texasfishingforum.com logo
Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
TraeMartin, Power-Pole CS, T-Rigger, JoeGoes, EcKo
119150 Registered Users
Top Posters(All Time)
hopalong 120,565
TexDawg 119,510
Bigbob_FTW 94,875
John175☎ 85,892
Pilothawk 83,259
Bob Davis 81,465
Mark Perry 72,280
JDavis7873Ž 67,416
Forum Statistics
Forums59
Topics1,037,798
Posts13,934,678
Members144,150
Most Online39,925
Dec 30th, 2023
Print Thread
How will Texas be affected? #64500 01/10/03 10:31 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
redfinŽ Offline OP
TFF Guru
OP Offline
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
Saw this article in a Charleston, WV newspaper. Is Texas one of the states involved?
_________________________
Court case could affect
out-of-state license sales
_________________________
John McCoy <wildwordwv@cs.com>
Daily Mail Outdoors editor

Friday January 10, 2003; 11:00 AM
An upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case might ultimately affect the way West Virginia and other states issue licenses to non-resident hunters.

Twenty-two states are asking the high court to overturn a lower court's ruling that states can't restrict numbers of licenses sold to out-of-state sportsmen, or charge them different rates.

The ruling, made in August by three judges in the 9th U.S. Circuit of

Appeals, struck down an Arizona law that restricted non-residents' share of bull elk and antlered-deer hunting tags to no more than 10 percent of the statewide total.

In the ruling, the judges held that Arizona's limits are an act of "overt discrimination" that establish unconstitutional restrictions on interstate commerce.

Curtis Taylor, chief of wildlife resources for the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, says ruling will have far-reaching implications if the Supreme Court doesn't overrule it.

"This thing would affect everything we do with non-residents, whether it be limits or fees," he says "Essentially, it says you can't treat non-residents different from residents."

Taylor says that if the Supreme Court confirms that hunting-license sales constitute a form of interstate commerce, states could lose the flexibility they now enjoy to set fees and to restrict license sales.

"If it's (found to be a form of) commerce, it would be governed by some federal agency, and states' rights would go out the window," he says.

At least 23 states have laws that restrict the numbers of hunting licenses sold to non-residents for certain game species. Thirty-two states, including

West Virginia, charge higher rates for non-resident licenses.

Montana, another popular hunting state that restricts non-resident licenses and charges differential fees, has taken the lead role in the Supreme Court appeal.

Brian Morris, Montana's state solicitor, says the August ruling "runs squarely into a long line of cases holding that recreational hunting does not qualify as interstate commerce and that wildlife does not constitute an article of commerce."

But a subtle twist in the appeals court's ruling could throw a wrench into wildlife agencies' ability to cite those precedents before the Supreme Court.

The three-judge appeals panel sent the original case back Arizona and challenged wildlife officials to prove that their restriction is the only means the state has to carry out a legitimate state interest in managing wildlife.

Morris says it's unlikely that Arizona officials -- or any state's officials -- could successfully make that argument.

The case, instead, will hinge on the Supreme Court's ideas as to whether recreational hunting is a form of commerce, and whether license limits and fees affect its interstate exercise.

One compelling court precedent, Morris says, holds that a purely intrastate business can't be converted to an interstate business just because it has non- resident customers. That precedent could eventually form the backbone of the wildlife agencies' case when it reaches the Supreme Court.

The DNR's Taylor says an unfavorable ruling could significantly affect his agency's ability to do its work. West Virginia attracts approximately 43,000 non-resident hunters each year, and those hunters' license fees supply roughly 43 percent of the agency's annual revenue.

That's why Kelly Goes, an assistant attorney general assigned to the DNR, has recommended that the state join with the 22 others already signed on to participate in the Supreme Court appeal.

"My understanding is that we are going to sign onto it," Goes says. "The key issue is whether we can treat non-resident hunters different than resident hunters."

Not surprisingly, Taylor and other key DNR officials will be keeping an eye on the case as it makes its way through the process.

