Being from the Northeast and dreaming about hunting elk and mulies out west since childhood but looking at the price of tags and guided hunts..I might not ever be able to afford it.

Being a federal taxpayer, I feel I contribute alot to national forests and federal lands and should have a right to have reasonably priced access to tags for these areas. I know it is a limited resource but we are becoming a country where only the rich will be able to enjoy what everyone has contributed to in the form of excise taxes on sporting equipment.

Lets face it, I am in my mid-thirties and will be lucky to hunt out west a few times in my life.....a federal onetime elk/deer tags should be available for a small fee...after that then you pay the present fees to the state.

I, for one feel that on federal lands I should be able to hunt for animals with a general federal license which should give preference to first time out of state hunters.

I of course would still need to pay a guide in most circumstances but at least I would have to pay a grand just for the tag.

Either way...the present system is too complicated and too expensive in many locations. There has to be a fairer way to grant first time hunters preference over repeat tag recipients from out of state and to make it affordable for the average hunter.

Not a bad article. One thing that it doesn't mention, which I think is relevant, is that a lot of state money gets spent maintaining and administering "federal" land. Hence, the notion that every citizen of the nation should have equal access to any federal land is flawed. More of my tax money goes to support "federal" land in Colorado (where I live) than in Montana. Therefore it is right and proper that I should have greater access to "federal" land in Colorado than I do in Montana.

Besides that, I think the last two paragraphs really hit the nail on the head. Certainly it is reasonable for people who feel like they are being shutout to complain, but the kind of bickering that has been going on recently, in the long run is only going to weaken the hunting community as a whole. The end result may well be the end of hunting as we know it.

Where does the State get this money that it uses to administer "federal" land?
What state Tax dollar(s) goes to support "federal" land?

I am not trying to sound argumentative...just asking.

Depends on the state. Of course, in the end it all comes from the taxpayers.

Here in Colorado, as an example, law-enforcement issues that arise on federal land are usually handled by the local sheriff's office, so that's local property tax and sales tax money that is being spent.

A fire breaks out on BLM land or a national forest, that's going to be both local and state tax money that gets spent to control it and/or put it out. The federal government won't kick in any money unless the fire is big enough to declare a disaster and bring in FEMA.

Those are just two examples of how your state tax dollars get spent on federal land that is within your state. There are plenty of others.

national forest land is national. But it get real old when you live in a state that is 66% public land and some people who live in states with no federal land and have no desire to go into that federal land, tell me what i can and can't do in the land i have been in all my life.
\
The endangered species act was good in its day but it needs updated. I am all for having wolves, lynx, wolverine, griz and caribou. These animals are all around me. now try going into the mountains around me. It is getting tougher. The wolverine will be the down fall of winter recreation.

It is a matter of priorities -- what you want to spend your money on. You can hunt elk more than once or twice a lifetime if you want to. The question is, do you want to. A cow elk license costs $275 in Colorado. Can't you afford that? Get a few buds together to share gasoline costs and work up a do-it-yourself hunt on public ground in Colorado. You would be surprised how affordable this kind of hunt can be. Change the hunt to pronghorn antelope as a do-it-yourself hunt in Wyoming and it is all the easier and more feasible. Now if you want to get a bull elk license ($500) in a popular limited entry unit in Colorado (wait a few years to build preference points) and do this as a guided/outfitted hunt on public land ($4,500) or worse on a private ranch ($10,000 to $15,000) and get that big elk head mounted by a taxidermist ($1,000) things can get expensive. But there is a spectrum of hunting opportunities that you should think about before simply dismissing the deal as a once or twice in a lifetime deal. Always remember, lots of elk hunters every year go home empty handed, so you can go home empty handed after a $4,500 guided/outfitted elk hunt just as well as after a cheap do-it-yourself hunt; and also do-it-yourself hunters do manage to connect sometimes.

I did a do-it-yourself hunt in 2006 -- unsuccessfully. I could not have done a $4,500 guided/outfitted hunt, so I got to have a great hunting experience I otherwise wouldn't have had. I hope to go again in 2008, and I'll be going back with some important lessons under my belt that I couldn't have learned without the benefit of the unsuccessful 2006 hunt. If my minimum standard was a guided/outfitted hunt, I would never have gotten out there at all.

All of this is not to chastise you or beat you up, but to encourage you to be bold and look at cooking up your own hunt on limited resources. There are many ways to skin a cat. Of course, an extremely vital component of a do-it-yourself hunt is study and research: where, when, how, physical conditioning, necessary equipment -- you need to do your homework carefully.