I wouldn't go that far, but the residents simply refuse to comprehend simple economics. See the below expenses comparing residents vs non-residents for getting an elk license. The non-resident pays $802 more than the resident, almost 8x. CPW's budget largely depends on the funds generated from non-resident hunting and fishing licenses. Non-residents pay ~$120 just to apply for an elk license. And that doesn't even begin to address the economic impact to businesses in the Western Slope towns coming from out of state hunters.

Until residents are OK with spending over $900 for an elk license and almost $600 for a deer license, the CPW will continue to rely on non-residents to fund its existence. Some people will say residents will pay more, but the ranchers and blue collar CO residents that I know well absolutely will not pay that amount or even half of that amount.

Residents comprehend perfectly, they just want less pressure from NRs and many or most say they would gladly pay more for that.
No Western state is going belly up because Texans stop coming to them, lol.
Plenty of other folks will step right into your place.

Tourism brings in more dollars than hunting I would bet in most every Western state, I know it does in Wyoming.
Colorado could just tax those tourism folks and make up the difference, raise park fees etc....

You all are right on the antis though, they want hunting stopped and have a foot hold in Colorado.

Yes they understand perfectly until there is a cougar hunting ban proposed and now they want NR $$$$ and influence to help fight it. Or they want to eliminate all NR sheep tags until they realize 97 % of all sheep conservation in their state is via NR donations. Whats WY NR income 50 mil to Res 9m? Im sure half of the WY res would be ok with picking up that tab but how many does it end up pricing out of the other half? Once we price a generation out its hard to get them back in.

AZ cut Gov tags. Funny one, loseing A Gov tag is the equalivant of adding $2k to ALL 146 sheep tag lic costs.


I think Western state resident hunters are very short sighted and only look at current and not long term.

It makes it really hard to keep putting in for states like Colorado where there is a point system, knowing the odds of drawing are only getting worse each year.

I like New Mexico and Idaho where it’s a true lottery and no weighted system, even though NM only allots 6% of the tags to non-residents.

I stopped going to Colorado when it was around $400 and found out that they dropped sound/ noise charges to change movement patterns right before the season began.

Colorado hunting licenses will not change until people stop buying the licenses.

It's not all so doom and gloom... New Mexico has wolves that haven't made much of a impact. Hope Colorado wolves go the same route

CO hunting licenses change almost every couple years. It's always changing and licenses continue to be purchased. New this year is a lower allocation of licenses to NR and at a higher cost. A miniscule increase in cost for residents.

I will disagree greatly with this. I've hunted the Gila many times, wolves have made a big impact in that area.

BOBO they can raise the NR fees to the roof and folks will still pay it, just watch and see what happens in Wyoming with the huge increase in the Special draw price.
Sorry but we will not dry up and blow away with less NR hunting in our state or others.
Yes Colorado has to battle their own folks but take a look at what resident hunters are saying, they will pay more and lots of way to make up that shortage especially in Colorado.
There are plenty of folks with the money to pay the high fees.
Sorry but Texas hunters do not keep Western state alive, that is just bluster.

We are definitely looking long term because we know we have a finite resource and want it for our residents mainly. Same with Colorado resident hunters.

Saying that CO residents will close the budget gap and pay hundreds of dollars more per tag tag is a purely anecdotal opinion of yours. The small town and rural guys I know can't afford to pay that amount for themselves (and x2 for many of their wives) to hunt elk, deer, and pronghorn. The people in Denver, Boulder, and COS can perhaps afford it, but these aren't the hunters, as evidenced by their history of endorsing anti-hunting measures.

The folks on the Western Slope are the hunters. Right now, they can draw an elk and buck license for $170 all in. The NR pays $1406 for the same licenses, $1236 more. This is my opinion, but I view your opinion of "There are plenty of folks with the money to pay the high fees" as flat out wrong.

I agree that CO and others do not "need" non-residents, but they will need to reduce their budgets drastically if that's the route they want to go. Future conservation efforts and improvements will slow down or cease.

And to all of the small town stores/restaurants, motels/lodges, airports, outfitters, etc., just ask them how dependent they are on hunters during the fall. And the local tax revenue that contributes to the town's operating budgets. Hunters/anglers, largely from out of the state, generate $3.25 billion for CO and support more than 25,000 full-time jobs across the state. Again, the economic impact is not just limited to the sale of licenses. Anyone who doesn't recognize this is tone deaf.

There is a breaking point. Lots of NR are no longer buying points for Big 3 in CO. Revenue went up, but now its starting to fall.

I dont think TX hunters keep western hunting a float, NR ‘s do. Its a Fact, NR keep WY afloat, as it stands. Revenue numbers dont lie. BUT there are more Hunting license sold in TX than Montana, wyoming, And Idaho combined.


these are 2020 WY numbers for license revenue

Nonres - $43,593,085
Resident - $9,599,458

Every NR that gets priced out of outstate hunting, Is a multi generation hit to Western states budgets and conservation funding. As that NR no longer will support anti hunting efforts in those states, Why they dont hunt there, their kids wont hunt there etc

That's 82% coming from NR. A $34mm shortfall. It's a similar story across the west.

In CO for 2022-23, Colorado Wildlife Revenue was $209mm. Of that, $138mm was from Licenses/Fees/Passes. Of that $138mm, only about $20mm was from residents. That's leaves a gap of almost $120mm to fill if NR revenue goes away. Again, this ignores all of the other dollars that NR hunters contribute while hunting in the state.

and the extra NR conservation and legislative funding. If I don’t hunt CO, Im not donating money to keep lion hunting open, or habitat restoration projects.

All states, including TX, charge NR hunters about 10X the fee they charge residents. Look at what the gold sportsman license cost a TX resident and then look what those same licenses and endorsements run a NR. It is what it is. Always bern that way, always will be that way.

Its $56 for residents to have same endorsements as the NR $315(5 WT’s, 2 MD, 2 Javi, Upland and SG).

the kicker is there is no NR resident specific allocation or draw barriers in TX.


Every Western State mandates you buy a hunting license to-enter draw SO that they A) get additional revenue and B) they need the license volume to max out Federal Pittman Roberson money equation

Wrong. The gold sportsman ($68) includes turkey which NRs would have to buy separate. It includes both freshwater and saltwater fishing which the NR would have to buy separate. It includes the upland game endorsement which the NR would have to buy separate. It includes the archery endorsement which the NR would have to buy separate. There is no NR combo license so they have to buy it all separate. You add all that in and the NR pays close to 10X what the resident pays for the same licenses. That's my point.

Every state including TX gouges the NR and always have. If you don't want to pay, then don't apply, nobody makes anybody play the game. I was a CO resident for 54 years (state taxes in CO meant my resident tags cost about $5K a year by the way) and I like hunting elk, deer, bear and pronghorn back there with my brother. I pay the NR fees, despite still owning property in CO and paying CO property taxes, and if my brother wants to hunt down here he pays the TX NR fees. When I was a CO resident I paid NR fees in WY and UT. I hunted whitetails in PA with a buddy of mine and I paid the NR fees in PA. It is what it is. You have to pay to play.

I was a CO resident and still pay income, property and Non producing mineral tax in CO.

I did resident texas “hunting license” plus endorsements for upland, archery, etc . Not supper combo.

regardless what western state do you get 7 Deer tags, 2 javi for 318 dollars, and can apply for ANY hunt for $3. A NR can not apply for “any” hunt in CO, and are capped severally in top units. Not the case in TX. Not even close.

I have the ability to pay to play, I hunted four states last year but Im not arguing for my sake, its sake of the ones getting priced out that will no longer support or donate against anti hunting legislation. Nor will thier kids because they didnt grow up hunting out west.

None but that point is moot. A CO resident has to pay $47 for a single deer tag while a single deer tag in TX (if such a thing was sold) would be about $8. Neither CO nor any other western state has a deer herd that allows someone to have 7 tags. TX is fortunate that it does. CO preference points were $3 for all species for many, many years but they did raise that recently. It is a fool's errand to compare one state against another in every situation. Hell when I was stationed in VA I could legally take 64 deer in a season. Can't do that in TX.

