Wyo Wildlife Task Force and the new outfitter/landowner draw proposal

[TheTone]

Why don't we think about it in terms of doing right by the resource? I think we should raise prices on everyone, pretty significantly, and use it for habitat and access. You guys are mostly engaged in a pissing match that has to do with ME ME ME. My ability to buy a tag, blah blah blah. Are tags too cheap? Clearly. Has habitat and access degraded? Duh!

Can we remember that the whole point of license fees is to support and improve the resource? Not to make sure blue collar individuals can afford their out of state hunts every year.

I think that can be a slippery slope; you often seen that argument used by those that love high priced auction tags and “conservation” groups as justification as to why they are needed to fund conservation and why they’re a better sportsman than the commoner

 

[TOGIE]

Why don't we think about it in terms of doing right by the resource? I think we should raise prices on everyone, pretty significantly, and use it for habitat and access. You guys are mostly engaged in a pissing match that has to do with ME ME ME. My ability to buy a tag, blah blah blah. Are tags too cheap? Clearly. Has habitat and access degraded? Duh!

Can we remember that the whole point of license fees is to support and improve the resource? Not to make sure blue collar individuals can afford their out of state hunts every year.

if there was a clear correlation between tag prices and habitat quality maybe there's a poin there.

but that's not the case.

the point here is what we're trying to prevent with outfitter welfare tags. we're trying to keep the spirit of wildlife held in trust for the public alive and well.

not held in trust for the esteemed and powerful.

i'll say for the third or whatever time, hoping to price people out of the game for the benefit of yourself, is antithetical to the north american model. it's a mentality of regression back towards the kings deer.

i couldn't give an actual #*^@#* what the price is, but hoping to price people out because that could make it better for "me" is a bad and dangerous mentality for wildlife and public spaces.

 

[bullbugle307]

Well hell, we don't want a slippery slope. Better keep selling out our NR doe tags for 37 dollars while the resource dwindles. Wouldn't wanna go from 37 dollars to auction tags, cause, you know, there's not really much room to work with between those 2.

 

[seeth07]

Well hell, we don't want a slippery slope. Better keep selling out our NR doe tags for 37 dollars while the resource dwindles. Wouldn't wanna go from 37 dollars to auction tags, cause, you know, there's not really much room to work with between those 2.

I just saw inflation from last year at this exact time is at 9.9%. So shouldn't all big game tags go up 9.9% across the board just to keep up with it? Everyone hunting this fall on last falls prices are getting a steal!

 

[TOGIE]

Well hell, we don't want a slippery slope. Better keep selling out our NR doe tags for 37 dollars while the resource dwindles. Wouldn't wanna go from 37 dollars to auction tags, cause, you know, there's not really much room to work with between those 2.

raise em to 400 dollars, won't bother me one bit.

but it won't change the current population woes of the wyoming pronghorn herds one bit either. stop straw manning.

 

[bullbugle307]

if there was a clear correlation between tag prices and habitat quality maybe there's a poin there.

but that's not the case.

the point here is what we're trying to prevent with outfitter welfare tags. we're trying to keep the spirit of wildlife held in trust for the public alive and well.

not held in trust for the esteemed and powerful.

i'll say for the third or whatever time, hoping to price people out of the game for the benefit of yourself, is antithetical to the north american model. it's a mentality of regression back towards the kings deer.

i couldn't give an actual #*^@#* what the price is, but hoping to price people out because that could make it better for "me" is a bad and dangerous mentality for wildlife and public spaces.

Maybe we need to make that correlation happen. I can think of millions of dollars our GF spends on artificial BS like pheasant and non native fish stocking. Maybe we'd see a correlation if that money went to habitat instead.

 

[bullbugle307]

But wait, we can't do that. Cause everyone's worried about their opportunity.

 

[TOGIE]

Maybe we need to make that correlation happen. I can think of millions of dollars our GF spends on artificial BS like pheasant and non native fish stocking. Maybe we'd see a correlation if that money went to habitat instead.

it's still all entirely irrelevant to my point. raise every tag by 300%, great i LITERALLY don't care. you keep missing that point. if that fixes budgetary woes or funds 12 new wildlife under/over passes then hell yeah.

but raising them for the sake of raising them with the only goal of hoping your draw odds get better? that's where the problem arises. same thing as outfitters saying we need all the tags for ourselves. literally the same thing. stop ignoring the point i'm making.

 

[bullbugle307]

it's still all entirely irrelevant to my point. raise every tag by 300%, great i LITERALLY don't care. you keep missing that point. if that fixes budgetary woes or funds 12 new wildlife under/over passes then hell yeah.

but raising them for the sake of raising them in hoping your draw odds get better? that's where the problem arises. same thing as outfitters saying we need all the tags for ourselves. literally the same thing. stop ignoring the point i'm making.

