Idaho House Bill 587 was recently introduced on February 19, 2024. This legislation requires all nonresident tags and permits issued by the Idaho Department of Fish & Game for deer, elk, and antelope to be issued through a draw process, instead of an over-the-counter purchase.
This would be a big change from the current process of everyone logging in early on the tag sale dates, and jumping into a system where you have a waiting room and then you’re assigned a random number. The current process has been difficult for people getting logged out and losing their place in line, a frustration with the time it takes on the tag sale date to sit and stare at a computer or phone screen, and the process has made it very difficult for friends to try to get tags in the same unit or zone together. Also this would change things where you would no longer be able to even head to a license agent in person on those tag sale dates and wait in line.
Idaho House Bill 587 currently reads as follows:
"36-419. NONRESIDENT TAGS AND PERMITS -- DEER, ELK, PRONGHORN ANTELOPE. All nonresidents licensed to hunt in the state of Idaho shall be required to obtain tags and permits for deer, elk, and pronghorn antelope through a draw process as established by the department of fish and game. Nonresidents shall not purchase tags for deer, elk, and pronghorn antelope over the counter."
A fiscal note mentioned this, “It is expected that this legislation will have a positive impact on the Fish & Game funds. However, the amount of positive impact will depend on how many nonresidents apply for the drawing for deer, elk, and pronghorn antelope tags.”
Section 2 of the bill states, “This act shall be in full force and effect on and after January 1, 2025.” So, depending on how this shakes out, any changes might not happen until the 2025 season. Which means next December 1, 2024, when the 2025 season nonresident tags are available, all nonresidents could still be under the same process as we have seen the past few years with the waiting room and random number system.
If you want to read about how this process currently works in Idaho as a nonresident, check out our Tactics for Idaho's 2024 nonresident OTC general season elk and deer tag sale date article here.
What are your thoughts on moving the over-the-counter tag sale to a draw?
It will be interesting to see how they decide to conduct the drawing. Will you get multiple unit or zone selections? What happens when people all apply for the same unit? Will you have a second draw or a third draw, or will you then revert back to the old system after the main draw for these nonresident general tags?
127 Comments
Chad S
3/25/2025, 6:10:38 AM
Trying to find out if this passed or not into law and read a bunch of these comments. Crazy people are complaining about current system. As in anything that is worth doing it takes dedication and planning to be successful. There should be no equal chance. If you are the one complaining that its not fair then you need to better yourself and make it so you can afford to take off work and go stand in line or go pay someone else like I do to go camp in line then that is what you should do. There are limited number of animals and tags in every state so just figure out the best odds you have and go do it or go find another hobby. There is nothing fair in life and this equal opportunity nonsense should stop. We are a capitalist country, if I can afford to pay someone to go do something you call shady so it gives me a better chance to get a tag then thats what should be done. If you don't like it or can't do it then you probably aren't benefiting the state anyway. Why would the state want to give a tag to someone who can barely afford it they aren't spending the money to fly in and rent RVs, Airbnb, spend money at restaurants, etc. We non resident buyers are what drives your economy in each state. Just because you are a resident doesn't mean you own the wildlife. Your tax money doesn't fund their habitats mostly, its federal money so all of us pitch in. Conservation is done mostly from outside Non resident people who donate lots of money to a state because their resident population is too entitled to actual pay anything. Hunting is a sport and in any sport those that work the hardest, have the best equipment, spend the most time on the craft are the ones who succeed so if you are reading this and think you are entitled to this or that the state should give anyone a fair chance at something there is nothing fair in life you have to be the top G to get what you want, PEACE!!
Steve Smith
3/25/2025, 4:58:54 PM
If you click the very first link in the article it will redirect you to information about this bill. This specific one died in committee and, it seems, has yet to be brought forth again. Your points about non-res hunters being economic drivers are valid. As are your noticing's that the folks who tend to put time and energy into their chosen pursuit tend to be more successful. As far as where conservation funding comes from, Federal Pittman Robertson dollars are generally allocated as matching funds, which means the State Agencies receive federal dollars in similar amounts to only what they are able to accrue through their state revenue actions first. Saying that Federal tax dollars paid for strictly by non-residents to fund habitat and conservations works at state levels is generalization at best. I am not there to say you are wrong, just that there is far more nuance to this subject. Also, in my opinion, the difference between equality and equity needs to be made more clear. Equality means everyone gets the same thing, whereas equity means everyone gets access to what they need, at an individual level. Access and opportunity with the individual, and their wants and needs in mind, is an incredibly nuanced situation. One that state game agencies have to navigate carefully and with the benefit of all in mind. Notice I said benefit of all and not just the benefit of all who can afford it. Saying we are a capitalist society and thus working more and harder to afford to hunt is short sighted at best. Firstly, we have to acknowledge that not all people are born into the same social, religious, geographic or economic status and thus, not all born into a system that affords the same opportunity for everyone. This is a very important thing to consider, because the wildlife of this nation are held in trust by the states, but belong to all people of this nation, thus making every single citizen a beneficiary of the trust. Now, residents and nonresidents alike also become shareholders of the trust, depending on the amount of investment into the trust. Most states have decided that being a resident of a state entitles an individual to more affordable access to more opportunity. I know the word "entitles" may trigger the shit out of someone, but it is the proper use of the word and does not imply that whiny entitlement around public resources does not exist, because it very much does. I will say that making a statement that a state agency should not want to allocate a tag to an individual simply because their economic status is less than what you find desirable is quite gross. How much money someone has to spend outside of the costs they have incurred while acquiring the tag, should in no way shape or form be considered when we discuss democratic and equitable access to a public resource.
Joya kennedy
4/8/2024, 12:56:33 AM
I would hope that the nonresidents should have to choose between applying for an otc tag or a controlled tag. It’s not right that the nonresidents can buy a first come first serve tag and still apply for the controlled hunts but residents virtually can’t with the 5 day waiting period.