Utah legislators got an earful of complaints last year after the state began enforcing a new law that requires adults to carry a hunting or fishing license to enter some state-run wildlife management areas.

Yet, given the chance to revisit the policy during the 2026 legislative session, lawmakers didn’t scrap it.

They expanded it. And, according to one Republican who voted against it, made it more invasive.

HB30, which is awaiting Gov. Spencer Cox’s signature, will require a license or registration to enter any of the 149 state-run wildlife or waterfowl management areas — from the Hardware WMA in Cache County to the Price River Natural Area in Carbon County — starting July 2028. The original law applied only to the 26 management areas located within the state’s four most populous counties: Salt Lake, Davis, Weber and Utah.

Lawmakers also changed the type of license required. One of the main complaints legislators said they heard was that runners, mountain bikers and birders objected to buying a hunting or fishing license. The new law adds two alternate ways to gain entry to a WMA: Visitors now can make a nonprofit donation to the newly established WMA fund or watch a free video about how WMAs differ from other public lands.

But those additions create their own complications.

Anyone who completes one of the three steps — purchasing a license, making a donation or watching the video — will be entered into a state database. That database will be made available to wildlife officers patrolling the areas. And Sen. Heidi Balderree, R-Saratoga Springs, said she finds that practice more concerning than having too many people enjoying the public lands.

“It replaces the freedom of the hills with a digital leash,” Balderree said of the law in a text to The Salt Lake Tribune, “by suggesting that a citizen’s right to nature is now conditional upon their willingness to be tracked and educated by a central authority.”

How do wildlife management areas differ from other public lands?

Wildlife management areas are set aside to preserve wildlife habitat. Though they are public lands managed by the state, their purchase and maintenance are funded almost entirely through the sale of hunting and fishing licenses and associated federal matching funds. They typically are closed for portions of the year to protect breeding grounds or food sources. However, the bounty of birds, deer, fish and other animals they attract make them a popular draw for hunters and hikers alike.

The wildlife areas closest to population centers typically see the most recreational use. So last year, Rep. Casey Snider, R-Paradise, tucked a clause regarding entry into WMAs into a larger hunting bill. According to its floor sponsor, Sen. Mike McKell, the intent of that clause requiring sporting licenses for entry into some WMAs was to generate funds for upkeep and maintenance. At the time, it drew little attention.

But the new law was met with backlash from recreationists once enforcement began. McKell, R-Spanish Fork, called the fallout “unintended consequences.”

That’s when Rep. David Shallenberger, R-Orem, got involved. The sponsor of HB30 said he sought to change the law because the Timpanogos WMA — the epicenter of much of the controversy — is in his and floor-sponsor Keven Stratton’s backyard. The Bonneville Shoreline Trail crosses through that area, and last year trail runners, photographers and bike teams that had been using it for years suddenly had game wardens asking them for their license. (In July, the Timpanogos WMA was granted an easement, eliminating the license requirement for BST trail users).

“You have a billion-dollar hunting and fishing industry and, on the other side, you have a billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry,” Shallenberger said. “And sometimes they bump up against each other, and we have some friction points, and that’s where we are.”

Another bill proposed by Rep. Nelson Abbott, R-Orem, would have eliminated the license requirement entirely. That bill never made it onto the House floor.

Stratton, R-Orem, told the Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Committee last month that HB30’s changes to the law allow users to “take ownership” of the public lands.

“When you put your time and effort and skin on where the rubber hits the road, that’s a powerful thing,” he said. “And I have a great hope. I love the notion … that we’re going to raise a generation of trained, dedicated citizens in a wonderful way.”

Education is the priority, but the money helps

Above all, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources wants to use the law to educate the public about WMAs and how they differ from other state-run public lands, according to deputy director Justin Shannon. But, the money is nice, too — and he told legislators that he asked Shallenberger to keep a revenue-generating avenue open in the new bill.

Matt Anderson, director of the Utah Sportsmen’s Caucus, added that his group believes it’s time recreationists bear some of the responsibility for their impact on wildlife areas rather than leaving it to hunters and fishers to foot the bill. He said that when people are required to pay for a permit, they take more interest in how the money is being used.

“Hikers, mountain bikers and others have an impact, and they have a take on wildlife,” he said, “and we believe that they should pay into it.”

Money donated to a specific management area will be used for improvements there unless the total annual donations tally less than $1,000. Anyone who donates $40 or more will automatically be issued a fishing license — a clause that allows the state to take advantage of federal matching funds, which can bring in between $16 and $80 per license.

The bill does not clarify a minimum donation for entry. That will likely be set by the DWR, which will also be tasked with producing the short video. Shallenberger said he envisions visitors accessing the video by scanning a QR code at trailheads and other entry points. He also suggested the video should be available on the DWR website for those wanting to plan ahead or who are concerned about a lack of cell service.

“We looked at this and said we can either charge $40 or some nominal fee — $8, $10, $50, $80 — [and] make everybody pay that’s going to use this,” Shallenberger told legislators. “Or, [let it be] like it has been for the last 80 years — where we don’t charge anything for recreation and let people just go up there and use it.

“And the approach we’ve settled on is sort of a middle ground that we want to try and see how it goes.”

He said the license requirement is no different than the entry fees charged at some state and national parks. The donations and the money from fishing and hunting license sales, he added, will help pay for anything from the purchase of trail markers to the cleanup of couches and mattresses dumped on the lands.

Aside from a pandemic surge, the sales of hunting and fishing licenses in Utah has been relatively steady over the past six years, according to DWR spokesperson Faith Heaton Jolley. Still, she said, the division consistently operates at a deficit when paying for the upkeep of wildlife areas.

“DWR always pays out of pocket when it comes to land management and habitat restoration,” Heaton Jolley said in an email to The Salt Lake Tribune. “We get funding from the Habitat Council, Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative and other DWR funding accounts for land restoration projects.

“This would be the first time a donation has been established to assist with land and habitat maintenance and restoration.”

Balderree, however, is concerned the law will lead to a pay-to-play situation.

Legislator: Utah is acting as a ‘nanny state’

Balderree was the lone senator to vote against HB30 in the 28-1 decision that sent it to Cox’s desk. She said the database denies visitors the ability to enter public lands anonymously and “converts our wild spaces into gated communities.”

“If the land is state-owned,” she said, “conditioning access on a ‘registration’ or a video could be seen as an arbitrary barrier to a public right.”

“This is a classic example of a nanny state,” she added. “The bill adds a time-tax and digital tracking to a simple outdoor walk/hike.”

Tracking concerns were not raised during discussions of the bill. An email and a text to Shallenberger’s office were not immediately returned.

Hunting and fishing licenses typically are valid for 365 days from the date they are purchased. It is unclear how often a person making a donation or watching the video would need to renew their information in the database. It is also uncertain what type of identification visitors would need to provide to prove they are in the database.

The changes to the law are set to take effect July 1.

Shallenberger was asked during a committee hearing what would happen if no one abided by the changes to the law.

“This is a policy direction, and trying something new,” Shallenberger said. “If it’s not working in a couple of years … let’s sit down and readdress the issue, or address it, and say it’s obviously not working, let’s try something new.”