I agree with your statement. Residents do indeed get a pretty good value for what we pay in licence fees. I just think it would be much easier to get them to raise the NR fees as opposed to having residents freak out about paying $10 more for licences.Residents shoot far more birds than non residents so maybe the residents should pay more to fund more habitat. CRP finding at the federal level would be nice but that would take lobbying the congress. I think one of the farm groups was against some conservation program details in the latest version of the farm bill. We need to incentivize landowners to participate in habitat conservation through government and private programs. It’s unfortunate that groups like DU and Pheasants forever are demonized for trying to conserve bird habitat because without the feds there wouldn’t be anyone pushing to conserve it. Too many marginal acres have been tilled up because of expiring CRP and high commodity prices, but now farmers are feeling the repercussions of over production resulting in terribly low prices. Now is the time to put more land back into grass. Lobby the Gov and donate to conservation orgs.
Montana figured it out a few years ago. They raised the prices crazy high. They were not selling out of licences the first few years, but as non-residents began to get used to the cost, they started selling more. Now they are selling out, and in some cases are hard to draw.
The loss of CRP has been horrible for wildlife, and conservation organizations like RMEF and Pheasants Forever can only do so much.
There are habitat projects and boat ramp access area that could really use some improvements.
I wasn't trying to ruffle any non-resident member's feathers, just thinking revenue=habitat. Sorry.