"I wouldn't say we're sweating it," Taylor says. "But there is concern in every state for what happens in this, because it will affect immediately the things a lot of states do."


I know more old alcoholics than I know old doctors - Me.
"If you think women are the weaker sex, try pulling the blankets back over on your side."
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64501 01/10/03 10:48 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 384
R
rod Offline
Angler
Offline
Angler
R
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 384
I wounder if this would have anything to do with non resident fees on Alan Henry?

Re: How will Texas be affected? #64502 01/10/03 11:01 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,024
T
TX Champ Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,024
Good one rod!! I was thinking the same. Although I don't think Texas limits the number of licenses to non-residents, they do charge more for them than residents pay. I'd expect to see that in any state. What chaps me is that some states (and I won't mention any names but one rhymes with New Mexico) gouges non-residents worse than some other states (again, no names but rhymes with Texas) treat non residents for both hunting and fishing licenses.

However this thing could open up a can of worms that'd be hard to close back up. Could make life kinda hard on residents of their respective states. I'd say I'd have to side with it not being interstate commerce and leave the states alone.


Re: How will Texas be affected? #64503 01/10/03 11:12 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
redfinŽ Offline OP
TFF Guru
OP Offline
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
Lowering the fees to non-residents will definitely increase the number of non-residents coming in. In the case of West Virginia (really small state, but if you flattened it out it would be bigger than Texas-- ) where they had 43,000 non-residents last year, if the fees go down, that could double potentially, crowding out a lot of residents.

This is one thing the federal courts need to keep their damn noses out of, that's for sure.


I know more old alcoholics than I know old doctors - Me.
"If you think women are the weaker sex, try pulling the blankets back over on your side."
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64504 01/11/03 05:32 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,220
W
Wiley Coyote Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
W
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,220
Oh Wow what a topic!?!?

States Rights vs the Federal Government !?!?

Who owns the access to the resource/assets and why is there a difference from state to state in the regulation of the resultant Interstate Commerce that is the domain of the Federales are the core questions as I see it.
I believe that precedent has already been established just like if an entity like a educational system takes Federal Tax Dollars then the Feds already call the shots on standards and the locals be damned about what can or cannot be taught.
Or how about this ... Why are the State's of Texas, California, New York et al not allowed to coin it's own money and required to use only Federal Currency...and allow those Currency's to float in value against each other based on the issuing States ability to pay like the World Market does.....some things are reserved for the Federal Government for the "United States of America" to work... same concept as individual states being allowed to mandate fees and access to Federally owned resources even all Citizens regardless of State of Residence have paid for the Federal Resource thru Federal Taxation... ie "Taxation without Representation" .... you and I don't get to have a say in how Montana or Colorado or any other States operate the game laws on the Ferderally owned resource is the root cause of this court action it appears.
I don't have a problem with any States right to dictate whatever to their own local Residents ... on Resources that have been paid for without reliance on any Federal Funds - my Texas based tax dollars ... that is their right.
As far as impact on Texas I believe it will be minimal since 97+% of Texas is private property to begin with and would not be subject to limitations on access. I don't believe that the loss of out state license fee cost are significant enough in Texas to cause much heartburn in the TP&W budgets that are now being significantly more abused by the Legislature with diversions to the General Fund. The Lege needs to keep it's fat hands out of TP&Ws money !!!
However some states and not just in the West - only within my memory has Kansas allowed out of staters a deer permit - have a long history of gouging out of state sportsmen with unrealistic fees and limited access and I believe that it is past time for these issues to be addressed by the Fedral Judiciary. I have refused to hunt or fish in the Rockies because of this ... however with the unrealistic costs of a Texas hunting lease these days it just about cheap enough to hunt in Africa or Canada as it is to pay for a trophy Whitetail hunt in South Texas ... I know I know ... it's only money so get over it.

