Wildife Task force 90-10, etc.

[Deleted member 16014]

...The whole thing, to me, feels like it was written to stir emotions.

Par for the course for Eastman's, which has about as much credibility as the National Enquirer IMO.

To faux name drop his "connections" in the task force is typical pandering to a click bait base. This is Guy's "reporting" on a class action lawsuit: "If I had to guess, the Game and Fish Department is probably in the process of interviewing good defense attorneys, as the class action lawsuits are certain to fly."

If an outfitter set aside and transferable tags legitimately hit the table in a compromise for 90/10 D/E/A, I will vehemently oppose; and I bet there are quite a few residents who draw the line there as well.

My two cents.

 

[Treeshark]

If an outfitter set aside and transferable tags legitimately hit the table in a compromise for 90/10 D/E/A, I will vehemently oppose

Im not sure if they’re really part of of what’s coming in the future or not, but this article isn’t the first time I’ve heard of it being a possibility. Makes sense though, the task force will certainly have make some compromises in order to appease outfitters/large property holders in order to push this through.

Im not sure why it would be a surprise to anyone on Hunt Talk, I seem to recall some discussions buzzing around on here about it recently

 

[WYelker]

https://blog.eastmans.com/wyoming-passes-90-10-the-worst-article-youll-read-this-year/

It is a hack article. Like many of the recent articles I have seen from Eastmans. They are starting to go the way of main stream media. Big on emotions weak on content. Sadly this article is filled with a ton of could happen, might happen, etc. No actual facts presented and in the end some of "facts" numbers he posted are complete bs. First of all the 90/10 for deer elk and lope would be only for draw units for residents. So region G allocations would not be changed at all. Since those are general units. Could we decide to cut NR tags in G and H? Sure we could but we can do that now without 90/10.

Secondly, if it went 90/10 for elk, that would simply mean that any tags lost in draw units would be added into the general pool as I believe the number of NR elk tags is set in statute.

Yes pronghorn would take a hit for NR.

As for the next steps of the taskforce... I will admit, I am surprised how quickly we got to 90/10 for the 5. However the battle over the other 3 has not even really started yet. There is a ton of speculation on what might be on the table, but where we end up is anyone's guess. I do know this, the more residents I speak with about the matter the more I realize that people are against transferable tags and also against outfitter set aside.

As for the class action lawsuit. That is funny. I mean after all people bought points. They paid for a point. The result is they got a point. There was never anything else promised other than you can buy a point.

I laughed at this line... If the state does not change the draw.... You will virtually have 0 chance of drawing a moose tag with under 20 points as they have gotten rid of the random tags. The truth is the odds of drawing a random tag is way closer to 0% than it is to 1%. Last year for moose there were 7 random tags total and over 2000 applicants. Odds of getting the random was around .3%.

 

[WYelker]

We can all get behind them to STOP transferable LO tags! It will ruin WY hunting for many.

I agree. I feel many of us in WY would keep current quotas rather than go with transferable landowner tags. Also there is so much left to be said about 90/10 on deer elk and lope. Transferable landowner tags will work against the access programs in everyway.

 

[Treeshark]

But it would be nice to have a way to hunt WY more often for NRs and would certainly benefit resident landowners/outfitters , so it’s kind of a wash

 

[WYelker]

But it would be nice to have a way to hunt WY more often for NRs and would certainly benefit resident landowners/outfitters , so it’s kind of a wash

What is a wash? Transferable tags?

 

[BuzzH]

Interesting article recently put out by Eastmans, talk of class-action lawsuit to recoup point $.

Also mentioned future transferable landowner as part of the 90/10 DEA initiative (finally something from the Task Force we can get all get behind!).

Eastmans don't even understand the law. There is not a legal leg to stand on in that regard. The right for states to discriminate against nr hunters was reaffirmed by federal legislation.

It's an emotion filled article to pander to nr subscribers.

