Wildife Task force 90-10, etc.

[RobertD]

If 1/2 of the limited tags are taken from nonres that is a heck of a lot of revenue that the WG&F "banks on" every year! It's really nothing more than a gamble that this revenue loss will be made up for by selling nonres left over and doe tags. If it takes twice as long for nonres to draw tags a lot of nonres will likely draw tags and quit paying expensive pref pt fees. Other nonres likely won't start applying for limited tags when draw odds dramatically leap. With so few tags offered to nonres and high pref pt fees why start applying for tags with insane draw odds?

To top it off, there is no guarantee the revenue losses by cutting nonres tags in 1/2 will be made up for by selling 2nd choice and doe/cow tags. 2021 is a great example. Almost 0 2nd choice buck tags are issued after the first draw and doe tags have been cut or eliminated in almost every antelope unit in Wyo. In years with bad winterkill there could potentially be 0 2nd choice and 0 doe tags offered so no revenue to make up for cutting nonres limited tags in 1/2!

There are great options to draw tags in neighboring states like Colo where 35% of limited tags are offered to nonres and nonres can hunt elk every year!

For elk, there will be a hard number of tags for NRs that won't change, as there is now. And for pronghorn there will still be tons of tags that roll over from being undersubscribed by residents. Not sure about what happens with deer.

I don't know the whole thing inside and out, and not here to argue, I just want to point out that it won't just be "2nd choice and doe/cow tags" for us NRs after the change to 90/10

 

[BuzzH]

If 1/2 of the limited tags are taken from nonres that is a heck of a lot of revenue that the WG&F "banks on" every year! It's really nothing more than a gamble that this revenue loss will be made up for by selling nonres left over and doe tags. If it takes twice as long for nonres to draw tags a lot of nonres will likely draw tags and quit paying expensive pref pt fees. Other nonres likely won't start applying for limited tags when draw odds dramatically leap. With so few tags offered to nonres and high pref pt fees why start applying for tags with insane draw odds?

To top it off, there is no guarantee the revenue losses by cutting nonres tags in 1/2 will be made up for by selling 2nd choice and doe/cow tags. 2021 is a great example. Almost 0 2nd choice buck tags are issued after the first draw and doe tags have been cut or eliminated in almost every antelope unit in Wyo. In years with bad winterkill there could potentially be 0 2nd choice and 0 doe tags offered so no revenue to make up for cutting nonres limited tags in 1/2!

There are great options to draw tags in neighboring states like Colo where 35% of limited tags are offered to nonres and nonres can hunt elk every year!

What percentage of CO moose, goat, and sheep permits go to NR's?

What percentage of CO RFW tags can residents apply for?

Wyoming GF will lose less than $200,000 in revenue from 90-10 for the big-5 and elk...which we can recover by charging an additional ONE dollar ($1) on a conservation license.

The sky isn't falling...and NR's can always flock to CO, the land of opportunity.

 

[BuzzH]

For elk, there will be a hard number of tags for NRs that won't change, as there is now. And for pronghorn there will still be tons of tags that roll over from being undersubscribed by residents. Not sure about what happens with deer.

I don't know the whole thing inside and out, and not here to argue, I just want to point out that it won't just be "2nd choice and doe/cow tags" for us NRs after the change to 90/10

Region wide deer tags for NR's won't change from current quota's, other than normal fluctuations due to deer numbers (biological reasons). Those numbers may increase or decrease depending on biologists recommendation (science).

LQ deer will be cut in half, and that's where the most significant loss in funding will happen.

NR's will still be drawing about half of all pronghorn tags, just like they are now.

Sebastian hasn't crunched any numbers...other than the one number that matters to him. That's point creep and his inability to party apply with strangers from the internet...that he cares about. That will impact him, and that's ALL he cares about.

The rest of his concerns about GF funding, local communities, or the economy of Wyoming, he couldn't care less about any of those. Just talking points to keep him in party applications...that's all it is.

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

i like that chart jmiss has,,,,the numbers and the money talks.unlike you buzz who "doesnt worry" about the little guys" see a couple of posts up,, that just scratch buy on gas station sales and tourism/out of state travelers,,,personally i see alot of "little folks" that love it when i pull in and buy $100 +of diesel and some snacks.your hurting those folks too buzz.just saying that maybe not all residents are for it either,,lol

 

[BuzzH]

i like that chart jmiss has,,,,the numbers and the money talks.unlike you buzz who "doesnt worry" about the little guys" see a couple of posts up,, that just scratch buy on gas station sales and tourism/out of state travelers,,,personally i see alot of "little folks" that love it when i pull in and buy $100 +of diesel and some snacks.your hurting those folks too buzz.just saying that maybe not all residents are for it either,,lol

I haven't found any Resident hunters that are opposed to drawing more tags in better areas...but, I don't talk to them but every day.

If the gas stations are worried about selling diesel and junk food to NR hunters (that Resident hunters also purchase), maybe they should start providing some funding to the GF and State trust.

How can I "hurt" someone that does nothing but take? They get what they get and should be thankful for the freebie that wildlife makes for them. Something for nothing, what is that called again?

