Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm still working on drawing a general elk tag in Wyoming.Is that based on your vast experience of elk hunting in Wyoming?
Provide some better evidence that resident hunter numbers aren't declining then. Your post is full of speculations.Point out in the stats you posted the breakdown of general elk tags sold to residents. Please try to comprehend your own tables there Chief.
You posted statewide TOTAL statistics for ALL elk tags, of which each hunter here can have 3. Which include general AND LQ tags issued.
Sure, very possible to have significantly less R general tags sold from year to year as LQ elk tags increase.
For instance, I didn't buy a general elk tag this year, I drew a LQ any elk tag. Don't forget, Residents can only have one antlered or any elk tag per year. I can't have a LQ elk tag AND a general tags, its one or the other. Which, let me break out the crayons, means that as more Residents draw LQ elk tags, they purchase less general tags. So, yes, general R elk tag sales are going to fluctuate.
So, no, the only thing you've proven is how little you know about both statistics and elk management here.
Active hunters declining/fluctuating from year to year means zippo. There are lots of R elk hunters in Wyoming that buy 3 tags, fill one, and never even bother to hunt the other 2.
Not all elk hunters are created equally, mine get filled, but a majority don't.
Look at your own statistics...the number of licenses and active hunters is going to fluctuate for a variety of reasons.I'm still working on drawing a general elk tag in Wyoming.
But my experience in other states? Yes buzz. It is.
Provide some better evidence that resident hunter numbers aren't declining then. Your post is full of speculations.
Wouldn't a tag that goes unhunted be filed under license sold and not "Active Hunter". Active Hunters isn't labeled "Actively hunted licenses". There's a column showing "Licenses Sold"
Do you not have any questions about what caliber to choose when defending yourself against an angry grizzly bear today?There really isn't enough crayon colors in the box to get anything through to you...
I'm rooting for the grizzly bear...Do you not have any questions about what caliber to choose when defending yourself against an angry grizzly bear today?
I tried to read this thread and I just can't, it's too long with too much bitching. But I'd like to respond to this pointThere might be a better understanding and might be why it is so common in our comments and emails.
And maybe a better understanding does result in people realizing more and more how it is a system designed to favor the residents of said state, and therefore the non-resident is merely along for the ride, however rough that ride might be in terms of cost and low opportunity.
While it might seem counterintuitive, there are scenarios where a 1 cm pistol could potentially be more advantageous than a 10 mm pistol. Here's why:I mean, like 10mm right? Duh. Proven facts here man.
how I think life should work as opposed to how it actually works.
My point is, I put almost no value in "that's just the way it is" when I form an opinion on something, wildlife management included. So just because the SCOTUS said wildlife can be managed however the States want... With regard to wildlife management, what we have doesn't make a lick of sense, it's undemocratic and flies in the face of almost everything people value about America.
You really think that a federal managed system would result in more opportunity? For r/nr? I doubt it.I tried to read this thread and I just can't, it's too long with too much bitching. But I'd like to respond to this point
How often does reality dictate your opinion on a topic? I'd argue that most of my decisions in life are based on my own morality and outlook on how I think life should work as opposed to how it actually works.
There is multitude of things that are either legal or possible (with little risk) that I refrain from, similarly their are financially advantageous discussions that I choose to go against on an almost daily bases because it would be the "wrong" choice.
My point is, I put almost no value in "that's just the way it is" when I form an opinion on something, wildlife management included. So just because the SCOTUS said wildlife can be managed however the States want (even through there is a mountain of exceptions), I don't really give-a-shit. I still look at the problems and potential solutions apply my own flavor of morality to come to my own thoughts and conclusions. With regard to wildlife management, what we have doesn't make a lick of sense, it's undemocratic and flies in the face of almost everything people value about America.
I will always support wildlife, but I've stopped supporting the structure that governs the preferential allowance and allocation of wildlife to be killed through hunting fishing by a select group.
Why does "more" have the be the metric we measure by? Why not "better" or "equal"?You really think that a federal managed system would result in more opportunity? For r/nr? I doubt it.
I think that's a very fair point and I can see the rationale. My perspective is that I have a moral obligation to object to, or sometimes even advocate against, things that are central to human worth and health. I just don't believe that going on vacation to hunt deer/elk/antelope falls into that category. That sounds a little glib but I'm not sure how else to put it.I tried to read this thread and I just can't, it's too long with too much bitching. But I'd like to respond to this point
How often does reality dictate your opinion on a topic? I'd argue that most of my decisions in life are based on my own morality and outlook on how I think life should work as opposed to how it actually works.
There is multitude of things that are either legal or possible (with little risk) that I refrain from, similarly their are financially advantageous discussions that I choose to go against on an almost daily bases because it would be the "wrong" choice.
My point is, I put almost no value in "that's just the way it is" when I form an opinion on something, wildlife management included. So just because the SCOTUS said wildlife can be managed however the States want (even through there is a mountain of exceptions), I don't really give-a-shit. I still look at the problems and potential solutions apply my own flavor of morality to come to my own thoughts and conclusions. With regard to wildlife management, what we have doesn't make a lick of sense, it's undemocratic and flies in the face of almost everything people value about America.
I will always support wildlife, but I've stopped supporting the structure that governs the preferential allowance and allocation of wildlife to be killed through hunting fishing by a select group.
How often does reality dictate your opinion on a topic?
Do you see the inherent contradiction here?My point is, I put almost no value in "that's just the way it is" when I form an opinion on something, wildlife management included
Again, "that's just the way it is" isn't going to be a peg I hang my hat on.Though if you look at Alaska the feds are far far less democratic than the states when it comes to wildlife management.
Ok, why? What specifically should make that activity different?I think that's a very fair point and I can see the rationale. My perspective is that I have a moral obligation to object to, or sometimes even advocate against, things that are central to human worth and health. I just don't believe that going on vacation to hunt deer/elk/antelope falls into that category. That sounds a little glib but I'm not sure how else to put it.
no, please, inform me.Do you see the inherent contradiction here?
Do you feel the same about migratory ducks?Though if you look at Alaska the feds are far far less democratic than the states when it comes to wildlife management.
Probably comes down to worldview I suppose, and what kinds of engagement are worth time and money prioritization to me.Ok, why? What specifically should make that activity different?
If you wanted a different outcome in that case, you/me/anyone else can put in the time and effort to advocate for a change. I just don't think the juice would be worth the squeeze.Personally, I don't see why you should have less access to the spring chinook that spawn in the Icicle River in Leavenworth, that are the product of a federally funded hatchery. I can't make any logical ideologic justification for it.