Wildife Task force 90-10, etc.

[rwc101]

 

[brocksw]

I think where you get bogged down is that you fail to listen...

I hate the law, I also hate the AK guide requirement too.

But what you're asking me to do is ONLY going to happen one way and that is for you, as a NR and all other NR's, to take an absolute beating to get your way on it.

This law has been challenged in court, it won't be changed that way. So that's off the table.

You can try to run a ballot initiative in the most difficult state that allows ballot initiatives to pass. Keep in mind that many R's here support the wilderness restrictions on NR. Ballot initiatives are expensive, labor intensive, and time consuming in states and on issues that Residents are supportive of. Who's going to pay for it? Who's going to gather signatures? Yeah, Residents, that's who.

So that leaves a legislative fix, one that CAN be had, but like I already stated, NR's will take a beating, a thrashing actually to get it. I have NO doubt that I could call Sy right now and get him to agree to repealing the Wilderness guide law in exchange for my support of an outfitter set aside. He'd do it in a heartbeat. I could also get all the Resident support I'd need if residents get 90-10...no question. A bill sponsor is no problem, I have the very guy on speed dial that would draft it, support it, and he's wayyy up the food chain in Senate Leadership.

That's the ONLY way this will change, period. Any other waty is pissing up a rope...its all been argued and tried before.

So, the question becomes, is gaining access to wilderness without getting a Resident to sign of for you with a FREE resident guide license worth 75% of your NR tags?

Its that simple...

I'm a results driven person and if you want results I'm going to tell you upfront what it will cost and the way to get it done.

Thank you for explaining that again, Buzz. You lay out the current situation very well.

 

[JLS]

His explanation is 100% solid. I highly doubt you were going to find a lot of resident support for repealing the law, which really only leaves the option he laid out as a negotiation, and I guarantee you that won’t be pretty in the long run.

 

[Sytes]

So that leaves a legislative fix, one that CAN be had, but like I already stated, NR's will take a beating, a thrashing actually to get it. I have NO doubt that I could call Sy right now and get him to agree to repealing the Wilderness guide law in exchange for my support of an outfitter set aside. He'd do it in a heartbeat. I could also get all the Resident support I'd need if residents get 90-10...no question. A bill sponsor is no problem, I have the very guy on speed dial that would draft it, support it, and he's wayyy up the food chain in Senate Leadership.

Buzz, putting aside our, whatever,

If it was offered for an 85/15 split with 5% of NR tags dedicated to their welfare, that does not exceed their wilderness only WYOGA State set-aside checks?
Sure seems an overall 5% is an exceptional amount of gauranteed clients.

 

[brocksw]

20 yrs ago ND was a blue state. Now we're a red super majority. Things can change. I don't believe stopping the conversations circled around the issues will yeild any positive results. Very similar to Buzz's advice on another thread. If you don't apply there is 0% chance of drawing the tag. Like drawing tags, continually building support through debate/conversation and keeping avenues open and ideas flowing for future opportunities to make change give us a non-zero chance to tackle these issues. Asserting that anyone should stop the conversation seems a lot like not applying to the lottery for the chance to engage, or more specifically being prevented from having the chance to engage.

 

[Archer86]

Buzz, putting aside our, whatever,

If it was offered for an 85/15 split with 5% of NR tags dedicated to their welfare, that does not exceed their wilderness only WYOGA State set-aside checks?
Sure seems an overall 5% is an exceptional amount of gauranteed clients.

What in that for the residents of the state wyoga isn't the only hurdle.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, putting aside our, whatever,

If it was offered for an 85/15 split with 5% of NR tags dedicated to their welfare, that does not exceed their wilderness only WYOGA State set-aside checks?
Sure seems an overall 5% is an exceptional amount of gauranteed clients.

Nope, Residents wouldn't support it, nothing in it for them. I think at least half the Residents like the law, and getting them to support an effort to repeal the law, that's going nowhere unless they get something out of it.

I also don't think many NR's would support a 25% reduction in their available tags so they can hunt designated wilderness.

I wouldn't support that as a NR hunter, no way would I give the outfitters 25% of my tags when I can access wilderness via finding a Resident to hunt with. I'm also strongly opposed to set asides for any special interest, so for me, it would be off the table. Juice isn't worth the squeeze.

I'm telling you what it would take, and you aren't listening. I live here, I know the players, I have the pulse of the Resident hunters, and know full well what WOGA wants.

There's exactly one way to get this repealed and one way only.

 

[BuzzH]

20 yrs ago ND was a blue state. Now we're a red super majority. Things can change. I don't believe stopping the conversations circled around the issues will yeild any positive results. Very similar to Buzz's advice on another thread. If you don't apply there is 0% chance of drawing the tag. Like drawing tags, continually building support through debate/conversation and keeping avenues open and ideas flowing for future opportunities to make change give us a non-zero chance to tackle these issues. Asserting that anyone should stop the conversation seems a lot like not applying to the lottery for the chance to engage, or more specifically being prevented from having the chance to engage.

