Use Promo Code Randy for 20% off OutdoorClass

WY NR 50-50 special/random split...comment now

My closing paragraph….


As a non resident in 49 states, I understand that I must follow the rules set forth by either commissions or legislators of those states, and I know that non residents coming to my state (Kansas) must abide by our draw regulations. Tilting the draw odds in favor of outfitters and their wealthy hunters willing to pay over 50% more per tag does not seem like something that the “Equality State” should adopt.
 
My son will have 7 pronghorn points in 2024, I will 100% put him in for the special draw regardless of cost. $1200 isn't enough to stop me from using the special draw for myself either, don't want to wait 5 years between lope tags and I am a regular blue collar joe. Odds in the special will only get better if they go to 50-50, still not going to personally support it though
 
I assume most of you know that the 50/50 proposal died. Special and Big 5 fees going up.

Wildlife Task Force Recommends Cranking Up Out-Of-State “Big 5” Trophy Hunting Licenses

Can someone explain this Hicks quote to me?

In addition to keeping resident hunting tag prices steady, fee increases for premium tags help fuel the economy in many smaller Wyoming towns near prime hunting areas, such as Pinedale, Hicks said.

I don't understand how the price WYGF charges in the draw helps fuel the economy of smaller towns.
 
I assume most of you know that the 50/50 proposal died. Special and Big 5 fees going up.

Wildlife Task Force Recommends Cranking Up Out-Of-State “Big 5” Trophy Hunting Licenses

Can someone explain this Hicks quote to me?



I don't understand how the price WYGF charges in the draw helps fuel the economy of smaller towns.
It doesn't, if I'm remembering his comment in context correctly from Friday, he was alluding to funding for WGFD for things like access programs, roadway over passes, fencing, biological studies etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oak
My assumption was that the journalist misquoted him and that he was actually referring to the special tag prices rather than Big 5, with special tag prices perhaps giving outfitted NR better odds.
 
My assumption was that the journalist misquoted him and that he was actually referring to the special tag prices rather than Big 5, with special tag prices perhaps giving outfitted NR better odds.

I have a feeling this price hike is a long ways from actually happening. I am not aware that the Game and a fish is struggling to meet budget. The only way I can support any fee increase at all is if it is tied directly to a budget shortfall or program in need of funding.

This idea that we should just give the Game and Fish blank check on the backs of NR hunters is wrong and I would suspect it will be met with resistance.

I do not see this going well in the process since none of it has been tied to anything other than hey let’s raise the fees and if we raise the fees high enough those damn peon, poor working class NR slobs won’t be stealing the licenses that should be going to our wealthy clients…
 
I assume most of you know that the 50/50 proposal died. Special and Big 5 fees going up.

Wildlife Task Force Recommends Cranking Up Out-Of-State “Big 5” Trophy Hunting Licenses

Can someone explain this Hicks quote to me?



I don't understand how the price WYGF charges in the draw helps fuel the economy of smaller towns.
Raising prices weeds out the blue collar riff raff leaving room for a more well to do hunting population with more money to burn in those Wyoming hamlets
 
My assumption was that the journalist misquoted him and that he was actually referring to the special tag prices rather than Big 5, with special tag prices perhaps giving outfitted NR better odds.
Anecdotal evidence to re-enforce Hicks comment.

 
Anecdotal evidence to re-enforce Hicks comment.

I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist, but that was a pretty quick, direct pivot to outfitted hunters being the potential solution.

And this quote supports what I've been saying about most of western CO as well. Fewer and fewer small towns are relying upon hunting season to buoy them through the rest of the year.

Audrey Odermann of Pinedale, who owns the Lakeside Lodge, agreed that hunters don’t seem to be a particularly big segment of fall business, and haven’t been for a while.

“To be honest, we have not historically gotten a lot of reservations for hunters,” she said Wednesday in an email to Cowboy State Daily. “That of course may change, but for now most of our fall is booked with corporate retreats.”
 
I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist, but that was a pretty quick, direct pivot to outfitted hunters being the potential solution.

And this quote supports what I've been saying about most of western CO as well. Fewer and fewer small towns are relying upon hunting season to buoy them through the rest of the year.
Article is from August, but your point is still valid.
 
I was just thinking how segmented we get. Hunters: Big Game Hunters: Elk Hunters: Bull Elk Hunters: Rifle: Public Land: NR: DIY: Non-influencer

How many combinations of that string can we come up with? I worry that we, as the larger group of just "hunters" is going to lose opportunity and united voice in the long run. Every subgroup wants to tilt things in their favor a little more to the detriment of other groups.

Every once in a while, I read these threads and think of Matt Rinella's comments.
 
I think the biggest take-away is that the public comments on the proposed 50-50 ridiculousness kept it from passing again. The outfitters just keep trying these ideas over and over and over again.

But, make no mistake, they still came out pretty well with just the fee increases and the NR elk cap being removed.

Its also fair to note that they aren't done, they never will be until every hunter, R and NR alike, are having to pay them to be held by the hand to kill a deer, elk, pronghorn, etc.

I believe that the local economy influence the outfitters always tout is highly over-stated. Sure, hunters bring revenue to the State, but as time change so does how those hunters choose to spend their money.

Some people prefer to camp, some like hotels, some like Air-bnb places. Some hunters are good dining at McDonalds, others like the local steak house, some heat soup in a can in a hotel.

The one consistent thing is that outfitters are NOT looking out for any hunter except their clients.
 
I think the biggest take-away is that the public comments on the proposed 50-50 ridiculousness kept it from passing again. The outfitters just keep trying these ideas over and over and over again.

But, make no mistake, they still came out pretty well with just the fee increases and the NR elk cap being removed.

Its also fair to note that they aren't done, they never will be until every hunter, R and NR alike, are having to pay them to be held by the hand to kill a deer, elk, pronghorn, etc.

I believe that the local economy influence the outfitters always tout is highly over-stated. Sure, hunters bring revenue to the State, but as time change so does how those hunters choose to spend their money.

Some people prefer to camp, some like hotels, some like Air-bnb places. Some hunters are good dining at McDonalds, others like the local steak house, some heat soup in a can in a hotel.

The one consistent thing is that outfitters are NOT looking out for any hunter except their clients.

Just curious, do you believe the price increase and cap are a done deal? Or is it something we can still fight?

I know that I am against any increase that is necessary. The price increase seems like something that is not necessary and that it is just giving the Game and Fish a blank check… It has nothing to do with funding shortages and nothing to specific programs needing money etc…
 
What does the removal of 7250 cap mean for the NR draw allocation?
 
The outfitters are also pushing for the removal of the 7250 cap. That will certainly make them more money but will hurt the hunt experience for everyone. Removal of the cap will lead to overcrowding in the general areas. I hope the legislature doesn’t pass that.
 
The outfitters are also pushing for the removal of the 7250 cap. That will certainly make them more money but will hurt the hunt experience for everyone. Removal of the cap will lead to overcrowding in the general areas. I hope the legislature doesn’t pass that.
So will general tags be 16% NR and LQ tags stay the same?
 
Back
Top