Why It Matters: There is no doubt that private lands often play an outsized role in providing habitat for our nation’s public trust wildlife resources. In many cases, state fish and wildlife agencies provide no-cost hunting tags as a reward for the habitat that qualifying landowners provide. However, recent efforts have sought to allow recipient landowners to sell their no-cost landowner tags for a profit. While many within the sporting-conservation community support landowner tag systems, there is a very hard line drawn when that type of system allows a private individual to profit from the private sale of tags to pursue a public trust resource.
Highlights:
- Over the last several sessions, state legislatures, particularly in the Midwest, have seen a few different attempts to authorize the transfer of no-cost landowner hunting tags, often going so far as to permit the sale of these tags for a profit.
- Earlier this year, similar proposals were floated in Wyoming, causing many within the sporting-conservation community to bristle at the notion.
- Much of the community’s opposition stems from the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, particularly the Public Trust Doctrine which holds that wildlife are not private property as transferable landowner tags might imply.
The debate over the private ownership of wildlife is among the most difficult in our space. Some recent trends in wildlife have blurred the lines between private property and our nation’s public trust fish and wildlife resources. Recently, opportunities to access private hunting land for wild populations of certain game species through the issuance of landowner tags have evolved into efforts to allow landowners to transfer, or even sell, their landowner tags to other hunters who would not otherwise qualify for these special, management-driven opportunities.
No-cost landowner tags certainly have their place. These opportunities are designed to reward qualifying landowners, typically based on the size of the property owned, for their contributions to wildlife habitat. While qualifying landowners may or may not actively manage for wildlife habitat, the mobile nature of most wildlife means that they are inevitably using private lands. This is particularly the case in states in which most lands are privately owned.
These systems are typically managed carefully by the participating state’s fish and wildlife management agency, maintaining the systems foundation in the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and adherence to the Public Trust Doctrine. Recently, however, some have proposed opportunities for landowners to receive and transfer or sell these no-cost tags to other hunters, effectively allowing them to profit from the opportunity to pursue a public trust resource on the basis of private land ownership.
Kansas has seen several efforts to accomplish this goal in recent years, though most have been defeated, in part, thanks to wide opposition from the sporting-conservation community. Recently, conversations in Wyoming have taken a similar turn. While the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) supports opportunities for state agencies to offer landowner tags, we take issue with the notion of transferrable tags due to the Public Trust Doctrine implications associated with the misconception that land ownership equals ownership of local wildlife and the ability of landowners to profit from what should be state-regulated hunting opportunities in support of the “user pays – public benefits” American System of Conservation Funding.
Stay tuned for updates as these conversations continue.
