An Act to amend 27.01 (7) (g) 2., 29.563 (2) (b) 1., 29.563 (2) (b) 2., 29.563 (2) (b) 3., 29.563 (2) (b) 3m., 29.563 (2) (b) 4., 29.563 (2) (b) 6., 29.563 (2) (b) 6m., 29.563 (2) (b) 7., 29.563 (2) (b) 8., 29.563 (2) (d) 1., 29.563 (2) (d) 2., 29.563 (2) (g), 29.563 (2g) (intro.), 29.563 (3) (b) 1., 29.563 (3) (b) 2., 29.563 (3) (b) 3., 29.563 (3) (b) 4., 29.563 (3) (b) 5., 29.563 (3) (b) 5m., 29.563 (3) (b) 6., 29.563 (3) (b) 7., 29.563 (3) (cm) 2., 29.563 (4) (b) 1., 29.563 (4) (b) 1m., 29.563 (4) (b) 2., 29.563 (4) (b) 2m., 29.563 (4) (b) 2s., 29.563 (4) (b) 3., 29.563 (5) (b) 1., 29.563 (5) (b) 2., 29.563 (5) (b) 3., 29.563 (6) (am), 29.563 (6) (d), 29.563 (7) (b) 1., 29.563 (7) (b) 2., 29.563 (10) (b) 2. and 29.563 (10) (b) 6. of the statutes; Relating to: fees for nonresident hunting, trapping, and fishing approvals and nonresident vehicle admission receipts. (FE)
SB670 would raise a wide range of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources fees for nonresident hunting, fishing, trapping, and related approvals. The bill increases prices for many nonresident licenses and permits, including small game, deer, elk, bear, archery and crossbow deer, wild turkey, fishing, sturgeon spearing, trapping, taxidermist, commercial fishing in outlying waters, and wild ginseng harvest. It also increases certain resident-related or special-category fees, such as bonus deer and some conservation patron and sports licenses, and updates the fee for nonresident wild turkey authorizations.
The bill also changes the law governing daily vehicle admission receipts for out-of-state vehicles entering state parks and other vehicle admission areas. Under the bill, DNR must charge at least $19.85 for a daily nonresident vehicle admission receipt, where current law requires a fee but does not set a specific minimum amount. The bill is scheduled to take effect on March 1, 2026.
In practical terms, SB670 would increase the cost of accessing Wisconsin hunting, fishing, trapping, and state recreation opportunities for nonresidents, while also raising some related fees across several license categories. The bill amends numerous provisions in the statutes governing DNR approvals and fee schedules, making the new amounts part of the statutory fee structure rather than leaving them at prior levels.
The available context suggests the bill was not the subject of recorded committee testimony or roll-call votes in the materials provided, and it ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. As a result, the general sentiment reflected in the record is limited, but the bill’s introduction and sponsorship indicate support from its authors for higher nonresident user fees, likely to generate additional revenue or align fees with updated policy goals.
The main point of contention is the burden on nonresident hunters, anglers, trappers, and recreational vehicle users, who would pay more for access to Wisconsin resources. Opponents would likely focus on affordability, tourism, and whether the increases are too broad or too steep, while supporters would likely emphasize that nonresidents should pay more for use of state-managed wildlife and recreation assets. The bill also raises questions about how much discretion DNR should have in setting admission fees and whether statutory minimums should be imposed.
SB670 would amend Wisconsin statutes governing DNR licensing and fee schedules, primarily in chapter 29 and one provision in chapter 27. It would increase statutory fee amounts for numerous nonresident hunting, fishing, trapping, and related permits and approvals, and it would establish a minimum daily fee of $19.85 for nonresident vehicle admission receipts. The bill would directly affect the Department of Natural Resources, nonresident outdoor users, and holders of certain special licenses and permits, and it would take effect on March 1, 2026 if enacted.
The bill appears to have been introduced as a fee-increase measure with support from its sponsors, but the record provided contains no committee testimony or vote breakdown showing broader legislative debate. Its eventual failure to pass suggests it did not advance successfully through the legislative process. Overall, the available record indicates a policy proposal aimed at raising nonresident user fees rather than a broadly embraced consensus measure.
The central controversy is whether nonresident users of Wisconsin’s hunting, fishing, trapping, and park systems should bear substantially higher costs. Supporters are likely to argue that fee increases are appropriate because nonresidents use state-managed resources and should contribute more to their upkeep, while critics may argue the increases are excessive, could discourage tourism and participation, and may disproportionately affect out-of-state hunters and anglers. A secondary issue is the bill’s move to set a statutory minimum for nonresident vehicle admission receipts, which reduces administrative flexibility and could be viewed as either a needed floor or an unnecessary mandate.