Yeah I never suggested anything about raising tags to increase my own odds. I tried to steer the conversation to the resource, but apparently this argument won't evolve past everyone's opportunity.

 

[TOGIE]

Yeah I never suggested anything about raising tags to increase my own odds. I tried to steer the conversation to the resource, but apparently this argument won't evolve past everyone's draw odds.

i'm trying to discredit some other posters points about how they should raise tag prices so their draw odds get better and the woods will have fewer people in them. you're trying to discredit my points....

see where the problem is arising?

 

[bullbugle307]

I'm not really trying to discredit your points. Sorry if it came off that way. I just really wish we could argue about how best to improve the resource within the North American Model instead of y'alls opportunity.

 

[Irrelevant]

and obviously @JLS drinks the most GOOD beer.

duh.

Clarification.

 

[TOGIE]

Clarification.

i mean, i think PBR is great beer actually.

 

[Rhcuam]

that fact is irrelevant.

what's relevant here is a hope or hypothetical attempt to further change the status quo for the better and benefit of those with more. i.e. being a selfish bastard.

all these things are antithetical to the north american model. be it outfitter welfare or hoping to price people out of the game for the benefit of, what's the word? oh yeah, "yourself" or "me"

me me me

no one will be laughing when cam and joe are the only ones tagging out bull elk anymore.

Come on, You think either of those individuals do whole lot of hunting on public land.

 

[TheTone]

Let me know when my elk tag price is going to influence the FS or BLM to spray weeds anywhere beside next to a gravel road or any other work to benefit elk habitat. My local offices seem to only care about grazing cows and logging to a barren wasteland. About the only species conservation I see them doing involves anadromous fish and that’s because they are required to for T and E reasons; even with that most of the work is being done and forced by private groups

 

[bullbugle307]

If more money to our Game and Fish to buy habitat and improve it isn't the solution the increase the resource, what the hell is the solution?

 

[TOGIE]

Come on, You think either of those individuals do whole lot of hunting on public land.

ah so you do get my point?

if not, you'll get it eventually.

 

[Rhcuam]

We're not talking about demand. Of course they could jack the prices up and there would still be demand. We're talking about what's fair, not what the market will bear. The whole point I'm making is that this is a resource that should not be a simple "free market economy" resource. I don't want to live in a world where only the super rich can hunt. It's already pretty darn close to that in Texas.

Oh OK now we want to do the “fair” thing.
I think it’s unfair that I can’t hunt wilderness in Wyoming. I think it’s unfair I only get 10% of the tags in some states. I think it’s unfair there are a handful of units I would have to live to be 473 years old to be able to draw to hunt elk in. I think it’s unfair that I was born later than some and I did not get to participate as early in the point schemes.

Life isn’t fair. I make hunting a priority. You do not deserve a tag in any other state than the one you currently live in. You seem to have just as much of a case of the me me me’s as anyone, in the fact that you think you deserve tags.

 

[bullbugle307]

Let me know when my elk tag price is going to influence the FS or BLM to spray weeds anywhere beside next to a gravel road or any other work to benefit elk habitat. My local offices seem to only care about grazing cows and logging to a barren wasteland. About the only species conservation I see them doing involves anadromous fish and that’s because they are required to for T and E reasons; even with that most of the work is being done and forced by private groups

When I was a technician for a state agency, we went out and did habitat work on federal lands. Increase cost of licenses, and put the new money to those types of projects. It's that frickin simple.

You ever see the bumper sticker, THINK HABITAT. Well, THINK HABITAT!!! How do we make the habitat better. Gee, first thing we're gonna need is a lot of money. Where's that money gonna come from. Us! Unless we're too worried about our own opportunity and find every excuse in the book not to do it.

 

[TOGIE]

When I was a technician for a state agency, we went out and did habitat work on federal lands. Increase cost of licenses, and put the new money to those types of projects. It's that frickin simple.

You ever see the bumper sticker, THINK HABITAT. Well, THINK HABITAT!!! How do we make the habitat better. Gee, first thing we're gonna need is a lot of money. Where's that money gonna come from. Us! Unless we're too worried about our own opportunity and find every excuse in the book not to do it.

the lions share of state agency money goes to salaries and benefits, the majority of salaries are at desks and law enforcement.

i think if we really want better habitat and more animals RMEF is the place to put money. sure better funded state agencies helps too.

but holy shit does CPW have a huge ass budget and i'm not sure we're keeping more habitat intact than anyone else, probably less.