WY NR hunters bend over...

[dan.kirkpatrick]

hope it doesnt go thru,,,thats alot of non res moneys that wyoming will end up losing out on as people will find other more affordable opertunitys in other states...and the "special" tag price is already one of the highest around,,,I think they should leave at least the deer,elk and antelope as they have it.

 

[Z Barebow]

So let me get this straight: the Wyoming Game & Fish is strapped financially (long term) and cutting access programs, overflights and fisheries programs, and these guys think reducing the NR revenue stream by 50% is a good thing?

If i were cynical, and I am, I would think this is more about breaking WGFD's back and pushing them into a Utah model more than it is about anything else. Especially after seeing some of this brain trust in action.

They're banking on residents supporting this. If i were a resident of WY, i would be pretty pissed off at how the Legislature is dealing woth hunters & anglers.

RE: Revenue stream. Precisely my point. If the G& F has revenue shortfalls, how will driving NR's away fix revenue issues? They won't. And after several years, the SFW buzzards circle the crippled G&F and the Utah model is implemented.

This is not about raising money. Everyone is looking at the proposal for face value. Look into the background of the authors of this bill. Think a couple steps down the road. I smell SFW types.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I agree.

Jaggi has parroted SFW for a long, long time. Even back when i was there in 06 & 07.

This is about another expo. Starve the agency so you can get tags for your own welfare system.

 

[ShootsManyBullets]

The whole thing smells fishy to me. The financial impact to the state doesn't make sense so I see where guys are thinking there may be ulterior motives. Another example of the few trying to rule over the masses and control OUR resources.

I kind of get the quota on the sheep and moose, but not on elk, lope and deer. I'll gladly drop out of those bonus point pools every year and waste my money somewhere else instead of sheep, goats, and moose that I'll never draw before I'm pissing in a bag and riding a scooter to the fridge. I'd probably be better off buying raffle tickets at huntin' fool than trying to draw a sheep tag.

Good discussion though. So much more respectful than MM

 

[A-con]

I was all set to type out a long winded response to this, but Buzz, Oak & Schmalts have expressed my opinion better than I could have.

The way to kill this is to get Wyoming residents to realize just how bad it will hurt economically when non residents spending money on tags, hotels and restaurants are replaced with residents sleeping at home and eating bologna sandwiches.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,

I get a kick out of the thought that just because an individual supports a change in tag allocations they are selfish and characterized as unwilling to share. It's not hard to figure out why compromise in the world of politics is so hard to come by when we quickly demonize anyone that disagrees with us.

I certainly understand your argument of moving the goal posts so far into it but I don't think you can argue that the current system for sheep and moose is solid and should never be altered. Perhaps there are better ways to change the system and I am willing to listen to any ideas. Many parts of the tag system change as time goes on. Price, number of tags, unit boundaries, PP systems, hunt dates, etc. Why is tag allocation a sacred cow that should never be touched?

Mulecreek...I give more than a casual thought to what I say and post.

I'm also pretty good at thinking outside the box and solving problems that everyone can live with. I solve issues and cut to the chase.

I would recommend if the Residents want to cut the NR tags to 10% go for the gold. But, the condition of that is when you do, the tags cut from NR allocation should be sold, applied for, etc. at the Non Resident fee schedule. No lost revenue to the game and fish and the residents that choose to pay the higher fees, they can learn whats its like to have a tiered fee schedule (similar to what the NR are forced to deal with in regard to Special and Regular fees).

Oh, and if you apply for the new "special NR fee Resident sheep tag"...yeah, the cost of that bonus point just went from $7.50 to $100. Same with moose, elk, pronghorn, etc.

Let the belly-aching and "that aint fair" start...

No such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Outdoor Junkie]

I'm in the same boat as most, so nothing new to say. I've not done the math, but it seems clear that the majority of license fees collected by the WYGF are from non-residents, while still allotting ~80% of the tags to residents. That seems like a great split. This has nothing to do with revenue and support of programs. Also, us non-residents infuse a lot of money into Wyoming in terms of hotels, taxidermists, restaurants, gas stations, etc. It seems to me the balance is good right now. Also, if it's shown that raising tag prices across the board is needed to support the WYFG programs then I'm O.K. with that.

I feel for the guys tht have invested in all the points. At the end of the day, math doesn't lie. If these guys actually do the math they might realize how bad of an idea this is.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Mulecreek...I give more than a casual thought to what I say and post.

I'm also pretty good at thinking outside the box and solving problems that everyone can live with. I solve issues and cut to the chase.