 

[cahunter805]

But it would be nice to have a way to hunt WY more often for NRs and would certainly benefit resident landowners/outfitters , so it’s kind of a wash

It would benefit wealthy NR hunters and most likely there would be much less access to the private land programs and I’d suspect even some outfitters losing their leases since the rancher could just sell the tags himself.

 

[Treeshark]

What can you do? Gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette.

 

[DFS]

It would benefit wealthy NR hunters and most likely there would be much less access to the private land programs and I’d suspect even some outfitters losing their leases since the rancher could just sell the tags himself.

Unintended consequences of promoting western hunting has quickly turned things into the kings deer. A lot of people are getting exactly what they deserve, normal hunters are the ones left behind.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

If an outfitter set aside and transferable tags legitimately hit the table in a compromise for 90/10 D/E/A, I will vehemently oppose; and I bet there are quite a few residents who draw the line there as well.

I hope you are correct. A lot of the people I talk to either don't care or they support both since drawing LQ areas isn't necessarily a slam-dunk for residents either. At the TF open house I attended there were residents advocating for RFW in Wyoming.

 

[Treeshark]

Side thought that popped up while reading the article- I do wonder how much longer Region G will be a general region.

 

[Treeshark]

I bet there are quite a few residents who draw the line there as well.

How bold of those residents to “draw the line” at the exact point at which this begins to impact them!

 

[RobertD]

No actual facts presented and in the end some of "facts" numbers he posted are complete bs. First of all the 90/10 for deer elk and lope would be only for draw units for residents. So region G allocations would not be changed at all. Since those are general units. Could we decide to cut NR tags in G and H? Sure we could but we can do that now without 90/10.

Yeah, that's exactly what I thought, he just used G because of name recognition and popularity. Just after the traffic and the clicks.

 

[idahohuntr]

The Eastmans article can't be serious...the state does not owe anyone a tag, especially a NR, and as such they have the right to change allocations or the entire draw system as they see fit. Full stop.

What I do see here, and have mentioned before, is maybe all these Eastmans/Epic/GoHunt/Huntinfool commerical outfits are starting to panic as they realize their businesses might fold like a cheap suit when the NR opportunity in the west is reduced to a handful of doe/cow tags in marginal units? If these were public companies...the adage buy low/sell high...I'd be selling high because I honestly think they are at peak value and doubt many/any of them will be around in the future. There is simply too much demand and too little supply to support much NR allocation in any of these states.

 

[RobertD]

The Eastmans article can't be serious...the state does not owe anyone a tag, especially a NR, and as such they have the right to change allocations or the entire draw system as they see fit. Full stop.

What I do see here, and have mentioned before, is maybe all these Eastmans/Epic/GoHunt/Huntinfool commerical outfits are starting to panic as they realize their businesses might fold like a cheap suit when the NR opportunity in the west is reduced to a handful of doe/cow tags in marginal units? If these were public companies...the adage buy low/sell high...I'd be selling high because I honestly think they are at peak value and doubt many/any of them will be around in the future. There is simply too much demand and too little supply to support much NR allocation in any of these states.

I like this post, might be worth starting a thread to discuss/debate

 

[Treeshark]

First to be excluded: NRs without a lot of money.
Next: Residents without a lot of money.
Last: People with a lot of money.

 

[DFS]

I like this post, might be worth starting a thread to discuss/debate

Not much to discuss these people are cutting their own throats promoting western hunting and it’s getting to the point you have to be wealthy to play the game. Normal people without fat wallets won’t be hunting in other states.

 

[DFS]

First to be excluded: NRs without a lot of money.
Next: Residents without a lot of money.
Last: People with a lot of money.

Spot on

 

[cahunter805]

What can you do? Gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette.

Another problem with LO tags is they are pulled from the quota before any other tags draw. If NR tags are cut and then more NR landowners apply for tags due to being able to sell them there might not even be tags available for NR draw.