I like that chart too...just what I told you, that you wrongly claimed...NR's do not fund 82% of the GF budget.

 

[Big Fin]

@jimss - I sent you a PM the other day. Please respond. You are only allowed one registered user name. Let me know which one you want to use.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

I knew it was @EYJONAS! all along.

 

[goodhunt]

I have a question, why did we land on 90-10? Is there any specific logic or math there or was it just something someone pulled out of a hat? Why not start a new trend: 95-5? Or better yet 97-3. If it's because that's what every state around you is doing, that doesn't seem like a real intelligent way of doing it. If you made it 95-5 and the 5 had to use an outfitter then you wouldn't have to argue with anybody on here. Of course then maybe every other state would move to that and there wouldn't be a lot of use for a diy forum anymore. Plus the supposed "alphas", as someone called them, that are on this committee could focus on ways to add to the resource instead of divide it up. That seems like a way more productive use of time. I'm sure it won't change any opinions but just some food for thought. Whatever you guys in WY decide to do, I hope it works out for you and makes all the residents happy. I'll be happy with whatever the outcome since I'm not a resident of your state and I respect your right to divide up your resource as you see fit. Best case I'll come hunt there one day. Worst case I'll eat my points and spend my time hunting somewhere else.

 

[shootbrownelk]

If 1/2 of the limited tags are taken from nonres that is a heck of a lot of revenue that the WG&F "banks on" every year! It's really nothing more than a gamble that this revenue loss will be made up for by selling nonres left over and doe tags. If it takes twice as long for nonres to draw tags a lot of nonres will likely draw tags and quit paying expensive pref pt fees. Other nonres likely won't start applying for limited tags when draw odds dramatically leap. With so few tags offered to nonres and high pref pt fees why start applying for tags with insane draw odds?

To top it off, there is no guarantee the revenue losses by cutting nonres tags in 1/2 will be made up for by selling 2nd choice and doe/cow tags. 2021 is a great example. Almost 0 2nd choice buck tags are issued after the first draw and doe tags have been cut or eliminated in almost every antelope unit in Wyo. In years with bad winterkill there could potentially be 0 2nd choice and 0 doe tags offered so no revenue to make up for cutting nonres limited tags in 1/2!

There are great options to draw tags in neighboring states like Colo where 35% of limited tags are offered to nonres and nonres can hunt elk every year!

Have at it, Colofornia here we come!

 

[BuzzH]

I have a question, why did we land on 90-10? Is there any specific logic or math there or was it just something someone pulled out of a hat? Why not start a new trend: 95-5? Or better yet 97-3. If it's because that's what every state around you is doing, that doesn't seem like a real intelligent way of doing it. If you made it 95-5 and the 5 had to use an outfitter then you wouldn't have to argue with anybody on here. Of course then maybe every other state would move to that and there wouldn't be a lot of use for a diy forum anymore. Plus the supposed "alphas", as someone called them, that are on this committee could focus on ways to add to the resource instead of divide it up. That seems like a way more productive use of time. I'm sure it won't change any opinions but just some food for thought. Whatever you guys in WY decide to do, I hope it works out for you and makes all the residents happy. I'll be happy with whatever the outcome since I'm not a resident of your state and I respect your right to divide up your resource as you see fit. Best case I'll come hunt there one day. Worst case I'll eat my points and spend my time hunting somewhere else.

Standard for most every State and it does make sense.

In particular when paired with region wide deer tag quotas, and full price elk quotas that ARE NOT based on an allocation split.

 

[shootbrownelk]

I have a question, why did we land on 90-10? Is there any specific logic or math there or was it just something someone pulled out of a hat? Why not start a new trend: 95-5? Or better yet 97-3. If it's because that's what every state around you is doing, that doesn't seem like a real intelligent way of doing it. If you made it 95-5 and the 5 had to use an outfitter then you wouldn't have to argue with anybody on here. Of course then maybe every other state would move to that and there wouldn't be a lot of use for a diy forum anymore. Plus the supposed "alphas", as someone called them, that are on this committee could focus on ways to add to the resource instead of divide it up. That seems like a way more productive use of time. I'm sure it won't change any opinions but just some food for thought. Whatever you guys in WY decide to do, I hope it works out for you and makes all the residents happy. I'll be happy with whatever the outcome since I'm not a resident of your state and I respect your right to divide up your resource as you see fit. Best case I'll come hunt there one day. Worst case I'll eat my points and spend my time hunting somewhere else.

Or Wyoming could do like ND or SD, NO nonresident tags for elk moose or sheep, sound fair to you?

 

[goodhunt]

Standard for most every State and it does make sense.

In particular when paired with region wide deer tag quotas, and full price elk quotas that ARE not based on an allocation split.

I get that it's a standard for most western states, I'm just questioning why it's the standard. I also understand the region wide deer and elk quotas (i.e general tag). Seems to me this gives you even more reason to do something besides the 90-10. Why not allow NR access to those general tags only and keep all the limited quota tags for residents? Are you just feeling generous? I'm trying to draft an argument to my state congressman right now for why we should work to increase opportunity to non residents. It's pretty easy looking at it from an economics standpoint (i.e $ colorado rakes in). But for some reason when you start going over that 10% mark residents start getting antsy. I chalk it up to greed. Probably not questions that can be answered here but like I said, something to think about. No reason to be like the other guy just for the sake of being like the other guy.