Bottom line - if I pay for it with my Federal Tax dollars just like every other American ... then I "own" 1/280 millionth regardless of where I or any other Taxpayer lives. Same thing for State of Texas funded resources and TP&W has the right to charge whatever they want for access and delineate by state of residence... ie the out of staters can pay their fair share of Texas "tax's" by a higher access fee.
Wow what a topic! But nothing will ever come of it ... what is fair for the goose ... is fair for the gander as well ... but this is just my 2 cents worth as 1/280 millionth landowner of Yellowstone, Grand Tetons, the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, yadda yadda yadda.
Ron


Older Than Dirt...and trying To STAY That Way
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64505 01/12/03 01:05 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 822
S
stripermagic Offline
Pro Angler
Offline
Pro Angler
S
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 822
Jim
Am I missing something or should tax paying residents of a state have an advantage. The higher retes for out of state licenses brings in needed revinue that keeps our costs down.

Re: How will Texas be affected? #64506 01/12/03 01:11 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
redfinŽ Offline OP
TFF Guru
OP Offline
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
stripermagic -

You got it right. That was my whole point...too many out-of-state people coming in and following Steve T-Top Bradbury around on Cedar Creek lake. It's not the revenue that turns me on...it's a useable resource (uncrowded, unpolluted, and underfished).


I know more old alcoholics than I know old doctors - Me.
"If you think women are the weaker sex, try pulling the blankets back over on your side."
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64507 01/12/03 04:27 AM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 67
J
Jersey Striper Offline
Outdoorsman
Offline
Outdoorsman
J
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 67
It seems that everyone seems to have agreed about how it could lower the rates for non residents but I believe that most states would be forced to raise there rates overall to make up for lost revenue that would have have come from non resident fees.

Re: How will Texas be affected? #64508 01/12/03 04:56 AM
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 36
J
jbasser Offline
Outdoorsman
Offline
Outdoorsman
J
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 36
In the US Constitution it states that licenses isssued by one state shall be accepted by all. You don't need a marriage license in every state to be leagally married in other states than the one you were married in. Dr's have to license in different states, Drivers Licenses are another issue, you can leagally drive in all the states with your license you got in the state where you live, I mean you don't have to buy one every time you cross a state line. This right has always been abused by the states, it all boils down to money, we all pay taxes one way or another. They all just want more and more. After we are all AMERICANS should'nt we have license to hunt or fish any where with one license as long as we obey bag limits and other regulations. I mean after this is supposed to be a FREE country. People don't seem to remember that not so long ago there was a WAR fought in this country over TAXES!!

Re: How will Texas be affected? #64509 01/13/03 11:45 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,220
W
Wiley Coyote Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
W
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,220
'Magic
You are missing my point... Bradbury can look like the Pied Piper on CC (owned by the City of Ft Worth Water District, Tawakoni (Sabine River Authority, Whitney (Brazos River Authority) and so on and Texas has every right to engage in the setting of bag limits, access fees or whatever for both Texas residents and alien non natives ... but what really chaps my best "feature" is MY Federal Tax dollars are used for places that I cannot access to hunt, fish, or camp on because I live in Texas and MY money is being spent in Colorado, Wyoming or wherever and the locals are given favorable rights over me simply because I am an out of stater! ie. Taxation without Representation...if Colorado wants to keep me out... Great ! .... but let them pay for the resource with only Colorado money or some other state that Colorado has a reciprocal agreement with... kinda like the Powerball Lottery... if I want to play Powerball then I have to go to Lousyana or Yankeeland somewhere to buy a ticket. That guy in West By God Virginia that won, bought his ticket at the local gas station and the losing ticket purchasers money stayed in W VA as it should have... and the other participating Powerball states shared in the profits of their purchased tickets as well.