I'm not saying stop the conversation, I'm saying there's a way but IMO, its too high a price to pay when you have other avenues to legally hunt Wilderness for free.

The hunting isn't that great in the wilderness anyway, certainly not good enough to give up 75% of the tags you have right now.

Its a failed crusade.

For the record, what other way is there to do this? Its been law for decades, challenged unsuccessfully in court, and at least half the residents support the law?

Talking won't change anything, so if you want it changed, I've told you what the cost is.

 

[brocksw]

Talking won't change anything, so if you want it changed, I've told you what the cost is.

You might be right about that Buzz.

 

[BuzzH]

You might be right about that Buzz.

Its a crap message to be sure, and if there was another way, I would have already tried it or thought of it.

Its a one way deal, and the deal is with the devil or it simply won't be happening.

 

[Oak]

If hunters are actually going to rally, there are far more consequential issues to rally around than the WY wilderness law, IMO.

 

[brocksw]

I'm not saying stop the conversation, I'm saying there's a way but IMO, its too high a price to pay when you have other avenues to legally hunt Wilderness for free.

The hunting isn't that great in the wilderness anyway, certainly not good enough to give up 75% of the tags you have right now.

Its a failed crusade.

For the record, what other way is there to do this? Its been law for decades, challenged unsuccessfully in court, and at least half the residents support the law?

Talking won't change anything, so if you want it changed, I've told you what the cost is.

Buzz, have you ever seen a breakdown of the WY game and fish revenue? I'm curious to know what percentage of it is subsidized by NR tag fees. Then also the projection after the fee increases take place.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, have you ever seen a breakdown of the WY game and fish revenue? I'm curious to know what percentage of it is subsidized by NR tag fees. Then also the projection after the fee increases take place.

Yes, I think 70% of license revenue is funded from NR's.

Of the total budget about 60% IIRC.

Projections will be impossible to know because its hard to say how many of the special priced tags will sell. I can tell you that in a vast majority of deer and pronghorn units, they won't sell many, if any at the special fee prices.

Think its safe to say that bull elk tags will all sell out in the special fee pricing.

 

[brocksw]

If hunters are actually going to rally, there are far more consequential issues to rally around than the WY wilderness law, IMO.

Sure. But we don't always have a choice. It's why this issue exists in my opinion. Timing, current variables and environment, lots of factors that go into everything. It's all somewhat fluid. Sometimes we just get grid locked or stuck on certain issues. So a resolution to this issue could be really unsuspecting.

Making up an example, perhaps bighorn sheep populations in WY tank. Residents want to make it a once In a lifetime opportunity for residents only. This could be a bargaining chip. Very broad and simplified example there, I'm not saying that should happen or will happen.

 

[BuzzH]

If hunters are actually going to rally, there are far more consequential issues to rally around than the WY wilderness law, IMO.

That's a fact...jack.

 

[brocksw]

Think its safe to say that bull elk tags will all sell out in the special fee pricing.

Agreed.

 

[BuzzH]

Sure. But we don't always have a choice. It's why this issue exists in my opinion. Timing, current variables and environment, lots of factors that go into thing. Everything is somewhat fluid. Sometimes we just get grid locked or stuck on certain issues. So a resolution to this issue could be really unsuspecting.

Making up an example, perhaps bighorn sheep populations in WY tank. Residents want to make it a once In a lifetime opportunity for residents only. This could be a bargaining chip. Very broad and simplified example there, I'm not saying that should happen or will happen.

Uh, not to be opposite, but to point out the obvious...

What bargaining chip would there be if sheep tags go to resident only and once in a lifetime?

No NR's draw tags, no NR's hunt in, or out of the wilderness Wyoming residents can still hunt wilderness...not seeing the angle.

There is going to have to be something in it for Residents AND WOGA or its not changing.

 

[brocksw]

Uh, not to be opposite, but to point out the obvious...

What bargaining chip would there be if sheep tags go to resident only and once in a lifetime?

No NR's draw tags, no NR's hunt in, or out of the wilderness Wyoming residents can still hunt wilderness...not seeing the angle.

There is going to have to be something in it for Residents AND WOGA or its not changing.

"Very broad and simplified example there, I'm not saying that should happen or will happen."

 

[Oak]

Sure. But we don't always have a choice. It's why this issue exists in my opinion. Timing, current variables and environment, lots of factors that go into everything. It's all somewhat fluid. Sometimes we just get grid locked or stuck on certain issues. So a resolution to this issue could be really unsuspecting.

Making up an example, perhaps bighorn sheep populations in WY tank. Residents want to make it a once In a lifetime opportunity for residents only. This could be a bargaining chip. Very broad and simplified example there, I'm not saying that should happen or will happen.

I understand what you're saying, but NR wouldn't even be sitting at the table in that example, much less have chips to bargain.

 

[brocksw]

I understand what you're saying, but NR wouldn't even be sitting at the table in that example, much less have chips to bargain.

Never know. ND residents didn't want to give up 1 nonresident bighorn tag either, but it happened. Politicians have ties on other issues and can be influenced. Like I said, things change and we can't predict the future, obviously.