 

[goodhunt]

Or Wyoming could do like ND or SD, NO nonresident tags for elk moose or sheep, sound fair to you?

100%. It's their moose and sheep, they can do as they like. Do I think it's in the best interest of the resource, no. But there are are legitimate arguments against that. I'm simply trying to point out that it might be beneficial to think more broadly than just copying how your neighbor chooses to plow their field. You also shouldn't act like you are doing the resource or the majority of landowners both in quanity and geographic size of the state (i.e all U.S citizens) any favors by cutting opportunity to NR. It's perfectly fine to say "I want a greater opportunity for myself at the expense of others". I would hope that the people making these decisions recognize that's exactly what they are doing. I have a background in finance/economics and virtually all theory in that field is based on the assumption that people will act in a logical manner that benefits them. Again, 0 issues with it, I just want a spade to be called a spade.

 

[BuzzH]

I get that it's a standard for most western states, I'm just questioning why it's the standard. I also understand the region wide deer and elk quotas (i.e general tag). Seems to me this gives you even more reason to do something besides the 90-10. Why not allow NR access to those general tags only and keep all the limited quota tags for residents? Are you just feeling generous? I'm trying to draft an argument to my state congressman right now for why we should work to increase opportunity to non residents. It's pretty easy looking at it from an economics standpoint (i.e $ colorado rakes in). But for some reason when you start going over that 10% mark residents start getting antsy. I chalk it up to greed. Probably not questions that can be answered here but like I said, something to think about. No reason to be like the other guy just for the sake of being like the other guy.

Argue with someone else...I've given you valid reasons for 90-10 and why that split makes sense for all kinds of reasons.

Residents live here for a reason one big one is hunting opportunity and outdoors lifestyle.

 

[BuzzH]

100%. It's their moose and sheep, they can do as they like. Do I think it's in the best interest of the resource, no. But there are are legitimate arguments against that. I'm simply trying to point out that it might be beneficial to think more broadly than just copying how your neighbor chooses to plow their field. You also shouldn't act like you are doing the resource or the majority of landowners both in quanity and geographic size of the state (i.e all U.S citizens) any favors by cutting opportunity to NR. It's perfectly fine to say "I want a greater opportunity for myself at the expense of others". I would hope that the people making these decisions recognize that's exactly what they are doing. I have a background in finance/economics and virtually all theory in that field is based on the assumption that people will act in a logical manner that benefits them. Again, 0 issues with it, I just want a spade to be called a spade.

Sounds like you have work to do in your own state...let Wyoming Residents worry about Wyoming issues.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

I'd take 95-5

 

[JM77]

100%. It's their moose and sheep, they can do as they like. Do I think it's in the best interest of the resource, no. But there are are legitimate arguments against that. I'm simply trying to point out that it might be beneficial to think more broadly than just copying how your neighbor chooses to plow their field. You also shouldn't act like you are doing the resource or the majority of landowners both in quanity and geographic size of the state (i.e all U.S citizens) any favors by cutting opportunity to NR. It's perfectly fine to say "I want a greater opportunity for myself at the expense of others". I would hope that the people making these decisions recognize that's exactly what they are doing. I have a background in finance/economics and virtually all theory in that field is based on the assumption that people will act in a logical manner that benefits them. Again, 0 issues with it, I just want a spade to be called a spade.

If I understand you correctly, if Wyoming would have just started allocating licenses 90/10 from the beginning that we would be all good?

 

[shootbrownelk]

100%. It's their moose and sheep, they can do as they like. Do I think it's in the best interest of the resource, no. But there are are legitimate arguments against that. I'm simply trying to point out that it might be beneficial to think more broadly than just copying how your neighbor chooses to plow their field. You also shouldn't act like you are doing the resource or the majority of landowners both in quanity and geographic size of the state (i.e all U.S citizens) any favors by cutting opportunity to NR. It's perfectly fine to say "I want a greater opportunity for myself at the expense of others". I would hope that the people making these decisions recognize that's exactly what they are doing. I have a background in finance/economics and virtually all theory in that field is based on the assumption that people will act in a logical manner that benefits them. Again, 0 issues with it, I just want a spade to be called a spade.

That's racist!

 

[goodhunt]

Sounds like you have work to do in your own state...let Wyoming Residents worry about Wyoming issues.

Will do Buzz. No hard feelings here. Good luck out there. I will legitimately pray that you pull the tag your after.

 

[BuzzH]

Will do Buzz. No hard feelings here. Good luck out there. I will legitimately pray that you pull the tag your after.

Don't waste your time worrying about me.

I'm concerned about Residents, in particular those that are just starting out having better chances to draw quality tags. The potential advocates I see helping Wyoming with its wildlife, habitat, and public lands the most are Residents that live here...and hopefully 90% of the tags motivates them to do more.