Wildife Task force 90-10, etc.

[madtom]

Some of these ideas are being provided to the Commissioners for regulation change. It's closer to over than you think.

Which of the recommendations would be in reg? The splitting/lumping of whitetail and mule deer I think. I’m not as studied up as you and others, but most of the big recommendations would have to be in statute as I recall.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

As it currently stands in regards to D/E/A NRs have little if anything to complain about. The only thing the TF has approved for them so far is to remove the 7250 elk quota. That is a win for NRs and WOGA. About time res elk hunters got a win.

 

[JM77]

Which of the recommendations would be in reg? The splitting/lumping of whitetail and mule deer I think. I’m not as studied up as you and others, but most of the big recommendations would have to be in statute as I recall.

I need to check, but 90/10 elk could be done in regulation, I believe. Same with removing 7250 cap.

 

[JM77]

As it currently stands in regards to D/E/A NRs have little if anything to complain about. The only thing the TF has approved for them so far is to remove the 7250 elk quota. That is a win for NRs and WOGA. About time res elk hunters got a win.

If done correctly, region elk tags could be a NR loss. But I think I know where that's headed.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

If done correctly, region elk tags could be a NR loss. But I think I know where that's headed.

You are correct it could but given past history of the commission to issue far more NR elk tags than the 7250 I would be surprised if it ended up being less.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

In testimony and debate it was never once mentioned that the commission needs to reduce the total number of NR elk tags. Why would they start now.

 

[WIbiggame]

As a NR I have ABSOLUTELY no problem with residents wanting 90/10 split and would send a public in favor of this all day everyday. What I don't like as a NR which imo, I am "entitled" to feel, is NR's gaining/losing 50% of tags bc they choose to use or not use a service offered.

I put entitled in quotes bc I don't feel entitled to anything as a NR (or as a person for that matter) but no other person should feel entitled either.

Will follow this and submit public comment when able. Thanks to all who are fighting the fight on the ground.

 

[88man]

I see nothing wrong with residents wanting the 90/10 split either. Why is compromise only good on some issues? Maybe the WGOA is the way that NR get a seat at the table indirectly or will it play out as a double edge sword and cut the NR tags to DIY hunters? I am a DIY hunter but being honest if I could get a tag thru a outfitter and it wasn't ridiculously priced I would do it or seriously consider it.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

…or will it play out as a double edge sword and cut the NR tags to DIY hunters?

As proposed, yes.

 

[dmandoes]

90-10 is the industry standard. So is outfitter and landowner tags. Why would we think any differently.

 

[JM77]

Which of the recommendations would be in reg? The splitting/lumping of whitetail and mule deer I think. I’m not as studied up as you and others, but most of the big recommendations would have to be in statute as I recall.

I need to check, but 90/10 elk could be done in regulation, I believe. Same with removing 7250 cap.

As far as I can tell after checking, deer, elk & antelope allocations are done by the Wy G&F Commission. I personally don't think changing allocation to those three could be done through the legislature after all that's happened in the past.

 

[madtom]

As far as I can tell after checking, deer, elk & antelope allocations are done by the Wy G&F Commission. I personally don't think changing allocation to those three could be done through the legislature after all that's happened in the past.

Thanks. For some reason I really thought those percentages were set in statute.

 

[Archer86]

As far as I can tell after checking, deer, elk & antelope allocations are done by the Wy G&F Commission. I personally don't think changing allocation to those three could be done through the legislature after all that's happened in the past.

Did they talk about the cap being removed? I didnt get a chance to watch all of it yet. I thought that was put out for public comment looked like more are against it then for it?

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Did they talk about the cap being removed? I didnt get a chance to watch all of it yet. I thought that was put out for public comment looked like more are against it then for it?

Yes and they approved the recommendation to the commission to remove it

 

[RobertD]

What is even the point of an outfitter for pronghorn hunting? I wonder how quickly "guided" pronghorn hunts just turn into a gatekeeping mechanism for DIY hunters.

 

[madtom]

What is even the point of an outfitter for pronghorn hunting? I wonder how quickly "guided" pronghorn hunts just turn into a gatekeeping mechanism for DIY hunters.

Somewhat related to your question: do outfitters have to provide services for clients who draw through them in the outfitter draw?

I expect at some point, an outfitter draw devolves into a hunter paying an outfitter $X,XXX to use their code in the draw. Then you go hunt by yourself. They get your money without working for it, you get better odds in the outfitter draw.

 

[RobertD]

Somewhat related to your question: do outfitters have to provide services for clients who draw through them in the outfitter draw?

I expect at some point, an outfitter draw devolves into a hunter paying an outfitter $X,XXX to use their code in the draw. Then you go hunt by yourself. They get your money without working for it, you get better odds in the outfitter draw.

Honestly, I don't know. I would assume that there is or will be some language clarifying this. I don't know who will be in charge of enforcement if it is clarified.

I do know from experience that what you describe in that last sentence happens in New Mexico, or it did one time at least.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

Another excellent point that was brought up…what’s to keep outfitters from having potential clients put in on the “regular” half of NR allocation, in addition to putting in for other clients in the outfitter half? Huge opportunity to game the system.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

Did they talk about the cap being removed? I didnt get a chance to watch all of it yet. I thought that was put out for public comment looked like more are against it then for it?

You are correct that more were against it than for it…

 

[TheTone]

Somewhat related to your question: do outfitters have to provide services for clients who draw through them in the outfitter draw?

I expect at some point, an outfitter draw devolves into a hunter paying an outfitter $X,XXX to use their code in the draw. Then you go hunt by yourself. They get your money without working for it, you get better odds in the outfitter draw.

Or even a minimum amount of time the person has to hunt with the outfitter? Like could I hunt with the outfitter for an hour or so and then spend the rest of the season on my own?