HB0060 - Excess Wildlife Population Damage - Not sure on this one

[perma]

I encouraged them to make the access yes and the hma programs so great that landowners want to enroll.

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but AccessYES is only funded through donations and grants with G&F correct? I think the quoted is the solution they need but my understanding is LO’s don’t get much from it. At least the one I was talking to last year said that……

 

[BuzzH]

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but AccessYES is only funded through donations and grants with G&F correct? I think the quoted is the solution they need but my understanding is LO’s don’t get much from it. At least the one I was talking to last year said that……

Ask Game and Fish

Matt, what is Access Yes?

wgfd.wyo.gov

 

[Trial153]

Give the Land owners transferable landowner tags in lieu of payment. They can then use them to mitigate the damages and sell them to compensate their substantial losses.

 

[338win]

Give the Land owners transferable landowner tags in lieu of payment. They can then use them to mitigate the damages and sell them to compensate their substantial losses.

No

 

[Trial153]

No

Well I thought it’s fine idea, enough that I emailed our Senator and representative. Different opinions make the world go round

 

[Dan-06]

Follow the money….

 

[338win]

Well I thought it’s fine idea, enough that I emailed our Senator and representative. Different opinions make the world go round

Most ideas that people have are wrong.

 

[Trial153]

Most ideas that people have are wrong.

I never said it was right. It is, however, in my best interest.

 

[Bob-WY]

Access yes most likely won't fly, that's most likely " to open" to be acceptable. I emailed my reps and heard back from Crago, he said he disagrees with many of my points but happy to talk about it if I send a phone number

 

[Bob-WY]

This bill was amended in senate trw to get 5 million from the general fund to cover compensation.

One time $5m or a yearly commitment of $5m

 

[WYelker]

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but AccessYES is only funded through donations and grants with G&F correct? I think the quoted is the solution they need but my understanding is LO’s don’t get much from it. At least the one I was talking to last year said that……

I think it depends on the land owner and agreement. Depending on the area. I have hunted a ton in access yes and the landowners are very excited to have it. It must be worth something to them? I know the one area has agreed to have access yes, and it coincidentally also has a cow elk licenses limited mostly to the drainage where the ranch is located. The rancher does not seem to complain at all about elk numbers, because the ranch has adequate elk tags to keep numbers down.

 

[wyoelkfan15]

Access yes most likely won't fly, that's most likely " to open" to be acceptable. I emailed my reps and heard back from Crago, he said he disagrees with many of my points but happy to talk about it if I send a phone number

At least yours responded, our park county reps have been crickets after two rounds of emails.

 

[WYelker]

This bill was amended in senate trw to get 5 million from the general fund to cover compensation.

Hey Buzz. I am thinking I need to fire off a bunch of emails to kill this bill. With the budget blowing up and the legislature fighting.

Does it seem like we could attack this bill over the $5,000,000 general funds? Maybe get it all tossed over the $$$?

 

[BuzzH]

Hey Buzz. I am thinking I need to fire off a bunch of emails to kill this bill. With the budget blowing up and the legislature fighting.

Does it seem like we could attack this bill over the $5,000,000 general funds? Maybe get it all tossed over the $$$?

I'll know more tomorrow...

 

[WapitiMuser]

I thought Wyoming already had this in place.

Colorado has something similar... landowners get the private tags and the money that helps keep the elk on their land, convenient for them. I'm sure it happens but I don't personally know anyone who abuses it for that reason though. However, with last winter those private lands had to have had some role in feeding the 20% that survived some areas.

 

[wyoelkfan15]

I thought Wyoming already had this in place.

Colorado has something similar... landowners get the private tags and the money that helps keep the elk on their land, convenient for them. I'm sure it happens but I don't personally know anyone who abuses it for that reason though. However, with last winter those private lands had to have had some role in feeding the 20% that survived some areas.

@BuzzH can probably speak more to it than I can. From what I understand we do already have this program for damages to hay/fencing etc. but the owner has to provide some sort of access to qualify for the reimbursement.

 

[WYelker]

I thought Wyoming already had this in place.

Colorado has something similar... landowners get the private tags and the money that helps keep the elk on their land, convenient for them. I'm sure it happens but I don't personally know anyone who abuses it for that reason though. However, with last winter those private lands had to have had some role in feeding the 20% that survived some areas.

Haha. In Colorado you have a system where private land owners make money hand over fist pumping out tags. Sorry but we do not have such a system and we should never have such a system.

Landowner tags should be only for the land they are issued and should not be transferable.

 

[BuzzH]

@BuzzH can probably speak more to it than I can. From what I understand we do already have this program for damages to hay/fencing etc. but the owner has to provide some sort of access to qualify for the reimbursement.

That's essentially correct and the only way to qualify is if it's a cultivated crop where the damage is occurring.

The level of access for hunting has to be equivalent to the number of animals to keep the herd at the current level assuming how much the herd would grow. In other words, if its 100 elk doing the damage, and the cow/calf ratio is 25/100 the landowner is supposed to allow at least enough access to kill 25 elk.

I have no idea how that's enforced. I'm guessing its pretty loose on meeting the requirement.

 

[BuzzH]

HB60 is most likely dead, SF111 is for sure dead.

Thanks to the Residents that killed both of these.

 

[WYelker]

HB60 is most likely dead, SF111 is for sure dead.

Thanks to the Residents that killed both of these.

Is there anything we can do to make sure HB60 is dead? I got several responses to 111 from my last email. Some reps were really interested in understanding.