Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 302

Thread: Increased license fees

  1. #1
    Member akiceman25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Two Rivers, AK
    Posts
    1,284

    Default Increased license fees

    What do you guys think?

    Some seem pretty steep!

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/ho...cense_fees.pdf
    I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74

  2. #2
    Member fishing nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    121

    Default

    I agree. The state is so desperate. It's disappointing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    It's about time. We need to be funding F&G. We can't count on the state anymore.

    Brett

  4. #4

    Default

    When was the last increase? Seems the costs have been stagnant for years, so the increase is certainly justified. May have an impact for a year or two, then back to "Normal".

  5. #5
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,887

    Default

    Well IMHO I'm glad the non-res fees doubled for their hunt tags.
    So they still pay way more than us as it should be.
    But they also should have doubled their fishing license fees as well.
    Especially the non res annual which didn't change.
    I'm OK with it for now.
    As long as they spend it wisely.
    I remember once when they raised it and wanted to use 80% of the increase to give Adf&g employees raises and shore up their retirement plan!

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Being a non resident from Montana, I have no problem with an occasional fee increase. But, I think doubling non resident tag fees accross the board is a little too aggressive.

  7. #7
    Member Hoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danielwildin View Post
    Being a non resident from Montana, I have no problem with an occasional fee increase. But, I think doubling non resident tag fees accross the board is a little too aggressive.
    I am with you on this one.

  8. #8

    Default

    One thing I would invite a review of is, FREE hunting and FREE fishing and FREE trapping license for residents that are over 60 years old.

  9. #9
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,887

    Default

    Looking at things only a handful didn't go up.
    In particular the non resident annual sportfishing.
    Which IMHO should have.
    As that's the one that takes the most $$$ in meat out of this state.

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    Our fees have not changed in a very long time, and it certainly appears that the increase is needed to help manage our fish and game resources in the current economic climate. I fully support the bill. I would have even supported a slightly greater increase in resident fees, as well as a modest ($5 or $10) harvest ticket fee for us. Doubling the fees for nonresidents was right on...we were way under-valuing our resource for way too long.

  11. #11
    Member c6 batmobile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Interior
    Posts
    2,101

    Default

    Im glad to see the non-res price go up. Im ok with an increase for Res too but I think its a bit steep in areas. I hope the money is used wisely but I have little faith in any government agency to do the right thing with any revenue.
    Makin fur fins and feathers fly.

  12. #12
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,056

    Default

    Seems like a steep increase, but not out of line with the opportunity IMHO.

    Let's see-
    $94 for fishing, hunting and trapping
    $10 for a duck stamp
    $10 for a King salmon stamp
    $15 for a Chitina dipnet permit.

    That's $129 for 365 days of wild critters making their way to the freezer...still among the lowest of my annual hunting and fishing costs.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  13. #13
    Member Hoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    159

    Default

    Not surprised to see that many are excited to see non-resident fees doubled. However I cannot really understand the rationale behind why so many people feel so strongly that nonresident licenses and tag should be increased so significantly. In 2015 resident tags and licenses generated just over $6 million in revenue for Alaska, whereas Non-resident tags and licenses generated just over $17.1 million in revenue for Alaska. I could not find any reliable data, but I would assume that resident user group outnumbers the non-resident user group by a substantial amount as well. I just don't understand the logic behind the allegations that non-residents don't pay their share.

  14. #14

    Default

    Its been 20 yrs since the last increase. But the legislature fail to raise low income fees, still at $5.00. Subsistence fishermen still don not have to have a fishing license and they take the 2nd. most fish in Alaska. but they pay nothing for management. Commercial fish is first. It cost a non-resident sport fisher to buy a license, than a non-resident commercial fish crew member to fish.

    Blind, low income, 60yrs, and disable licenses, cost ADF&G more to issue the license than they take in.

    No it wasn't a good change, the legislature could have done a much better job.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Of course as a non res I'm not thrilled to have to pay higher fees. BUT, it's dang sure not going to keep me from coming up for a DIY caribou hunt each fall. It's just too great a place and in the end its well worth it.

  16. #16

    Default

    Ask yourself this............."Do you think it will be much better in 15 years, or much worse in 15 years"......??? On reconsideration......the hell with 15 years, what about in three or five years......???

    Quote Originally Posted by isnarewolves View Post
    .........No it wasn't a good change, the legislature could have done a much better job.

  17. #17

    Default

    AGLnow.
    I don't think you will see much of a change at all.

  18. #18

    Default

    I am curious, what change do you think may come about this fee increases?

  19. #19

    Default

    My question was not in reference to "This" fee hike.......???

    Quote Originally Posted by isnarewolves View Post
    I am curious, what change do you think may come about this fee increases?

  20. #20
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    8,464

    Default

    Resident difference is minimal, at least the state pays for it every year anyway.
    We'll see how it effects the non res and their hunting. Maybe none, but I'm sure a few. Paying 900 for three deer tags is a bit much I think.
    Www.blackriverhunting.com
    Master guide 212

Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •