Missouri Whitetails - Your Missouri Hunting Resource banner

Missouri Department of Conservation proposes adjusting permit prices, and wants public input

1928 Views 77 Replies 32 Participants Last post by  Ryfarm48
Missouri Department of Conservation proposes adjusting permit prices, and wants public input

Missouri Department of Conservation Sign

The Missouri Department of Conservation is proposing adjusting prices for most hunting, fishing, trapping, and commercial permits to keep up with rising costs of goods and services it uses to manage its more than 1,000 conservation areas along with nature centers, shooting ranges, fish hatcheries, and other facilities.
MDC received initial approval on the proposed permit price adjustments from the Missouri Conservation Commission at the Commission’s May 19 open meeting at City Hall in Washington, Mo.
Missouri is home to more than 1 million anglers, 500,000 hunters, and several thousand trappers. MDC issues nearly 2.6 million hunting, fishing, and trapping permits each year. Most MDC permit prices have remained the same for the past 20 years while costs for goods and services have increased significantly since then.
“In early 2003, the price of a resident firearms deer permit was $17 and the cost of a gallon of unleaded gas was $1.42,” explained MDC Director Sara Parker Pauley. “Jump ahead two decades to May 2023 when the cost of a resident firearms deer permit is still $17 while the cost of a gallon of gas is about $3.30. That cost increase adds up considering MDC purchased nearly 908,000 gallons of gas in 2022 to run vehicles and equipment.”
Pauley added that, on average, most resident hunting and fishing permit prices would be adjusted by about $1.
“Compared to other states, Missouri permit prices are in the middle-to-lower end of the scale and would still be a bargain,” she said. “The average price of a resident firearm deer permit for surrounding states is $54 compared to Missouri’s proposed price of $18.
Additional revenue from permit sales will help MDC maintain and improve its nationally recognized programs and services for hunters, anglers, wildlife watchers, and others. Conservation efforts supported by revenue from permit sales include:​
  • Maintaining and improving nine fish hatcheries around the state that raise and stock more than 7 million fish annually for public fishing – including about 1.3 million trout at five hatcheries.
  • Maintaining and improving more than 70 public shooting ranges around the state.
  • Ongoing habitat work on nearly 1,000 conservation areas, including 15 intensively managed wetlands for public hunting and wildlife watching.
  • Expansion of popular youth offerings such as the Missouri Archery in the Schools Program, which has reached more than 200,000 young archers at nearly 700 Missouri schools, and the Discover Nature Schools Program, which helps more than 87,000 Missouri students each year at more than 700 schools around the state learn about and connect with Missouri outdoors.
  • Helping more than 24,000 landowners create and maintain habitat for wildlife.
  • Research on the health and sustainability of deer, turkey, quail, waterfowl, songbirds, fish, bears, elk, and other species.
  • Evaluation of the effectiveness of harvest regulations for fish and wildlife game species and understanding resource-user preferences.
  • Restoration, monitoring, and protection of imperiled and endangered species and habitats.
  • Removal of invasive species that threaten the health of native species and habitats.
  • Maintaining and improving 15 nature and interpretative centers around the state.
Pauley added that most Missourians are generally familiar with some of the work MDC does, but there are new challenges — with added costs.
“In addition to everything we offer and the work we are known for, we have new and expensive challenges,” she said. “Our staff are dealing with more and new invasive species and wildlife disease outbreaks. And the costs of many things we must buy regularly keep going up, from fuel to fish food.”
Some of the proposed permit price increases are:​
  • The price of a resident hunting and fishing permit would go from $19 to $20.50. The average price for surrounding states is $42.47.
  • The price of a resident fishing permit would go from $12 to $13. The average price for surrounding states is $23.
  • The price of a resident small game hunting permit would go from $10 to $10.50. The average price for surrounding states is $26.57.
  • The price of a resident trapping permit would go from$10 to $11. The average price for surrounding states is $29.38.
  • The price of a resident spring turkey permit would go from $17 to $18. The average price for surrounding states is $47.69
  • The price of a resident firearm deer permit would go from $17 to $18. The average price for surrounding states is $54.06.
  • The price of a resident antlerless deer permit would go from $7 to $7.50. The average price for surrounding states is $24.21.
  • The price of a youth resident antlerless deer permit would go from $7 to $7.50. The average price for surrounding states is $24.21.
  • Those under 16 and over 65 years of age will still get no-cost small-game hunting permits and no-cost fishing permits.
For more information on the proposed permit price adjustments, including a complete list of permits, current and proposed prices, average prices of similar permits for surrounding states, the last year the permit prices were raised, and other information, visit the MDC website at this link.
Permit sales account for about 17 percent of MDC’s annual revenue. Other significant revenue sources for MDC include the Conservation Sales Tax at about 62 percent and federal reimbursements at about 15 percent of total MDC revenue. Sales and rentals, interest, and other sources make up the remaining 6 percent of MDC revenue. MDC receives no funds through fines from tickets or citations, and no funding from the state’s general revenue funds. For more information, read the MDC Annual Review for Fiscal Year 2022 in the January 2023 issue of the Missouri Conservationist online at this link.
MDC will next seek public comments about its proposed permit price adjustments.​
See less See more
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
Let me get this straight...the rising cost of consumer goods is being used as the basis for an increase in fees? Would it be those same consumer goods that MDC is drawing a .08% sales on? Am i too simple minded to come to the conclusion that an increase in the price of consumer goods would also lead to an increase generated from the .08 cent sales tax?
exactly what I was thinking, but I am pretty simple as well! tack onto the NR ;)
  • Like
Reactions: 2
I would be okay with a modest increase of $1-3.00 but it they want to double it more to reflect the fuel example, while I would pay it, I would be completely against that!
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Hooks nailed it
definitely, but hunters should likely absorb a modest fee increase as well??? Don't agree?
NR can use rifle for 12 days, how much more of an experience do they need? Two bucks for archery and 2 turkey for archery, how much more can get! Raise their tags or lower the game they can reap for the current price!
defund the mdc. most crooked entity in the state.
Likely not more crooked than most every public office in the city of STL
  • Like
Reactions: 2
If their going to compare to surrounding states then our non resident tags need to double.
They are not rocket scientists are they?
Maybe they should stop wasting money on turkey studies!
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Let’s not forget the MDC allows NR to take spots away from residents on managed hunts..
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Has anyone even looked to see if Ia, IL and other surrounding states residents tags are actually more expensive
And just liberalize the heck out of raccoon and possum kill'n. :D
wouldn't help a thang!
raise the tags $10 if you can hire people competent enough to figure how to move a youth season 1 week to not interfere with Halloween...or competent enough to not write regulations that keep a youth hunter from firearms season just because they killed an archery deer with a compound bow.....or maybe even competent enough to write an article about raising tag prices :ROFLMAO:
You sound like Hawk.
That was basically quoting Hawk and sarcasm on my part
No way Missourinis expensive for midwest NRvstate
Most people don’t turkey hunt. EVERY NR I talk with has never attempted or targeted turkey during their fall archery hunt. not sure why it’s even on the tag.
Let’s pick on WI here cause I know it the best. For $160, I can shoot 1 buck and 2 does..and purchase extra doe tags for around $20 i beehive. Some areas allow for 1 buck and 4 does.
I love coming to MO to hunt, and not trying to be rude, but I believe many of you think it’s waaaay better than it is. Well, only when talking about price. The rest of the time you all complain about how crappy the quality and quantity of wild game have gone.
NR aren’t ruining your deer and Turkey numbers. The locals are…and they are doing it for free while NR and paying top dollars to hopefully see 1-2 deer that meet the APR restrictions on public land. I’ve been down there. I know the locals poach regularly and the communities are okay with it. They are open about it. People on here have jokingly admitted it.
I don’t understand the hatred locals always have with NR. This is evident in all states it seems.

What’s your reasoning NR should have ANOTHER price increase?
Pulleye16, you are correct that the MO deer are not up to par with the WI, IA, OH, KS, but the MO deer product is FAR superior to to south and that is where the flock from to hunt our cheap NR tags and free for all to get them in hand.
And what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with an affordable deer tag? Are NR killing all the deer? Serious question. Not trying to be a ****.
I have no issue with NR where I hunt, but I do have friends that hunt different public ground and if it is just HALF AS BAD AS THEY DESCRIBE...well it must be miserable with the amount of NR hunters showing up on these areas. Even though I knock the MO deer herd, it is still solid and capable of producing some stompers.......BUT it could be the absolute best in the business with a few tweaks, IMHO!
  • Like
Reactions: 2
When I pull into a conservation area and over 80% of the vehicles are NR tags, there’s an issue. Buy a tag in IA, IL, KS or any other top whitetail destination and compare prices. I don’t care how many Turkey people will kill with archery equipment. It’s the 2 bucks and unlimited tags that chaps my Azz. Doe tags are just as cheap as others too. Reciprocal fees is all I ask and limit the amount of tags available.

Nobody here thinks that MO is some outstanding destination to kill huge bucks. It’s the TV shows pushing that narrative. MO is a consolation prize when they don’t get drawn for the premier states.

Personally, as a mostly public land hunter, I’m sick of being pushed out by NR hunters. It’s a reality. On private and public land. If you don’t think that’s true you really need to open your eyes a little wider and pay attention.
it is absurd that NR get two any deer tags and two turkey tags when purchasing a NR archery tag.
Yes Yes reciprocal tag fees,that be fantastic and would save me a fortune. I like that idea. Deer hunting is already expensive as hell and a government agency is just going to misuse the money it takes in anyway because that’s what government is good at.
Mdc goes reciprocal with states that have good deer, not the souther states! The southern hunters can pay the average cost of the Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, and IL fees, heck double or triple that price for anyone coming from LA, MS or AL, don’t like like stay and hunt the sole good area the south has, and do so well after Missouris peak rut!
$265 to hunt for 7 days is expensive which is most hunting trips. To hunt the entire season cost a non resident $530 vs a resident $36. It’s 15 times the cost of a resident to hunt the entire season as a non resident if you want to hunt the November portion which is what all want to do. It’s not even close an isn’t cheap. Y’all are always worried about what other states are doing and every state is always going to be different. Their seasons are setup different. In Kansas your archery tag is good Sept through the season vs Missouri where your archery tag is not valid for gun season forcing you to buy one or go home. Kansas is a 1 buck state if Missouri copied that model then their tags would be similar in cost they are priced in my opinion to entice a non resident to spend the $530 for both tags because of how the season is setup and closing for gun season vs if they were $450 a piece most people would not spend the money to hunt both.They may could increase them to about $300 a piece and increase their revenue but at $450 a tag they would probably lose money as they are getting $530 a pop from most people currently. They do however need to make certain public lands draw only for non residents, that’s just common sense you can’t have over the counter tags and unlimited public access to non residents. A national forest is a different ball game everyone should be able to hunt that but not every state owned area also. There could be changes but $450 tags making it $900 vs $36 to hunt the entire season is ridiculous for a deer.
If the national forest is in our borders, then we should have control, only allow NR on national forest (thats another debate)! AND no NR on managed hunts unless the quota is not met be resident.

12 days of peak rut with a rifle, jack those NR prices up and up!!!!!! if we lose some NR revenue, sobeit!!!!!! Raise the resident $5-$10 bucks and it will more than cover the cover the NR losses!
I agree, NR tags are cheap, and 1 buck rule for NR is fine with me too. However, If you expect the deer herd to improve dramatically by addressing the NR harvest with 22k tags sold vs 288k resident tags, I think you're kidding yourself. A big issue is trigger control for improving big buck population and that's a problem for NR and Res alike.

I don't think you can get a state wide movement of the gun season out of the rut, however, I think that is the number 1 reason for the imbalanced age structure in Mo. Honestly I'd try to get the MDC to approve a subset of counties to approve a gun season later in the year as a trial. I think they'd be more open to doing something like that for a test. I'd like to see the northern 1/3 of the state counties test a Dec gun season for 5 years and a 1 buck rule annually per person for those counties. Give a bonus doe tag if they (MDC) wants pop control per tag.
If that hasn't hit a nerve yet, let's face it, Res tags are cheap as well, you guys beechen about a $1-$3 increase, lol. I know what you're going to say "we have the 1/8% sales tax too". Last I checked, the average cost to a Mo resident for that tax was $24 a year. So in essence you're paying $41 for multiple deers tag. What's the surrounding states charge for Res deer tags? I know in Nebr it's more than than $41 since you also have to buy a habitat stamp with your deer tag and you only get to harvest 1 deer. The average price of a resident firearm deer permit for surrounding states is $54.
How much conviction do you have in improving the "age structure", only those ideas that impact others, or all ideas that may impact you as well?
Sounds like a lot of you want to improve the hunting in Mo, but not change what the Res can harvest off 1 tag, but that's where another big impact would be made. I wish you luck, but I think some of you are in an echo chamber with flawed assumptions and beliefs. Northern Mo could be as good as Iowa in terms of Big Bucks, but it would require sacrifice from everyone if you want to show significant progress in a short period of time (5 years). In the end I think everybody would be happier, but you have to convince the MDC and that's likely no small task, because I think the "improve the age structure" movement is in the minority. And I believe, as soon as you are unwilling to show your conviction to the cause, you'll lost credibility because I don't think it shows the seriousness of your effort because I'd assume most of the 'improve the age structure' hunters are also bow hunters. People who rifle hunt only would see this as unfair - the bow hunters get to chase and shoot big bucks during the rut and then they get to rifle hunt for another buck during rifle and 'we rifle only hunters' get forked. . Does anyone doubt that going to 1 buck harvest in those selected counties for everyone AND pushing rifle to Dec wouldn't yield the fastest results? In 3 years it'd look like you were hunting Iowa IF the right counties were selected for the trial.
I have no dog in this fight - while I am a NR Landowner since 2009, I haven't hunted Mo for the last 2 years and have no current plans to hunt anytime in the near future. I think I'm being fairly objective at this point. I kinda threw this response together, but I think the jest of my argument was made. Make a proposal, show you're willing to sacrifice too, otherwise, don't pretend it's for everyone because it'll appear you're just forking over rifle hunters. In that case, the rifle hunters might just propose then that No One should get to hunt the rut. Fair is fair they might say, and honestly, they might have a point. .02
Blast away.....
Is IL a OBR, is Iowa OBR, heck residents there can shoot two with firearms!!!

fierarms hunters that don't archery hunt have it easy now, so that is a lame excuse for them!

I agree that OBR and december season would be better than just one, but seeing how a couple neighboring states have 2 bucks max and late season and way better age class I would be more incline for mix....as opposed to further taking opportunity form the true archery hunters!
Pretty sure the rut is in full swing in early December and 70,000 bucks that don’t get killed the first two days of a 12 day peak rut November the hunting will be still be good!

What I meant to say is any firearms hunter that is unwilling to hunt archery these days….really, with a crossbow it can’t get much easier than using a rifle!
1 - 20 of 78 Posts