I finally get it now. Wildlife Areas and State Trust Lands, which is what the article is about, are maintained through revenue raised by the licenses. They aren’t manned by park staff to take fees for recreational (non-hunting/fishing) use, which normally happens in the state parks. Hikers are going through these areas more and more often. The state wants to capture the revenue they could be providing, so they cite the disturbance to the wild areas, caused by the increasing traffic of hikers, as the prompt to require that hikers get hunting/fishing licenses, too, to enjoy the lands.
Might cut down on people that go into remote areas and hunt or fish without benefit of a license, also. Could also be a way to cut down on such traffic. Sometimes gubment will screw up and admit that increased fees or taxes reduce an activity.