowner's rights and agree. The charging of a landowner in the first place, would be something I would vote against if I counted. I guess if a state charges resident landowners a licensing fee, though, I THEN have no problem with that state charging non-resident landowners a non-resident fee(within reason). I do think some of those fees are ridiculous, though. The non-resident fee in WI is under $200 for anyone(it was $125 the last time I had to pay it, but I am sure it is more now), which is not unfair to ask non-residents to pay - IMO.

[Homunculi]

Homunculi,
I am flip-flopping on my original post on this. I was basing my views on WI laws. I see your point about landowner's rights and agree. The charging of a landowner in the first place, would be something I would vote against if I counted. I guess if a state charges resident landowners a licensing fee, though, I THEN have no problem with that state charging non-resident landowners a non-resident fee(within reason). I do think some of those fees are ridiculous, though. The non-resident fee in WI is under $200 for anyone(it was $125 the last time I had to pay it, but I am sure it is more now), which is not unfair to ask non-residents to pay - IMO.

well you are correct it got a little deeper than what i had expected ...

i guess my point would be a tiered system .. residents pay the standard fees i.e $19 ..
non residents non-land owner pay theirs .. ohio is $125 ..
but, if you own property and pay taxes in the state of ohio for that property .. is it fair that you have to pay $125 to hunt you own land ?
when flipping through the regs a tourist 3 day lic is $40 ? (only 3 days but still)
http://ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulat ... enses.aspx <--- list of pricing for ohio

i know all the lic fees and tag fees go to preserve areas and do good for the animals protected and regulated ..
and wildlife preserves are well kept ...
well it is just a thought but if you are non resident and pay state taxes for land you own .. a little friendlier price would be more reasonable ... not a full blown non resident lic price ..
just my hillbilly thoughts ... i think that would be more fair
or am i just not thinking correctly ¿

[Deebz]

sounds reasonable... but again it does come back to politics. Each state sets their own rules and regs, which is where the problem lies. In order to make a change, you have to convince the elected officials to do so. There's no way someone who lives and votes in a different state is going to be able to influence the lawmakers... And I can't see resident landowner's putting up a fuss about it either... Seems like it would be more beneficial for residents as far as hunting pressure and the cost of their own licenses if out of staters have to pay more...

[JPH]

Here is another twist to the story. Iowa does not allow you to hunt as a resident in any other state but Iowa. In other words, if you buy one of those lifetime hunting licenses in one state but move to Iowa, Iowa requires that you relinquish those privelages in the previous state in order to buy a resident tag over the counter.

I like a lot about Iowa's game laws. They are tough on poachers and big on landowner rights, yet still allow the unarmed recovery of wounded game that has crossed property lines. Iowa allows active duity military members, with an Iowa home of record, to come home and hunt without applying for a tag in advance. Iowa has a long bow season, a post-rut gun season and they do not allow crossbows without a disability waiver. Iowa offers great extra seasons for youth and disabled hunters. Iowa offers liberal doe tags at a reduced cost on a countu by county basis and they have a fully funded meat donation program. I am happy with all of these things but I think they are wrong in their treatment of non-resident landowners.

[Woods Walker]

......and don't forget deer the size of young moose too J'per!!!