Alaska doubling all nonresident license and tags for 2017

[Mr Mykiss]

Pretty sure they're only "slightly increasing" other tags...not doubling them.

Doubling all Non-res big game tags except non-res military-
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/home/pdfs/2016_2017_alaska_license_fees.pdf

Dude WHAT!!!??? I checked it a few months ago and the moose tag was only going up like $100!!!

[KFhunter]

Do some of us feel entitled to hunt cheaply on other states? I don't. If an Alaskan resident wanted to hunt Washington they too would suffer from sticker shock over the nonres fees, and still have to pay the same transportation costs to fly themselves and their trophies back and forth. Considering the relatively historically low oil prices that are wracking AK's economy right now (thank the North Dakota Bakken fields and the Alberta oil sands in part for that) the fact that they need to increase non-res fees should be no surprise.  I'll be buying an AK non-res hunting license and moose locking tag next year, and for me to be able to do it when I want to do it (and more than once in a lifetime) the $970 it will cost me seems like a relatively small price to pay.  Especially considering a non-res moose tag in WA is $1652, IF they are lucky enough to get drawn.
 

I just wanted to point out that I've never seen an Alaskan wanting to hunt in WA

[Gringo31]

Alaska is fighting some finance issues.  This isn't surprising.

[Bob33]

 

[JLS]

If AKFG can maintain license revenue, but yet sell half the number of tags to NR hunters, I really doubt that the general AK populous is going to give a rat's hiney about it.  The outfitter lobby is strong, but I'm pretty certain that AK citizens in general are tired of competing with NR hunters.

[sagerat]

Have you guys seen the proposed license increases for our state next year? It's depressing to say the least.

[Bob33]

Have you guys seen the proposed license increases for our state next year? It's depressing to say the least.

The only proposal I've seen is for a 10% increase.

[Skyvalhunter]

Might as well increase it the general fund is getting low and we have some welfare people to take care of along with making sure there is enough wolves out there.

[pianoman9701]

It's death spiral for WA hunting. Not only is hunting decreasing nationwide, we're losing more hunters here in WA because of several factors including but not limited to significantly reduced public access, out-of-control predator increases, very poor forest management, and increasing costs and regulation. The department is running on lower revenue each year, causing them to raise license fees, which disenfranchises hunters to not buy licenses, which causes lower revenues, which makes them raise license fees. It's one thing to raise out-of-state license fees in a state like AK, which arguably has the most varied and attainable hunting opportunities in the country (maybe the world). It's another altogether to continue raising resident fees in WA when hunter satisfaction and confidence in the department is at an all-time low. It's almost like they're trying to end hunting here. That couldn't be, right? 

[Special T]

Pman gentlemen  hunting will be OK just like fly fishing is OK in all circles. Bird hunting with a dog will always be around because it falls in the same category. Meat hunting however will be looked down upon because so few people have any connection with thier food what so ever...

[Bob33]

It's death spiral for WA hunting. Not only is hunting decreasing nationwide, we're losing more hunters here in WA because of several factors including but not limited to significantly reduced public access, out-of-control predator increases, very poor forest management, and increasing costs and regulation. The department is running on lower revenue each year, causing them to raise license fees, which disenfranchises hunters to not buy licenses, which causes lower revenues, which makes them raise license fees. It's one thing to raise out-of-state license fees in a state like AK, which arguably has the most varied and attainable hunting opportunities in the country (maybe the world). It's another altogether to continue raising resident fees in WA when hunter satisfaction and confidence in the department is at an all-time low. It's almost like they're trying to end hunting here. That couldn't be, right? 

A resident deer/elk/cougar/bear tag combo in 2000 cost $66. The same combo in 2016 cost $95.50. That is an average increase of 2.3% per year, roughly the same as inflation.

While I don't like to see costs increase either, I see no inferences from cost increases to believe there is an intentional effort to end hunting.

[JLS]

Pman gentlemen  hunting will be OK just like fly fishing is OK in all circles. Bird hunting with a dog will always be around because it falls in the same category. Meat hunting however will be looked down upon because so few people have any connection with thier food what so ever...

I would disagree with your statement on meat hunting.  I think if anything, it is making a marked resurgence.

[KFhunter]

If AKFG can maintain license revenue, but yet sell half the number of tags to NR hunters, I really doubt that the general AK populous is going to give a rat's hiney about it.  The outfitter lobby is strong, but I'm pretty certain that AK citizens in general are tired of competing with NR hunters.

My take as well, swarms of them hunting up there and in Idaho.  I look to see ID NR tags increase again soon.

[sagerat]

Fishings going up again too. Now it's gonna be over $100 to crab twice a year and fish a half dozen times with my kids. I'm not sure it's worth it.

[Bob33]

Pman gentlemen  hunting will be OK just like fly fishing is OK in all circles. Bird hunting with a dog will always be around because it falls in the same category. Meat hunting however will be looked down upon because so few people have any connection with thier food what so ever...

I would disagree with your statement on meat hunting.  I think if anything, it is making a marked resurgence.

Agreed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-carpenter/the-revival-of-the-locavore_b_8922946.html

The diet of the modern-day “locavore” isn’t a new concept, though the word only recently came about. Before society got carried away with all its glittering supermarkets and high-yielding factory farms, food was produced locally and eaten locally, with a few exceptions. But wait. What’s a locavore, exactly? Is it different from an omnivore or carnivore? Translated from Latin:  locus: a place, spot, or position  vorare: to devour, swallow Literally, locavore translates to “one who eats only local food.” This movement is rapidly growing in the United States, especially among the young professionals we used to call yuppies. Locavores often hunt (locally, of course) to have access to the foods they’ve grown accustomed to eating while standing by their farm-to-table beliefs and convictions. They’re educated, they’re concerned about sustainability, and they’re really sick of social media. They are the new hunters. Championing the movement are some unlikely characters, including hunter Jesse Griffiths, a man one article described as “more punk than pastoral.” He’s been hunting for five years, and during that time, has become an advocate of the sport. He says it’s ethical and sustainable, unlike the factory farms we’re accustomed to getting our meat from. He’s even written a book detailing his experiences and insight (and exactly how to shoot and cook your hunted game). Griffiths described who these “new hunters” really are: “They’re 25 to 35, they like music, food, art. They’re socially minded, whatever that might mean. They’re interested in hunting, and maybe they weren’t five years ago, but they are now... We’re taking it away from Ted Nugent.” This new wave of socially conscious, ‘hipster’ hunters is only continuing to grow. But one problem the new wave of hunters are facing: A lack of rural land to hunt on. With most living in urban areas, getting out of the city to hunt poses one problem, practicing your shot poses another, and getting permission from land owners is an issue in and of itself. Most state and national parks allow hunting as long as you’re licensed, and many private land owners are willing to allow hunters to use their property because it keeps the population of game controlled. They might ask you to pay a fee, but if you’re sure the area is rife with wildlife, the fee will be worth it. Joining a local community of experienced hunters is a great way to find the best hunting spots and learn the most effective methods of approaching land owners.