NR’s chance to put $ where our mouths are

[232401a]

some of you might have a better notion of the most effective ways to donate, thoughts?

77% of WY GF budget is funded by NRs. Almost all western states are over 70%. An NR should give more to the state of Wyoming (and others)?

NRs should give less to other states and stay home. Let the resident hunters fund their own states.

Find somewhere to give, but make it in your own state. Don't be a fool.

Every single state has opportunity in your backyard, find it.

 

[HONEYBADGER]

Possibly but I believe the courts have decided that for now. Honestly federal control scares me more than state control. Just personal opinion though.

Feds screw up everything they touch. You don't want them managing your state's wildlife.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

77% of WY GF budget is funded by NRs.

Nope!

 

[232401a]

Nope!

At 77%, WY is perhaps the most reliant on NRs of any state. Like other states WY needs less NR money, not more.

"The department brings in about $56.3 million in licenses and fees and 77% of that comes from non-residents."

Funded by hunters and anglers, Wyoming Game and Fish weathering state's budget storm - Powell Tribune

At a time that the State of Wyoming is struggling to find ways to shore up the budget, the Game and Fish Department continues to find ways to afford major expenditures, from construction …

www.powelltribune.com

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/About%20Us/Commission/WGFD-Revenue-Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

 

[sclancy27]

I apply for half as many tags as a decade ago. I guess I spent too much time studying Statistics in college. Cost to apply for sheep in state X (all in, mandatory this and that plus app fee plus convenience fee) is the starting point. I ignore the cost of the tag itself since is unlikely I draw and in the long run the tag is a small part of my accumulated costs.

Now, what are my odds likely to be? How many years do I need to apply to have 100% odds (might be 4,000 in some states but even if obviously not realistic those are the facts). Add up the costs per year times years to reach 100%. That is my "comparison" cost to play the game in that state.

Say my home state is $80 to apply. Usually is a cheap date comparatively. Say I have 1 in 120 odds to draw a ram sheep tag as a resident (my state does not cap NR sheep tags, we are all in the same bucket). 120 years x $80 is $9,600.

Let's do WY. Not a max point guy and would die not still not a max point guy so there are, what, 3 NR random tags under the new bend an NR over rules? So, were recently 3,196 NR sheep applicants. So, 1 in 1,065. Cost if only apply for sheep is $170 (app fee, mandatory sheep point, cc fees). 1,065 years x $170 is $181,050.

So, I would use my Sheep Application budget to apply in my home state first then rank the NR states. Very easy to toss WY on the trash heap. When I started there were more random tags and all the assorted costs were each lower than today. I suspect WY will jack those cost up faster than inflation as try to recoup lost funds as NR shift to other states or tag lotteries or get old like me where can scratch a check to buy a hunt.

So, not sending a donation. Not hiring a lobbyist. Just changing my strategy as I do with other goals in my life.

Technically, your odds will never be 100% if the draw is random and results independent. In your scenario, your chance of drawing 1 tag in 120 years (given the 1 in 120 odds) is equal to 1-((119/120)^120) = 63.4%. Your reasoning makes me question how much studying you actually did....

 

[Deleted member 18333]

At 77%, WY is perhaps the most reliant on NRs of any state. Like other states WY needs less NR money, not more.

"The department brings in about $56.3 million in licenses and fees and 77% of that comes from non-residents."

Funded by hunters and anglers, Wyoming Game and Fish weathering state's budget storm - Powell Tribune

At a time that the State of Wyoming is struggling to find ways to shore up the budget, the Game and Fish Department continues to find ways to afford major expenditures, from construction …

www.powelltribune.com

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/About%20Us/Commission/WGFD-Revenue-Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

Funding for G&F comes from other sources than licenses. Of total funding, 49% is from NR licenses. Total funding for G&F is closer to $88M.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

At 77%, WY is perhaps the most reliant on NRs of any state. Like other states WY needs less NR money, not more.

"The department brings in about $56.3 million in licenses and fees and 77% of that comes from non-residents."

Funded by hunters and anglers, Wyoming Game and Fish weathering state's budget storm - Powell Tribune

At a time that the State of Wyoming is struggling to find ways to shore up the budget, the Game and Fish Department continues to find ways to afford major expenditures, from construction …

www.powelltribune.com

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/About%20Us/Commission/WGFD-Revenue-Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/About%20Us/Commission/WGFD-Revenue-Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

 

[232401a]

Funding for G&F comes from other sources than licenses. Of total funding, 49% is from NR licenses. Total funding for G&F is closer to $88M.

WGF uses the 77% number very heavily.

