I'm going to warn you right now, this article is purely tinfoil hat type stuff. I have no proof. I have no evidence. What I am channeling into this is more on par with Charlie Day's epic It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia conspiracy wall. But that doesn't mean it isn't true, you know?
What I want to talk about, and slightly rant about, is Utah's legislature pushing through a budget bill that increases the fees on non-resident hunters. And not just by a little, but by a whole lot. Normally, these types of things wouldn't be something RideApart covers. Yes, it's in the hunting space, which we've been talking about lately, but it doesn't have anything to do with using public lands or powersports at face value. It just sorta sounds like a bunch of politicians demanding more money from non-resident hunters.
But to me, there's something that feels pretty sinister within this increase. At least, if it's not just me being cynical.
You see, the price increase for non-resident big game hunters didn't come from Utah's Division of Wildlife Resources and the biologists and folks who make up that service. It didn't come from the people who are tasked with caring for Utah's big game animals and their conservation. It came purely from the legislature and it was stuck right smack dab in the middle of this 263-page budget resolution in a way that almost seems as if it was hidden within it.
Likewise, instead of a modest increase to keep up with inflation or whatever, these legislators doubled the prices of nearly everything, making non-resident hunting almost impossible to afford by anyone outside the 1% class. And it came out of nowhere. In fact, the UDWR didn't know about it until the budget left Utah's House of Representatives, making the move even more suspect.
[Puts on tinfoil hat]
Is this the legislature's way of further attacking public lands and the overwhelming approval of them?
It's no secret that Utah's legislature has been at the forefront of attacks on public land. It's lied about the need to develop them for the sake of the housing crisis, which I've thoroughly disputed, and it's even gone to the Supreme Court to argue that the federal government holding land is unconstitutional. Thankfully, it lost that battle, but not before a group of other Western states began beating that same drumbeat, too.
So far, those other states have also lost. And that's largely thanks to the support from the general public arguing that states shouldn't get our public lands and be sold off to developers and extractive industries. And while the current administration has made selling off those lands one of its chief priorities, it's likely to face court orders, lawsuits, and more fights than it can handle in the coming months. Fights they're destined to lose because, again, the public loves its public lands.
Which is why, in my extreme conspiratorial view of this rather underhanded move by Utah's legislature, this feels like a way for Utah's legislators to circumvent the public's desire to keep public lands public, and essentially bar a good number of people from entry, thereby reducing the advocacy for public lands. Essentially, it feels like Utah's legislators are upping the price of big-game hunting to such a degree, it kills a lot of the positive sentiment held of our public land by way of price-gouging. And I mean price-gouging.
As a Utah resident, my hunting and licensing fees are pretty dang reasonable. Non-residents, however, have had to pay what I would consider a pretty fair price to enjoy Utah's wildlife and terrain, where they can chase mule deer and elk, as well as once-in-a-lifetime species like moose or big horn sheep. But these new price increases double everything to the point where a general elk tag is nearly $4,000. Same goes for mule deer. And that's only if you're successful in drawing that tag. You still have to apply and buy a hunting license to apply, which now costs $240. And you have to buy it to apply.
Consider drawing an elk or mule deer tag could take between 5-15 years, and you can see how that adds up. And when you throw in the actual tag price, you're out many thousands of dollars. It's already causing many would-be Utah hunters to either not apply for this year's draw or give up on a lifetime of acquiring points toward drawing a big game tag. It's already reducing the amount of applications.
This might sound all right to the non-hunters or anti-hunting crowd who want fewer hunters in the field while they're trying to enjoy the outdoors. But again, to me, it sounds like a back-handed way of reducing public land advocacy as hunters are some of the most vocal advocates. We fiercely defend these lands and our rights as its holders. This reduces those numbers. It reduces those who'd fight to preserve the public's unimaginably approved-of resource.
I just can't shake the feeling that this is their new clever way to sell it all off. But maybe it's just the tinfoil messing with my brain?
