# Increasing Fees



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Is there or will there be a bill that will increase license fees for non-res and res to provide more money to be used to get more public land...PLOTS.I haven't seen any yet.Will there also be a bill to split the non-res waterfowl and upland and limit the number of days for non-res to hunt upland?


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Ken,

HB 1358, splits the waterfowl and upland license and charges $100 for each one. This is a little more than a double in price, as currently the certificate, general game and habitat, and small game needed to hunt upland game tallies at $85, for another $10 you can get the state waterfowl license and hunt all waterfowl and upland for $95. It also makes a nonresident upland license good for either two 5 day blocks or 10 days straight. The bad part of this is is allows nonresidents to purchas unlimited upland licenses. When your 10 days run out, you will be able to purchase another license.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Well that really doesn't do anything at all to stop the leasing and buying of land by NR's. :eyeroll:

If you're willing to put forth the cash to secure your own land do you honestly think having to buy another $100 license is going to deter them?

So far I'm not seeing anything really positive for residents in the pheasant related bills brought forth.


----------



## muzzy (Mar 21, 2002)

Yep, it sure doesn't solve any problems.


----------



## David S Proffitt (Sep 13, 2002)

I don't think it solves all the problems but I think it is a good start. I deeply believe that generating increased revenues to be used for long term leases is a good strategy to open more land for public access and keep landowners feeling respected and appreciated. I am an out of state hunter and I have purchased the waterfowl license for an extra 10 bucks. I would admit this is the best deal around! I am willing to pay more as I think it is worth it and really don't mind as I think it is the right thing to do. Not aggressively pursuing revenues for land access is only putting the sportsman on a slower pace to the problem. The separation between public access and increased recreation days of sportsman will make the problems escalate. Just my thoughts.


----------

