And the Hits just keep on coming....WY now.

[JLS]

Just spitballing here, but non-resident hunting seems like a tenuous foundation for the North American Model.

Absolutely not. It’s all intertwined.

 

[rwc101]

Absolutely not. It’s all intertwined.

Non-resident hunting as we know it wasn't around when the concept was created.

 

[JLS]

Non-resident hunting as we know it wasn't around when the concept was created.

I understand that. I’m not going to argue, I’ve said my piece.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

So that residents get 90% of the tags in the LQ areas...

Just the same as Residents in CA, NM, AZ, UT, MT, NV, WA, OR, etc. etc. have...

But @BuzzH our 1 elk tag in CA is awesome, you just can't find that kinda quality hunt in WY.

Think how good the elk hunting in WY would be if we changed the allocation CA style and handed out just 250 tags to NR.

Gets the wheels turning right....

 

[rwc101]

I understand that. I’m not going to argue, I’ve said my piece.

I'm done arguing, but it would have been interesting to hear your thoughts.

 

[JLS]

I'm done arguing, but it would have been interesting to hear your thoughts.

Fair enough. If I have time I’ll fire up the laptop later. Not doing it on a phone.

 

[Four22]

So how much revenu to hotels, gas stations, restaurants and grocery stores will be lost with this kind of cut to out of state hunters?

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Just spitballing here, but non-resident hunting seems like a tenuous foundation for the North American Model.

Paying for management and conservation of wildlife with non-resident hunting opportunity seems like a tenuous foundation for the North American Model.

 

[BuzzH]

Aaa


....unless it’s in an LE I want to hunt in.

Fixed it for you.

Dont even care about that...there would still be 10% of the tags available to NR's.

 

[rwc101]

Paying for management and conservation of wildlife with non-resident hunting opportunity seems like a tenuous foundation for the North American Model.

I agree there needs to be more buy in from the residents. I would happily pay more for my tags to fund management. Working on another comment to expand my thoughts.

 

[BuzzH]

So how much revenu to hotels, gas stations, restaurants and grocery stores will be lost with this kind of cut to out of state hunters?

None for NR elk hunters, none for all the region wide NR deer tags, none for the 50%+ of the available NR pronghorn tags.

Probably very little, if any loss for moose, sheep, goat and bison since Residents probably spend as much or more hunting those species which are normally nowhere close to where they live.

 

[Trial153]

Paying for management and conservation of wildlife with non-resident hunting opportunity seems like a tenuous foundation for the North American Model.

Bedrock

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I agree there needs to be more buy in from the residents. I would happily pay more for my tags to fund management.

I think putting it entirely on hunters is tenuous as well. Making NR the cash cow, and then competing with them for access to the resource. Your essentially pitting the self-interest of resident hunters against the self-interest of the agency. The only possible outcome is fewer and more expensive tags.

 

[BuzzH]

You are truly unbelievable sir.

Just show me where, in the regulations or in the application process it stated you were assured a tag to hunt in Wyoming...prove me wrong.

What's unbelievable is the NR entitlement toward Wyoming...that really is.

 

[BrentD]

Just show me where, in the regulations or in the application process it stated you were assured a tag to hunt in Wyoming...prove me wrong.

What's unbelievable is the NR entitlement toward Wyoming...that really is.

No Buzz, what is unbelievable is your ability to completely refuse to listen and your deliberate unwillingness to recognize the understood definitions of english words like "lost" and "opportunity" etc...

Quit being so disingenuous.

 

[BuzzH]

If I understand it correctly: 10% cut to NR tags in the initial draw. Residents draw better tags on average. More mid-lower point areas go leftover draw. I'm sure I'll be corrected if that is off base.

Correct...and NR's better really think before they play the down trodden card.

Statute doesnt say they should receive more than 20% of the pronghorn tags.

Meaning, I say we keep the 80% for Residents, and Residents only including a separate leftover Resident only draw for ALL the pronghorn tags left from our 80% allocation. Also, one week of OTC for residents only, with a maximum of 5 buck tags per resident, 10 doe tags, before any more tags go to the NR's.

No more resident undersubscribed Resident tags rolling into the initial NR draw.

Give them exactly what they're allocated, not a single tag more.

 

[BuzzH]

No Buzz, what is unbelievable is your ability to completely refuse to listen and your deliberate unwillingness to recognize the understood definitions of english words like "lost" and "opportunity" etc...

Quit being so disingenuous.

Right,

Answer these questions.

1. How many of the 7250 full priced elk tags are NR going to lose under 90-10?
2. How many region wide deer tags are NR's going to lose under 90-10?

You won't because you know the answer.

 

[JLS]

So how much revenu to hotels, gas stations, restaurants and grocery stores will be lost with this kind of cut to out of state hunters?

Very little.

 

[JLS]

Paying for management and conservation of wildlife with non-resident hunting opportunity seems like a tenuous foundation for the North American Model.

It’s playing with fire for sure. Utah???

 

[rwc101]

Anyway, just musing to myself. My initial comment was focused on the democracy of hunting as described in the NAMWC since that is what seems to be at play here. We all agree on the democracy of hunting as the NAMWC. Keeping tags affordable for everyone, not basing tags on land ownership (cough, landowner tags), wealth (cough, landowner tags), or other privileges. I think the current state of NR hunting has drawn the ability to offer those principles to their extreme. When you load the model with the stress of increasing pressure, diminishing habitat, and cost of you are inevitably going to spin the model out of control. I see the model succeeding well into the future if people buy-in to their stewardship at the local, county, regional, and state levels and with the increased buy-in from non-hunters as @wllm1313 mentioned. I think that leaves the model with a much more solid foundation. Abandoning the model or declaring it dead because you have to wait a few more years to travel half-way across the country to hunt is what scares me. As I have said elsewhere, one thing I really like about Wyoming is seeing regular joes bring their family to the state and develop a passion for the habitats and wildlife. I hope we can continue to offer those experiences well into the future.