I would recommend if the Residents want to cut the NR tags to 10% go for the gold. But, the condition of that is when you do, the tags cut from NR allocation should be sold, applied for, etc. at the Non Resident fee schedule. No lost revenue to the game and fish and the residents that choose to pay the higher fees, they can learn whats its like to have a tiered fee schedule (similar to what the NR are forced to deal with in regard to Special and Regular fees).

Oh, and if you apply for the new "special NR fee Resident sheep tag"...yeah, the cost of that bonus point just went from $7.50 to $100. Same with moose, elk, pronghorn, etc.

Let the belly-aching and "that aint fair" start...

No such thing as a free lunch.

Buzz, I still have not heard an argument that I think holds water as to why 20% is the magic number and can never be altered either up or down. I see a lowering of the percentage as an adjustment to a system that has gotten out of hand for residents. The residents of Wyoming are the ones that the state legislature is suppose to be working for. Perhaps I am being naïve and this is a grand conspiracy to get SFW into Wyoming but I think that may be a bit of a stretch at this point.

Had the original NR tag allocation been set at 10% would that make it acceptable or is that still selfish on my part? What about 15%? Is that the right number? Maybe it should be 30% to really show how much we appreciate the NR hunter and how much we hate SFW.

You will get no argument from me that the fee structure for both residents and non-residents is ridiculous. I have stated before that I believe the cost of tags should be derived from what it costs the G&F to manage those species. At least at that time you can have a real debate over what the G&F should be doing and it's value. The lack of a sufficient resident tag increase was the only part of this Bill I did not like and asked Jaggi to address. Now that it has died my discussions with the crafter of this Bill will be that any new attempts at this plan should only address sheep, moose and possibly Mt goat and bison and that the resident tag fees should go up enough to cover the costs of managing those species.

 

[schmalts]

Had the original NR tag allocation been set at 10% would that make it acceptable or is that still selfish on my part?
.

When you take money for only buying a point, what were you selling? You are selling a better chance at drawing a tag in the future. Am I wrong?
Then after 12 years you cut the chances of drawing that tag by 100% do you think this is not a slap in the face to those who were buying what you were selling?

To answer your question, if they started with 10% or 2% I would not care because I would not have purchased points for a tag that would take 25 years to draw but at least I would not have been baited and switched.
You do know what a bait and switch is right?

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, I still have not heard an argument that I think holds water as to why 20% is the magic number and can never be altered either up or down. I see a lowering of the percentage as an adjustment to a system that has gotten out of hand for residents. The residents of Wyoming are the ones that the state legislature is suppose to be working for. Perhaps I am being naïve and this is a grand conspiracy to get SFW into Wyoming but I think that may be a bit of a stretch at this point.

Had the original NR tag allocation been set at 10% would that make it acceptable or is that still selfish on my part? What about 15%? Is that the right number? Maybe it should be 30% to really show how much we appreciate the NR hunter and how much we hate SFW.

You will get no argument from me that the fee structure for both residents and non-residents is ridiculous. I have stated before that I believe the cost of tags should be derived from what it costs the G&F to manage those species. At least at that time you can have a real debate over what the G&F should be doing and it's value. The lack of a sufficient resident tag increase was the only part of this Bill I did not like and asked Jaggi to address. Now that it has died my discussions with the crafter of this Bill will be that any new attempts at this plan should only address sheep, moose and possibly Mt goat and bison and that the resident tag fees should go up enough to cover the costs of managing those species.

You dont even have a clue about what you're asking for here...with all due respect.

If the license fees for sheep, moose, and goat reflected the true cost of management..you would be paying out the ass for tag fees to "cover what it costs to manage those species."

Sheep are a management money pit, and the ONLY reason that most states are so active in sheep management is because of groups like the RMBS, WSF, etc. that pump an asspile of money into studies, management, habitat, etc. etc. etc.

If they didnt we'd be paying 50K per sheep tag as a residents to cover management costs.

Moose are almost as bad.

Be careful what you wish for...

BTW, the $1400 I paid for my AZ desert sheep was almost embarrassing it cost so little.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

When you take money for only buying a point, what were you selling? You are selling a better chance at drawing a tag in the future. Am I wrong?
Then after 12 years you cut the chances of drawing that tag by 100% do you think this is not a slap in the face to those who were buying what you were selling?

To answer your question, if they started with 10% or 2% I would not care because I would not have purchased points for a tag that would take 25 years to draw but at least I would not have been baited and switched.
You do know what a bait and switch is right?

You are correct. You are buying a chance. A chance that was never guaranteed or certain. Where I differ is that I do not see it as a slap in the face but rather a change to the system to attempt to fix something that is perceived to be broken. To me it is the same as adjusting the price of the tag through the years. To me it is no more of slap in the face than when the cost of a PP was increased.