You make a good point as to alternate funding. But the analysis only looks worse for WY residents if viewed that way because that other money also does NOT come from WY residents. $26M (of that other $31M) comes from federal aid and grants. And the lonely 581K people who reside in Wyoming didn't contribute very heavily to that money. The population centers on the coasts provided much of that subsidy to Wyoming.

Stay home, Wyoming doesn't need more outside funding. Wyomingites will step up and pay more for their licenses if we let them. (Other states also).

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Stay home, Wyoming doesn't need more outside funding. Wyomingites will step up and pay more for their licenses if we let them. (Other states also).

Now I can agree with that.

 

[sclancy27]

WGF uses the 77% number very heavily.

You make a good point as to alternate funding. But the analysis only looks worse for WY residents if viewed that way because that other money also does NOT come from WY residents. $26M (of that other $31M) comes from federal aid and grants. And the lonely 581K people who reside in Wyoming didn't contribute very heavily to that money. The population centers on the coasts provided much of that subsidy to Wyoming.

Stay home, Wyoming doesn't need more outside funding. Wyomingites will step up and pay more for their licenses if we let them. (Other states also).

If you don't want to hunt other states just don't. I never understand the NR entitlement that because they pay more they should get more, residents of these states vote to provide non-residents ANY OPPORTUNITY AT ALL. We do not have to provide opportunities, we choose to, generally at the expense of resident opportunity, especially for special draw areas. We get to decide the rules, you get to decide whether to play the game, that's how it works.

 

[CPAjeff]

Made my donations to my favorite states, and in some cases, let them make interest off the upfront fees.

If I was forced to only hunt my resident state - Utah (enter all utard jokes here), my options would be limited substantially.

 

[Trial153]

The you don’t like it take your toys and stay home attitude that pisses me off more than anything.
Considering the federal government pays to manage the bulk of public lands that state residents get to use as their sand box to hunt in don’t be surprised when NR hunters decide federal lands are tab not worth picking up anymore.

 

[Mallardsx2]

We get to decide the rules, you get to decide whether to play the game, that's how it works.

For now.

 

[Jasher]

The title should say.... residents time to put your money where your mouth is. In Colorado the number of tag cuts effect residents more than non residents. The price of cow tags is what effects non residents. The costs and availability of tags I'll just keep getting points and go when I get a good tag. No more going every year.

 

[TOGIE]

Considering the federal government pays to manage the bulk of public lands that state residents get to use as their sand box to hunt in don’t be surprised when NR hunters decide federal lands are tab not worth picking up anymore.

i'll be incredibly surprised thanks.

the subset of the 4-5% of US tax payers that hunt but dont live in western states has me shaking in my trailrunners

 

[Jasher]

i'll be incredibly surprised thanks.

the subset of the 4-5% of US tax payers that hunt but dont live in western states has me shaking in my trailrunners

Normally 4-5% wouldn't be something to worry about. In 2023 the 4-5% of the population is ruling the country.

 

[sclancy27]

The you don’t like it take your toys and stay home attitude that pisses me off more than anything.
Considering the federal government pays to manage the bulk of public lands that state residents get to use as their sand box to hunt in don’t be surprised when NR hunters decide federal lands are tab not worth picking up anymore.

There is no tab to pick up. There is a reason why conservative (big business leaning) reps want those lands privatized, there is a shitload of extractive industries (and others) that would benefit enormously. Somewhere on this site is a graphic of land management agencies budget vs production ($$$). They are well in the black.....

Edit: I found it < https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/public-lands-the-congressional-football.317431/post-3533945 > , post #57

 

[rjthehunter]

I'm going to put my $ into my bank account, and save for a hunt I can pay for. Seems like the best hunting investment nowadays.

MAYBE buy a couple more raffle tickets for the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Society drawings coming up. But that's it for donations for me. Not interested in donating money to a state I've never hunted in where they don't want to let me hunt. My donation will be paying the application fees and the overpriced NR tags. Eventually, maybe.

 

[Trial153]

i'll be incredibly surprised thanks.

the subset of the 4-5% of US tax payers that hunt but dont live in western states has me shaking in my trailrunners

Incredibly surprised how off base you are. That 4-5% had nothing to do with stating a goal of a party platform that is federal lands being turned over to states( read corporate interests) . That may have more legs and money behind it then you know.
Some well placed landowner tags on newly privatized “ state lands” might be appealing to a new found 4%-5% non resident constituency…eh.
And let’s not forget a we have an insane Supreme Court values states right over individual rights right now…

Never say never.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

...don’t be surprised when NR hunters decide federal lands are tab not worth picking up anymore.

That 4-5% had nothing to do with stating a goal of a party platform that is federal lands being turned over to states (read corporate interests).

Those are two different arguments.