Reciprocal- Your definition

[scottphillips]

Just a simple question, not looking to start any arguements.

Here is the challenge; Keep it to two lines. I would like to hear what everyone's definition of reciprocal is. Keep it civil please.

Scott

[stickbowhntr]

What I pay there you pay here and vice versa, no more no less.

[racer53]

What you can do in my state i can do in your state


Russ

[CoonDuke]

Within an individual state, both residents and non-residents are offered equal opportunity in regards to bag limits, season length, and regulations providing that the state in which the non-resident resides provides the same equal opportunity to non-residents wishing to harvest fur in that state.

[ringtail]

x2 with CoonDuke

[Horn]

Any State who differentiates Resident form Non-Resident trappers in any way other than License Fees shall disqualify the residents of their state from partaking in the Trapping season of any other state.



If it were as above it would remove any possible Bias

[trappincoyotes39]

well to me it means not only the same dates but a unified cost as well. Otherwise a state to limit such could make a non resident pay 2,000 and in effect still claim themselves as reciprocal but in effect really limit non residents thru the pocket book.

[garman]

combine coondukes and tc-39's and you have my definition. IMO one the best states I have seen so far is Wyoming

[TrapperRon]

Reciprocal means: mutual; corresponding; matching; complimentary; equivalent. Two jurisdictions can have a "reciprocal agreement" meaning it applies to residents no matter which jurisdiction they are in.

[doyleflory]

Same money same season.

[Scott W.]

Same fee for residents and non residents, unless your home state charges a higher resident fee than the state you are going to, then equal to your home state's resident fee.
Same rules, dates, and bag limits for residents and nonresidents in the state you are trapping in.

[swifty]

Just curious. Does ANY state currently have the same fee for residents and non residents for any fishing, hunting, or trapping license? (other than something like a one or two day fishing permit)

[FWS]

This would be my definition, which is the reciprocal license law for non resident trapping here in CA.

From the CA Fish & Game Code,

§4006. Issuance of license;

A license shall not be issued to a nonresident if the state in which he or she resides does not provide for issuance of a nonresident trapping license to California residents. Also, a nonresident issued a license under this subdivision may take only those species, and may take or possess only that quantity of a species which a resident of California may take or possess under a nonresident trapping license or permit in the state of residence of that nonresident.

[trappincoyotes39]

I understand the higher fee for non residents but to charge an amount much higher than other surrounding states for non residents would mean less than true reciprocal in my mind.

Iowa is what now for a non resident deer license? close to 600.00 I believe much higher than other surrounding states for sure. All about the demand and most states have what would be considered low demand for non resident trapping license .

[thorsmightyhammer]

Aug 19, 2011 5:46:01 GMT -6 CoonDuke said:

Within an individual state, both residents and non-residents are offered equal opportunity in regards to bag limits, season length, and regulations providing that the state in which the non-resident resides provides the same equal opportunity to non-residents wishing to harvest fur in that state.

I agree todd.

CA's is convuluted IMHO

[FWS]

CA's is convuluted

Nah, it's pretty straightforward.

If a state, such as MN, does not offer a CA resident a non resident trapping license then MN residents are disqualified from getting a non resident license in CA.

And if a state does not allow a non resident trapper to take cats, as in NV or MT, then NV and MT residents can't take cats in CA. Or if the non resident is subject to a limit, such as UT with their cat limit, then the UT resident can take only that limit in CA.

Or if a state has a zero limit on cats for residents and nonresidents, like IN, then that zero limit would apply. But if they allow a non resident to take an unlimited number of possums, but not cats, then that nonresident may keep the possums but not the cats.

Seems entirely fair

[trappincoyotes39]

MD that was going to be my point, if we allow footholds as a legal means then CA should as well with that line of thought...................................................

[hvtrapper]

Aug 19, 2011 21:37:58 GMT -6 FWS said:

CA's is convuluted

Nah, it's pretty straightforward.

If a state, such as MN, does not offer a CA resident a non resident trapping license then MN residents are disqualified from getting a non resident license in CA.

And if a state does not allow a non resident trapper to take cats, as in NV or MT, then NV and MT residents can't take cats in CA. Or if the non resident is subject to a limit, such as UT with their cat limit, then the UT resident can take only that limit in CA.

Or if a state has a zero limit on cats for residents and nonresidents, like IN, then that zero limit would apply. But if they allow a non resident to take an unlimited number of possums, but not cats, then that nonresident may keep the possums but not the cats.

Seems entirely fair

NOT! that's purely greed based IMO. We have it.....You can't!
Why travel to another state unless they have something not offered at home? That could be different species(Alaska for lynx, wolves and wolverine) or just greater populations(S.Dakota muskrats or Lousiana nutira). In my mind reciprocal means that residents and non-residents should operate on equal terms other than the difference in costs. Cost comes down to residents already pay more through their taxes so I don't argue a reasonable non-resident fee. (And, no, IA's non-resident deer fees are NOT reasonable..another case of greed based fees) If you want to just limit non-residents, why not through lottery draws for licenses?

[scottphillips]

So does California have to use cage traps if they trap out of state?

Colorado can go to Wyoming and use foot traps while Wyoming has to use cage traps in Colorado?

[FWS]

Then we NR residents who want to go to Cal and trap should be able to use foot traps in Cal,

Present that argument to the state of CA and see how far you get.



Remember, the cage trap only mandate was not the trappers choice, it was the voters and the law requiring them was written by HSUS and Co.

There is no loophole that would allow what some of you want, so it's a moot point.

NOT! that's purely greed based IMO. We have it.....You can't!

If you think so...............But we're not gonna change the law.

It's not something that affects trappers in CA since none will state hop to PA, IA, IN, MD, etc. So providing access to CA resources to residents of those states is a gift rather than actual reciprocity.....................