Boll Weevil
Well-Known Member
Anybody going?
Now there's a thought!. . . . but non-residents can't hunt public yet.
MS implemented this when nearly all surrounding states (GA, AL, TN, AR) pushed their seasons back. MS wanted to keep their 3/15 start date, but there would have been a HUGE influx of out-of-staters like us pounding their public land. With our delayed opener, I don't think this type of limitation is necessary, but I absolutely agree that MS had to do this or delay their season.Now there's a thought!
Maybe TN should do something like this on state-owned public lands?
1st week for residents only?
Not suggesting this on federally owned lands like LBL or Ft. Campbell.
Other than South Florida, Mississippi has the earliest opener in the country. You are correct, had MS not implemented this rule they would've been HAMMERED with out of staters.MS implemented this when nearly all surrounding states (GA, AL, TN, AR) pushed their seasons back. MS wanted to keep their 3/15 start date, but there would have been a HUGE influx of out-of-staters like us pounding their public land. With our delayed opener, I don't think this type of limitation is necessary, but I absolutely agree that MS had to do this or delay their season.
I don't see how MS is getting away with keeping non-residents off of National Forests and Corp of Engineer land for 2 weeks. Are those not federally funded and paid for by all of us?Not suggesting this on federally owned lands like LBL or Ft. Campbell.
Same way every single state out west does it, but the states out west are FAR more restrictive than MSI don't see how MS is getting away with keeping non-residents off of National Forests and Corp of Engineer land for 2 weeks. Are those not federally funded and paid for by all of us?
I get all that, but you didn't answer my question. How can a state tell non-residents that they can't hunt federal land that everybody pays for? I get that they can do whatever they want on state owned WMAs, but I'm talking about federal land. I don't really have a dog in the fight. I have numerous private tracts in MS I can hunt and I don't hunt public land anyway, but I just don't see the logic.Same way every single state out west does it, but the states out west are FAR more restrictive than MS
MS only limits NR 1st 2 weeks, and only on public land. The NR public land quota is 1000 permits (which are free). They came up with that number, because that was the estimated number of NRs coming in just before covid hit and the travelling turkey hunter explosion.
Again, private land is wide open to nonresidents without limitations as well as all open public lands after the first 2 weeks without limitations.
The change wasn't made to exclude nonresidents, it was made so that those who drew the NR permit would have a better experience hunting public. Without the 1000 NR permit limitation, you would be lucky to find a tree to sit on that didn't have a hunter on it already.
Because the federal lands go by state statue in most areasI get all that, but you didn't answer my question. How can a state tell non-residents that they can't hunt federal land that everybody pays for? I get that they can do whatever they want on state owned WMAs, but I'm talking about federal land. I don't really have a dog in the fight. I have numerous private tracts in MS I can hunt and I don't hunt public land anyway, but I just don't see the logic.
You explained it perfectly. It makes sense but I'm not sure I agree with it.I agree... but its been a longstanding precedent that the huntable animals within a state belong to the state, NOT the federal govt, and as such can be managed however a state sees fit (even on federal land within the state). Anyone can come and hike, camp, birdwatch, whatever on federal lands, but you cannot kill an animal that belongs to the state unless the state authorizes it.