As far as Texas being negativly impacted by this Federal ruling the only areas I see affected might possibly be the Army Corps of Engineers owned waters and the hunters on the National Forest Lands of which Texas has damned little by Colorado, New Mexico, and other States standards. I wish Texas had more Public Land, either State or Federally owned....then if Bradbury's little band of remoras wanted to follow him around on say someplace like Texoma where the Corps calls the tune they all might just have to buy a National Fishing license that would be good for every Corps lake in the US of A instead of the hodgepodge we have now with local state Wardens harrasing out of staters and we could have "Equal Access Under the Law" for ALL FEDERAL TAXPAYERS... now if you are some sort of space alien (and not just your everyday garden variety non native travelling Yankee) and are not subject to Federal Income Tax then we'll have to come up another way to git in yore britches... and massage yore ... wallet! LOLOLOL

My Texas professional license is not accepted in Louisiana and I'm ticked 'cause I just mailed $75 bucks to Baton Rouge to get my ticket to ride punched.... its only money I know ....and the bright side is that it is a TAX DEDUCTION as a "legitimate business expense!" so I can continue to work with a Texas based customer's local office in Red Stickville and the Big Easy.

Just remember this post come April 15th and wonder whynH#@! is my money goin' somewhares I cain't go 'cause some billygoat in Denver has a less than soft spot for Texicans (we Really need to annex that place again... it's not too bad to look at and they got more Elk than I can stand the thought of!) I don't mean to (YES I Really DO!) pick on Colorado but I put in for Permits up there for years and never got drawn back when my knees were not like John Varners (car wreck Thanksgiving week looks like it has cooked my goose good!)and I still had lungs enough to walk up 10,000 foot hills and still be able to see well enough not shoot myself in the foot so I hope they choke on all their Elk now!!! Can you believe that Oklahoma now has huntable Elk populations !!! and it ain't over a thousand feet tall anywhere in that state!!!
One idea that some States do on my professional license is they charge me the same as Texas charges their citizens and that seems pretty fair to me. I think California, Arizona and some others come to mind but still this doesn't address the restrictive access issues where limited permits are hard for out of staters to come by. CEE Yall around ...
Ron
PS Huntin' season ain't over yet an I gotta get some more of Miss Piggy's cousins in freezer before my better half Miss Clariol demands that the gun cleaning stuff stop stinkin' up the house... God I love the smell of Hoppe's #9 in the morning!!!
RV


Older Than Dirt...and trying To STAY That Way
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64510 01/14/03 01:17 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
redfinŽ Offline OP
TFF Guru
OP Offline
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 26,018
Ron,

I agree with your stand on federally funded lands but when it comes to state funded areas, the state should be able to charge out-of-staters a little more. The price shouldn't be the same for, say, hunting in the Monongahela National Forest (WV) and the Burnsville (WV) Public Hunting Preserve.

I don't particularly like shelling out $x for a resident fishing license and another $x in addition to fish Texoma Lake or having to buy a non-resident OK fishing license to walk down the opposite bank below Texoma dam to fish the Red River when my freaking lure is violating the imaginary state line from either side. It's not like I'm driving up to Eufala or someother deep country Okie water...


I know more old alcoholics than I know old doctors - Me.
"If you think women are the weaker sex, try pulling the blankets back over on your side."
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64511 01/14/03 12:24 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,241
D
Dexter Wilcox* Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
D
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,241
Here you have the Proverbial "Double edged
sword". If out of state licenses cost less more tax dollars will be created by more people utilizing hotels and buying gas. However with the looming 9.9 billion dollar budget deficit I can see an increase of every kind of license coming down the chute to increase revenue without "raising taxes". I hope I'm wrong.

Re: How will Texas be affected? #64512 01/14/03 01:13 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 848
K
kbobbjr Offline
Pro Angler
Offline
Pro Angler
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 848
Maybe I am oversimplifing this but the argument seems to be over whether the land is governed by state or federal agencies. If it is state land or waters then the state has the right to charge more for out-of-state licenses. If it is federal land or waters then one license should be accepted by all states. Or have I missed the preverbial boat on this one?

