SF118 Action alert big bucks for big bucks take 2

[Carnage2011]

I just don’t believe using wildlife as currency is a great idea. There are already damage claims paid out along with other options. This is terrible idea with a slippery downhill slope.

 

[Alpine01]

This bill destroy everything. NR corporate interest are already eating up lands without transferable tags. This goes through and there will be big money in owning land here.

If what you say is correct, then there is already incentives (financial) to buy land in WYO other than hunting. Access may take a hit but unless WYO is converting State lands to private lands, that access is already under pressure as it stands.

Changing the acres to 649 would not matter much as landowners will still divide out into LLCs that are now 640 acres. Huge swaths of land will be changed by this. Think about the rock springs grazing association, Stratton sheep company. Hell we just recently lost access on the stone ranch as it sold to NR investors who were primarily buying for access to tags in elk 22.

WYO regs already address this: Ch 44, Section 8 - "Any lands purchased or subdivided for the primary purpose of obtaining landowner licenses shall not be eligible for landowner licenses." Is WYO G&F not enforcing current regs?

End result will be less land available for ranching, especially sheep as sheep are not favored by hunters. NW Colorado saw several sheep properties taken out of sheep production when transferable tags came on board. Same will happen in WY.

I think this argument is mostly BS. Sheep ranching, whether for wool or for meat production, has been on the decline since 1940. Sheep production now is 10% what it was in WWII. Multiple factors contribute; loss of US textile industry, US consumption of lamb/mutton, improved beef, pork, and chicken production methods (good or bad depending on your POV), weather (cold winters, dry summers), competition from NZ and Australia, etc. Are there isolated examples where a rancher said "forget raising sheep, I can make more money from wild game hunters."? Coulld be, but they were likely already on the very low financial end of the sheep producers to begin with.

The other major impact will be the end of Access Yes, the end of HMAs and the end of walk-in access. Those programs will be all but gone. Simply put they will not be able to compete with the big money from the tags and leasi g. Transferable tags are the biggest reason why Colorados access programs struggle. Raymond in 22 will be gone. The Tipton ranch access gone, any access we can get in 118, will be gone.

Potentially, yes. But all of these programs are voluntary by the landowners so are at risk whether there are transferable tags or not. Many hunter access programs, including those in CO, struggle due to lack of funding for states to compensate landowners for opening up their properties to hunting vs putting it into some other form of production. Suggest you look at PERC (headquartered in Bozeman) as one example of a pro-conservation group that has looked at this topic in detail for quite some time.

First and foremost there needs to be landowner quotas. There currently are none. Every available tag in a unit can go to landowners prior to the draw.

Doesn't really solve the potential big $$$ spree that has been raised. Could make it worse as the "supply" is cut but the demand hasn't changed. More $$$'s to fewer landowners that get one of the quota tags. It would allow more tags to make it to the draw portion which is good for the average hunter. But passing a change that takes away from an existing entitlement will be challenging and has the potential to further discourage landowners from participating in any hunting access programs whether they get a quota tag or not. If WYO is going to screw the landowner, two can play at that game. They can simply close their land to the public and sell "access" rather than tags. They already have that right.

A quota would prevent the sub-dividing of property and many other problems.

Again - WYO already has regs around subdivision for the purposes of getting landowner tags. Are these not being enforced?

How on earth would landowners benefit from the headaches of public HMA and Walk-in programs when they can make big $ off transferable tags?

Landowners can already make big $'s off their land, be it hunting related or not. And many are mutually exclusive.

I am not a fan of transferable tags that can then be sold on the open market. Monetizing a public resource within a private transaction is generally wrong. But the arguments so far have been mostly scare tactics of what might happen with an underlying angst around losing their historical share of the pie. If the goal of this bill is to give landowners a bigger incentive to support and expand habitat improvement that results in a larger and healthier wildlife population, then that benefits everyone. I think there are better ways of achieving that goal than the current bill. As Big Fin has said before, we need to focus on putting more animals on the landscape rather than arguing who gets to kill the last elk.

 

[Dave N]

Just how would you "prove" someone bought enough acreage JUST for the tag?

 

[Treeshark]

But the arguments so far have been mostly scare tactics of what might happen with an underlying angst around losing their historical share of the pie.

Awesome post @Alpine01, and you nailed it in my opinion with the above sentence. There is a visceral, emotional reaction to this one for the very reason you outlined. Renowned philosopher Joe Rogan elegantly explained this behavior phenomenon with his Chimpanzee Birthday Cake observations.

I feel people get themselves twisted into a knot trying to justify their feelings on this one with logic, when they’d be better off just coming out and saying “I’m against them because I just don’t like the thought of it.”

 

[Alpine01]

Just how would you "prove" someone bought enough acreage JUST for the tag?

Good question for WYO G&F to answer. They wrote the reg.