None of this disproves that every state, and I mean EVERY state, INCLUDING TX gouges NRs. It is what it is, and it has always been that way. When I started hunting in CO a deer tag was $7 for a resident and $75 for a NR. A resident elk tag was $12 and a NR elk tag was $108. Pretty much the same percentage rate as today. A gallon of gas was 48 cents back then. Do the math, you will find there really isn't that much difference when cost percentages are compared.

I don’t mind paying the non resident tag fees, what irks me is the percentage of tags allotted to non residents on BLM and Federal lands.

And all things considered, Texas is an absolute bargain tag wise when it comes to hunting for non-residents.

Aside from the whitetail, mule deer and turkey tags they come with the license, it also allows take of exotics and non-game species.


If they require you to come out of pocket when you apply for tags ( like New Mexico ) a person could easily run up a $10k-$15k tab putting in for the popular western states.

Imo the minimal application fee Colorado implemented was more about revenue than trying to even the odds of draw. And it increased the number of applicants 10 fold.

The land has ZERO to do with it. You can use federal or BLM land every day of the year. There is nothing stopping you from going up there today and pitching a camp.

But, and this is a big but, the SCOTUS has ruled that the game animals belong to the residents of the individual states and the licenses to hunt them is a state matter and not a federal matter. Doesn't matter if the game is on private land or public land in any state, the game belongs to the citizens of that state and each state decides how to issue tags or to even decide not to issue tags. Here in TX as long as it is not a totally privately stocked herd every whitetail and mule deer belongs to the state even if it is on your property or on federal property and when TX sells you a hunting license it does not say "valid only on private property or valid only on federal property" the license is for the entire state which is why a game warden can come onto your property to enforce state game laws. Individual specific permits may be for designated areas but the state issued license is not. Each state gets to decide how it will allocate licenses and in what numbers regardless of who actually owns the land.

If you don't like how a state issues licenses then don't apply for licenses in that state. It really is that simple. Nobody is holding a gun on you forcing you to apply for a tag or even buying an over the counter tag. I am sitting on 26 elk preference points in CO because I am holding out for unit 2. I can draw that tag as a resident with that number of points but not as a NR. Doesn't matter if I like that or not, that is how CO does it and I have to play by their rules. You can always take your football and go home if you don't like the home field rules. I have held licenses in 13 states over the years and not once did any of those 13 states give a damn if I liked the way they issued tags. You either deal with it or you don't hunt.

I hold min of 10 state license EVERY year, you have to apply. Im blessed and can afford it. This is about when NR get tired of the blame game and priced out and who loses because of it.

Do you think any one on this forum is donating money or sending emails about the current Bear and Lion ban in Washington thats about to go to vote? Do you think anyone is trying to help
hunting in Cali? No one gives 2 its about washington or Ca. That mind set is quickly becoming same for CO. You Can see it on lots of forums. CO is in trouble internally and losing support externally. Think any one on this forum sent an email, public comment or donation to stop the CO proposed Lion ban?

its $500 in CO if you do just points for all species.

Ok, so the Wildlife belongs to the people of the state. Same here in Texas as it is in every other state. We can agree that is the case.

And I have by and large stopped applying for licenses in states like Colorado. Instead of paying my money in license and draw fees in hopes to have a shot against an unbalanced system, I'll re-allocate the money to other trips and/or landowner tags. I am taking my football, but I'm not going home, just going to another field.

What is gonna hurt long term and the point Bobo was trying to make, is that NR hunters will either move or cease to go to these states and there will be a huge dollar deficit created by the lack of NR hunters. That is going to hurt in both the long and short term, from State revenue to local revenue. My issue is a large number of these states are made up of public, federally owned land that are paid for by my tax dollars just as much as everyone else regardless of residency. Hard to swallow that they keep cutting the non-resident allotments on property that is paid for by everyone's tax dollars. But I'm not going to beat that horse any further.


The "if you don't like it then don't play" mentality is a losing train of thought. The state, the people of the state and ultimately the wildlife will be the ones who suffer the most.

WORD......

Nonresident hunters make up for $75million in licenses fees alone.