Re: How will Texas be affected? #64513 01/14/03 06:07 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,220
W
Wiley Coyote Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
W
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,220
KBOBBJR Striper Magic et al... back to the original premise of the lawsuit ...that a state - Arizona in this case - cannot legally charge non residents 1. more for the same activity than residents, and 2. restrict access based solely on where someone resides... with both of these things violating the Federal Interstate Commerce Commision regulations on unrestricted free trade.
I contend that Arizona in this case (and ?Texas, et al) have exactly that right .... to charge unequal fees and access rights ...but only on resources that ARE NOT PAID FOR with MY FEDERAL TAX DOLLARS. I also contend that any and all resources paid for with any degree of Federal Tax Dollars be open to every Citizen of the larger taxpaying entity equally and without restricton based on residence...
Now the problem lies in the application of the cost and access .... and how that impacts INTERSTATE COMMERCE. Some federal resources will not fall into the general category of federally owned land like the Indian reservations that control large parts of northern Arizona and set their own laws and game permits etc and it will be interesting to see how that aspect of this litigation will play out as well. As I understand it the Chiricaua Apaches set their hunting fees as well irregardless of what the State of Arizona sez.
As far as Texas is concerned... we have so little outside of the Army Corps lakes that the impact could/should be neglible and could actually generate some additional tourism and dollars for the local economies involved.
I personally would like to see a place on my 1040 where I could assign ?dollars to fund the aquisition of new properties and maitenence of exisiting property that could not be touched by the Washington fat cats of whatever political party that is in power unlike what is happening currently with the self imposed Price/Dingell (or whatever it is called)excise tax on sporting goods that was designed to do just that but is being diverted to other things. Same goes with the TP&W budgets... I'd love to see a small fee ($1-2's)added to every access fee, hunting/fishing license for maintenence and aquisition as long as I was "Garonteed" the money wouldn't get sucked into the black hole of the General Fund by the Legislature. Don't whine about the poor quality of the resource until you pick up more of the tab that WE are picking up now. I don't expect to get steak when I buy hamburgers !!! But I DO expect to get ALL the meat I pay for to reach my grill ... and that is not happening now under the current rules of engagement. Trust me Budgets are war zones!!!

I just got back from spending 5 days camped and hunting (Lottery Hunt) in Guadalupe River State Park. What a maginificent place, and really a crown jewel in the TP&W Park System. However, they are overun with deer and several vareties of exotics ... 1 per 4 acres or 2 1/2 times the 1 per 10 acres density the biologists recommendations for the carrying capacity of the park.... but the harvest was pitiful (I never saw a game animal outside of the campground!!!) because there is not enough money to properly manage the hunting stands, placement, maintenence (several were dangerous to use !!!) and the problem will only exacerbate itself until a major disease or similar catastrophe (ol' Ma Nature at work!) fixes the problem. I'll go camping there anytime I can get there but I'll never hunt there again because they cannot do for the hunting segment (that they need to do desperately)what they are doing for the primary user because of a lack of funding, and that lack of funding is only going to get worse with the reports of the Budget shortfall of close to $10 billion bucks.
Let the Budget & Lawsuit Games begin and we'll see what little is left after the Politicians and Lawyers finish sucking the blood out of everything! Call me cynical... call me an A## but I never believe anything anybody from Washington or Austin promises me anymore... and like Rosanne Rosannadana sez ... "its always somthing..." Incommmming!
Ron


Older Than Dirt...and trying To STAY That Way
Re: How will Texas be affected? #64514 01/14/03 06:35 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,130
H
hook-line&sinker Offline
TFF Guru
Offline
TFF Guru
H
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,130
Perhaps a federal fishing/hunting license is in order that allows out of state sportsmen to purchase any other states license at the same rate as residents, in other words, completely do away with any and all out of state or non-resident fees in favor of a national or federal license that is only required by those to hunt or fish outside their resident state. Wouldn't that be nice and easy, kind of like the tax simplifacation act should have been.. The only problem is it has to be managed and spearheaded by same people who simplified the Tax code, lawyers and the Government, so it will never happen..no matter how good or bad an idea.


>)));> Wishin' I was Fishin' <;(((<

“Personnel is the most vital and important aspect of any industry.
If you’re just going to grind them up, it’s not going to end well for anybody.”
SCOTT REINARDY


Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

© 1998-2022 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3