It is clear that we have two very different perspectives on this issue and that no amount of discussion is going to bring either of us closer to the other's viewpoint. I do appreciate the respectful discussion and I wish you the best of luck in drawing tags and hopefully your hunts.

When you do draw your Wyoming tags let me know if I can be of any help to you.

 

[WapitiBob]

MuleCreek, I'm curious if you apply to AZ?

 

[Zim]

The writing has been on the wall for years in Wyoming, and almost all other states for even longer. This bill would be no surprise at all. I've come to expect bait & switching nonresident point values, and always warn newbies of it when they jump in the point games. States feel no responsibility to maintain the value of what they peddle. So for Wyoming I began planning years ago, dumping my 8 sheep points back when they jacked the nonrefundable rate to $100/year. That was a mathematical deal breaker. Then I quickly cashed in my moose points as soon as I could draw anything average, and afterwards quit that game. Then last year burned my max elk & lope points. So all I got left is deer points in WY. This bill proposal just pushed me over the edge for those poor value points to begin with, so I'm now all in to burn them this year. Was thinking of it anyway. Not worth waiting 10 years for a 170" buck. So my closet will be bare by the time they try to devalue what I have left!

I have no problem with states deciding what they want for NR quotas. It's the part about devaluing previously sold points that I feel is unethical. In my 20 years of applying in 14 states, only two did not devalue the points they sold me............Arizona & New Hampshire. That's it.

 

[fulldraw]

After reading all of the debate over the future of the NR opportunities for Moose and Sheep I think it is time to burn my 14 moose points. I have been holding out for one of the trophy areas but feel it is time to settle for a chance at a lesser mid range bull. Are there any suggestions out there which areas would give me that chance ?

 

[Deleted member 18333]

MuleCreek, I'm curious if you apply to AZ?

I do not. I apply for tags in Wyo, Montana, CO, NM and occasionally ID.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

After reading all of the debate over the future of the NR opportunities for Moose and Sheep I think it is time to burn my 14 moose points. I have been holding out for one of the trophy areas but feel it is time to settle for a chance at a lesser mid range bull. Are there any suggestions out there which areas would give me that chance ?

Since you have 14 points and have not drawn I assume you have been putting in for 1, 34, 38, or 42. If you want to go now I would suggest 3, 5, 23, 24 and 10. In just about that order. All of these units have seen a decline in both quantity and quality but so has everywhere in Wyo. 5 can be a great hunt but you do have some wilderness to think about if you are not looking at a guide. However, bulls can be found off the wilderness. 3 is almost all wilderness so it may limit you. In my opinion a mid 30" bull is a good goal for 10, 23 and 24. It has been a few years since I have seen a bull approaching 40" in any of those units. Good luck in the draw and I hope you have a fun hunt.

 

[MN Public Hunter]

I say let it happen and let the residents start coughing up more for the tags and watch the DNR go...Oh SH!T....what did we do...Look at all the non-res dollars we are loosing. These are the dumbest people in the world, I swear. If the state can live with 10% or less of non-res dollars and loose all that money it brings to the economy...go for it. I for one am tired of the WY games they play every year.

 

[sbhooper]

I have never been a real fan of buying preference points anywhere. I have always felt like if you apply and don't get drawn, then you should get a preference point. Selling preference points is a joke.

That being said, I have done the preference point thing in Wyoming for antelope, as it was not all that expensive anyway. I was able to burn points and have a good hunt with my kid a few years back. I have again accumulated points and it will be my last trophy hunt there. I have determined that chasing horns/antlers is an expensive proposition and I am strictly going to hunt the female of the species. The hunt's the same, but you just don't have your bragging chips at the end. Meat in the freezer means way more to me than any antlers that I ever collected.

It amazes me that Wy is trying so hard to mess up something that has been working relatively well all things considered.

This country is going to go the same way as Europe, where only the rich guys can hunt.

 

[Zim]

It amazes me that Wy is trying so hard to mess up something that has been working relatively well all things considered.

This country is going to go the same way as Europe, where only the rich guys can hunt.

WY has already been one of the top states for the European model even before this........just not as well publicized. They've had the 2nd most auction tags for years. Nobody is even close to catching them in that category.

 

[Zim]

After reading all of the debate over the future of the NR opportunities for Moose and Sheep I think it is time to burn my 14 moose points. I have been holding out for one of the trophy areas but feel it is time to settle for a chance at a lesser mid range bull. Are there any suggestions out there which areas would give me that chance ?

I was in your boots in 2011 and burned mine in unit 20. I did a lot of research back then. I don't care much for griz nor wolves. If I had it to do over again I'd try unit 26. Read some reviews from pleased hunters lately. And yes, I'd burn those points ASAP somewhere.