You were such a great ambassador for BHA. LOL.
And the Hits just keep on coming....WY now.
- Thread starter Trial153
- Start date
This is a hot topic.... and I’m not getting pissy or battening anyone....
but for clarification, how can it be none for non resident elk hunters when there will be fewer of them traveling? And none for fewer deer hunters ect...?
I don’t stay for free and not eat when I come hunt so how is it zero loss if there are less people traveling to the state to hunt?
BuzzH
Well-known member
Look, you can try to be a wise ass all you want.
Residents are wanting more opportunity its going to be one or the other either 90-10 or no more giving away under subscribed Resident tags to NR's.
Shangobango
Well-known member
I agree.
My point was that saying " why don't they just hunt in their own State" is an oversimplification. The opportunity for a quality hunting experience in many places in the east is getting harder and harder to find.
I wish it wasn't so but I suspect that situation will replicate itself to the same degree in the west sooner rather than later.
That is not good for the future of the North American model.
R
rwc101
Guest
For sure. Places that I hunted in Virginia are now housing developments. I would love to see more advocacy for public lands and access programs out east.
Do all undersubscribed resident pronghorn tags switch over to non-residents in the initial drawing?
I thought I was doing a good job of being a wise ass. I will try harder.
Agreeing with you makes me want to run in front of traffic but I will say there is still going to be some decent opportunities in Wyoming. Wyoming’s general tags are still pretty darn good. The amount of resident antelope tags that get filtered through and make their way to the non-resident pool is a nice bonus. Since those tags are getting filtered through and not being drawn by residents are you guys really getting shorted that much?
BuzzH
Well-known member
How many times does it need to be explained?
Currently NR's receive 7,250 full price elk tags by REGULATION. IF 90-10 passes, NR's will still receive 7,250 full price tags. 7,250 is always equal to 7,250 full priced tags.
Currently a vast majority of NR deer tags are region wide NR tags. 90-10 will not change the allocation of NR region wide tags. Same now as after 90-10.
NR's currently receive about 30-32% ABOVE their 20% allocation of pronghorn tags due to undersubscribed R tags rolling into the initial NR draw, and also a majority of leftovers go to NR's. That wont change under 90-10 either.
Yes, there will be a few less LQ deer tags, a few less sheep, moose, goat and bison. That's it...when talking about TOTAL NR TAGS.
Give it a few years. That’ll change when the next price increase happens and 3 to 5 years. If that long.
Carl 9.3x62
Well-known member
I can't believe no one has mentioned the $2 increase in the resident application fee. Completely absurd!
BuzzH
Well-known member
Yes, but its not a statutory requirement.
R
rwc101
Guest
Just wait until the habitat stamp bill passes.
The residents of Wyoming don’t want the tags so they roll over to the nonresident pool.
This upsets the residents of Wyoming that nonresidents get the tags that they didn’t want.
Even though they didn’t want them or they would’ve put in for them.
It’s almost like a child wanting a toy all of a sudden because someone else wants to play with it.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Yes, I would rather our Resident families and Children are afforded more opportunity to hunt multiple buck and doe pronghorn here to increase awareness, advocacy, and appreciation for our public lands.
They cant do that when NR's take over 50% of their pronghorn tags and rob us of the Statutory 80% we're entitled to.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Bullchit...I'll take a half dozen more pronghorn buck tags...all day long.
Hawk Tuah
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,608
I don't blame WY for doing this. I selfishly wish it was otherwise, and I don't like that my points will be worth half as much, but they have had high tag allocations for NR and are falling in line with the more typical 10%. The other part that stinks is that I cannot picture a situation where NR allocations ever go back up. It is hard for a legislature to do something that pisses off 100% of their constituents that hunt. NR tag allocations move in one direction....down.
The dynamics from outfitter outcry of this will also be interesting. I think that if they do not like this, the legislature kind of has them against the wall and can just say: "keep your mouth shut or we will let residents hunt the wilderness." I don't know exact numbers, but fewer NR tags, however allocated, hurts them, but they have a pretty good thing going with the wilderness law.
If the next domino to fall is NR elk in tags in CO, I really do think that will ultimately change the landscape of western hunting in a big way. Again, I wouldn't blame CO residents for pushing that, but the ultimate result would be significant. I don't think interest in western hunting would continue at the rapid pace it has. My first western hunt as someone growing up in the Midwest was CO elk. I think a lot of people start there. Mostly for opportunity, but also location. It is hard to get hooked on something (western hunting) without being able to do it. Will it mean the end of public land advocacy? I doubt it, but I don't think they will recruit new people to the fold if they do not experience public land hunting. I also think that passion diminishes as opportunity diminishes. I am not worried about people who already live in the west and hunt public in their own state, but I am worried about recruitment of others.
As far as raising tag prices go, this will continue. Every free market has a cap, but I do not think we are anywhere near that. I believe that most states could double tag prices tomorrow and likely sell all or most of them. It is just a matter of F&G agencies weighing and balancing tag price vs fees they get for applications that do not draw in my opinion. If applications/licenses/point prices were close to free across the west, I bet tag prices would be double or more. For example, if Colorado started charging $5000 for S/G/M tags, they would still sell all of them, but they would be losing out on thousands of people paying over $400/year to put in for them and get a point who would not be able to drop $5000 on a tag.
The dynamics from outfitter outcry of this will also be interesting. I think that if they do not like this, the legislature kind of has them against the wall and can just say: "keep your mouth shut or we will let residents hunt the wilderness." I don't know exact numbers, but fewer NR tags, however allocated, hurts them, but they have a pretty good thing going with the wilderness law.