But realistically, if you are going to buy 360+ acres in WYO, charging $5-$10K per hunting tag and only getting two tags (elk) isn't going to make much of a dent in the cost of purchasing/running that land. Maybe 1 or 2 months mortgage payment at best if you can get the same for deer as well and you have a 30-yr mortgage. Better have a primary source of income off the property. And if you don't need to finance the purchase, do you really need the little bit of money selling the tag brings in anyway?

 

[elks]

Have you all not paid attention to what has happened in Colorado and Utah and every other state when this occurs. I watched it happen in Colorado. It had serious problems. It creates a ton of issues and every time one of those issues were addressed the end result was always better for the land owners and worse for the public. Transferable tags, brokers, the shift of lands away from ranching to recreation, the subdividing of lands in order to qualify for more tags. Big money outfitters leasing up piles of land to get guaranteed tags. Then selling not only the tag but also forcing the use of the guide and outfitter.

I will stand firmly that the move will destroy Access YES, HMAs and Walk-in access. Everyone, resident and nonresident will see a massive decrease in access. Place's like the Rock Springs Grazing Association will shut off access as they lease to outfitters. The Tipton Ranch access will be gone, Ferris Mountain Ranch access will not survive. We have already lost the Stone Ranch to such investment companies. They brought the property for hunting rights, nothing else. Anyone buying property for hunting rights first are going to be a lot less tolerant or livestock.

Am I against it because I do not like it. Well duh, that is a very simple statement. I am against it because I have seen what it does to hunting and how big money corrupts the issue.

Lastly all wild life belongs to all the residents. It is should be managed to benefit all and not sacrifice the majority for the benefit of the few. If you support this, why not support transferable tags for everyone at all times across the board? Why can't I get a tag and sell it? By law I am equal owner as everyone else in the state.

 

[Treeshark]

I’m not very familiar with Utah or Nevada, but Colorado and New Mexico’s landowner tag systems are great.

 

[Oak]

How many states that have transferable big game tags have public big game access programs like Access Yes or Block Management?

 

[Forkyfinder]

I’m not very familiar with Utah or Nevada, but Colorado and New Mexico’s landowner tag systems are great.

So great... you havent bought any?

 

[cgasner1]

I’m not very familiar with Utah or Nevada, but Colorado and New Mexico’s landowner tag systems are great.

I’m 100% against a guy buying a tag. New Mexicos landowner tags I wish more states followed that model with and had 2 different types one for the ranch and one for public

 

[Treeshark]

I’m 100% against a guy buying a tag.

I used to feel the same way, but after gaining a better understanding of CO and especially NMs E-Plus program I have changed my opinion.

Wyoming and Montana are missing a great opportunity currently, and I predict they will eventually move in this direction. I just don’t think now is that time for Wyoming (I have heard this one is basically in the dust bin already, so nothing to get worked up over if you’re against them).

 

[cgasner1]

I used to feel the same way, but after gaining a better understanding of CO and especially NMs E-Plus program I have changed my opinion.

Wyoming and Montana are missing a great opportunity currently, and I predict they will eventually move in this direction. I just don’t think now is that time for Wyoming (I have heard this one is basically in the dust bin already, so nothing to get worked up over if you’re against them).

I wanna see some grip and grins from these tags you have bought. How have you taken advantage of what already available?

 

[SaskHunter]

The commercialization of wildlife in many states is kind of gross.

 

[elks]

I’m not very familiar with Utah or Nevada, but Colorado and New Mexico’s landowner tag systems are great.

For who? It destroyed access for the public. It has taken a ton of tags away from the general pool. It is good for those with money but bad for the public.

 

[Treeshark]

I wanna see some grip and grins from these tags you have bought. How have you taken advantage of what already available?

As @Nick87 and others have pointed out in the past, I could never be able to afford these tags myself

I am an advocate of them not for selfish reasons, but because it is what is best for the resource.

 

[Treeshark]

It destroyed access for the public. It has taken a ton of tags away from the general pool.

Actually, they do exactly the opposite.

They provide access to private land that would otherwise be off-limits, and by increasing the game populations they increases available tags (that’s why states wisely offer unit-wide tags).

 

[Forkyfinder]

As @Nick87 and others have pointed out in the past, I could never be able to afford these tags myself

I am an advocate of them not for selfish reasons, but because it is what is best for the resource.

I thought it was more cost effictive than applying for points?

 

[Nick87]

As @Nick87 and others have pointed out in the past, I could never be able to afford these tags myself

I am an advocate of them not for selfish reasons, but because it is what is best for the resource.

I never said you couldn't afford them? I have no idea what your budget is like, nor do I really care. I believe convenience is always your big pitch. So convenient you haven't bought one.

 

[Treeshark]

I believe convenience is always your big pitch. So convenient you haven't bought one.

Why would that be relevant to this discussion?

 

[Nick87]

Why would that be relevant to this discussion?

What?