If the next domino to fall is NR elk in tags in CO, I really do think that will ultimately change the landscape of western hunting in a big way. Again, I wouldn't blame CO residents for pushing that, but the ultimate result would be significant. I don't think interest in western hunting would continue at the rapid pace it has. My first western hunt as someone growing up in the Midwest was CO elk. I think a lot of people start there. Mostly for opportunity, but also location. It is hard to get hooked on something (western hunting) without being able to do it. Will it mean the end of public land advocacy? I doubt it, but I don't think they will recruit new people to the fold if they do not experience public land hunting. I also think that passion diminishes as opportunity diminishes. I am not worried about people who already live in the west and hunt public in their own state, but I am worried about recruitment of others.
As far as raising tag prices go, this will continue. Every free market has a cap, but I do not think we are anywhere near that. I believe that most states could double tag prices tomorrow and likely sell all or most of them. It is just a matter of F&G agencies weighing and balancing tag price vs fees they get for applications that do not draw in my opinion. If applications/licenses/point prices were close to free across the west, I bet tag prices would be double or more. For example, if Colorado started charging $5000 for S/G/M tags, they would still sell all of them, but they would be losing out on thousands of people paying over $400/year to put in for them and get a point who would not be able to drop $5000 on a tag.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
Crazy! Almost as brutal as the $6 increase in a turkey tag. Highway robbery. At $20 a turkey I'm going to stop feeling bad when I shoot them out of the roost tree.
Well as long the unwanted pronghorn tags keep rolling over to NRs you won't get any arguement from me in regard to the proposed changes. If the pronghorn tags went down to a true 10% it would be a massive loss.
Residents wanting the best chance at the LQ deer and elk tags with no net loss in NR licenses seems fair.
Raising tag costs to an amount within 20% most other states NR prices seems fair.
BuzzH
Well-known member
@IdahoNick,
The outfitters are already squawking, but realistically, it will be good for some outfitters and not so good for some as well.
In regard to elk, if I were a guide that hunted general areas, I'd support 90-10. More general tags will be issued under 90-10.
Deer, no real change, as a vast majority of deer tags are region wide where guides operate.
Pronghorn, I would probably support it as well, since again, more public land dominated tags going to residents, means more available less public land tags that Residents would draw on their 2nd or 3rd choices.
Sheep, moose, goat, bison...its a wash. Most outfitters guide more resident sheep, moose, goat, and bison hunters than non residents. The point system has assured that a vast majority of people hunting those are long in the tooth, don't have the knowledge, don't own livestock and book with outfitters. The outfitters charge both R and NR the same price...wash there.
The outfitters are already squawking, but realistically, it will be good for some outfitters and not so good for some as well.
In regard to elk, if I were a guide that hunted general areas, I'd support 90-10. More general tags will be issued under 90-10.
Deer, no real change, as a vast majority of deer tags are region wide where guides operate.
Pronghorn, I would probably support it as well, since again, more public land dominated tags going to residents, means more available less public land tags that Residents would draw on their 2nd or 3rd choices.
Sheep, moose, goat, bison...its a wash. Most outfitters guide more resident sheep, moose, goat, and bison hunters than non residents. The point system has assured that a vast majority of people hunting those are long in the tooth, don't have the knowledge, don't own livestock and book with outfitters. The outfitters charge both R and NR the same price...wash there.
Neither were laser rangefinders and bows with eighty percent let off. The durability of the NA model absolutely depends on its ability to adapt to changing circumstances.
My two pennies...I've spent a significant chunk of my life advocating for wild things professionally. I'm a better advocate for public land, elk, mule deer, pronghorn, etc because a friend and colleague took me elk hunting on public lands and exposed me to a world that I assumed simply did not exist for me. Ever since, I've had a dog in the hunt and frankly, when then-Chairman Barrasso was rounding up support for wildlife crossings in a highway bill, his staff didn't give a damn where I was from if I could help explain migration corridors to fellow flatlanders.
My father, retired from forty years of service to various state and federal agencies as a wildlife biologist, had plans to go to Wyoming with me "sometime" in the next couple years. We thought about this year, but are contemplating burning CO deer points instead. May have to reconsider now I guess, because he won't spend that much coin on an antelope tag. Not because he can't afford it, even though he's on a fixed income now. But just doesn't want to shoot one that bad. Some may wonder about his motives if he's not willing to spend money on a tag he can afford, but a career putting more critters on the landscape kinda speaks to that and then some in my mind.
Finally, the folks that sign my bi-monthly thank you notes for services rendered have very few members in the Rockies and if I didn't have such a strong interest, it'd be real easy for us to let the "westerners" deal with a lot of issues from sage grouse to mitigation to migration corridors. So, thanks to that one trip, I can bring a lot more voices to bear with one email. It's not about me, but you never know when that one person is going to be on someone's board, or on a legislator's staff, or whatever. I was just a southern kid that never dreamed about much of anything except the muddy water I grew up with. No, I wasn't ever gonna stop advocating for wildlife or public lands. But then a buddy put me between a bull elk and a call. From the moment that sumbitch bugled in my face, everything was different. It just was. The fewer people that experience that, the fewer that'll be changed by it. That's all.
I don't know the answer. There are fewer animals in Wyoming than there are people who would like to hunt them. The state absolutely has to look out for its residents first. Like Randy, I think this will focus a lot more attention on the ban of NRs in Wilderness, but not sure that will amount to much. Once these kinda rules are made they're awfully hard to undo. Ask us east coasters about Sunday hunting...
