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

[RIVER_RAT]

Ftfy lol

More like the coonasses from LA lol

 

[seeth07]

I’m all for that as long as the residents will lease my public lands from me for their private resident hunting club.

I don't understand your comment here. Are you saying that residents in a state need to pay to use the public lands in there state just because their state choses to raise the price of the NR license?

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Not greed here. I am part of the common family. I bust my ass doing extra work all year to afford any hunt I feel like taking. Maybe yall shouldn't be worried with other "common folk" and be more worried about yourself making extra cash for more opportunities. Anybody can make an extra $1000 to $1500 a year just by doing extra stuff on the weekends once a month. So get that crappy excuse out of here.

Ok. Just selfish (your words), not greedy. Big difference.. I'd venture to guess a lot of the people against outfitter set asides or more free market tag pricing here would also be the benefactors of being able to buy their way to the front of the line; whether it's due to having $ or just hunting being a personal priority.

It's not at all greed. Non residents deserve zero percent of the states issued tags. Everyone's home state has super cheap and plentiful opportunities to hunt (except maybe Connecticut and Rhode island?) So no one is getting priced out of opportunity. So let the states set NR prices as high as the market will pay and good for them taking advantage of the crazy hot and popular market right now that will fetch top dollar for those tags.

Just so I understand, are you two for or against outfitter set asides? Because they bring more $ into the state per tag than raising the NR tag price would.

 

[seeth07]

Ok. Just selfish (your words), not greedy. Big difference.. I'd venture to guess a lot of the people against outfitter set asides or more free market tag pricing here would also be the benefactors of being able to buy their way to the front of the line; whether it's due to having $ or just hunting being a personal priority.



Just so I understand, are you two for or against outfitter set asides? Because they bring more $ into the state per tag than raising the NR tag price would.

Against. And do explain how it brings in more $ than the DIY hunter.

 

[SaskHunter]

Unfortunately greed comes in many different forms.

Now you see greedy hunters hoping the prices are raised so much it prices the common family out the chance to hunt but that's OK because the rich DIY guys can get tags more often. I see raising the prices so much it prices people out similiar to a outfitter set aside.

I'm not rich, my kids will just eat ramen noods and bum brand KD year round...

#Priorities

 

[wytex]

Against. And do explain how it brings in more $ than the DIY hunter.

Yeah, that's what I'd like the outfitters to explain because it makes no sense to me.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Against. And do explain how it brings in more $ than the DIY hunter.

Just the outfitter fee for the avg guided elk hunt is $7500. No DIY hunter I know is paying that for a week long hunt. And they could hike the price for guided hunter allocated tags to fund WGF.

Edit to add: I think that MOGA and WYOGA inflates the truth a bit on discrepancies but in pure $ brought into the state, there is no way in hell DIY hunters come close. I have spent a number of years hunting 3 week long trips on MT general tags and over 3 weeks I dont spend near what a 1 week guided hunt would cost.

 

[seeth07]

Just the outfitter fee for the avg guided elk hunt is $7500. No DIY hunter I know is paying that for a week long hunt. And they could hike the price for guided hunter allocated tags to fund WGF.

Edit to add: I think that MOGA and WYOGA inflates the truth a bit on discrepancies but in pure $ brought into the state, there is no way in hell DIY hunters come close. I have spent a number of years hunting 3 week long trips on MT general tags and over 3 weeks I dont spend near what a 1 week guided hunt would cost.

You are forgetting that not all of the guides nor outfitted businesses are set up in the state in which they guide/outfit. I don't know the ratio but when I worked for a waterfowl outfitter, there were 3 guides and outfitter. The outfitter and myself were from the state but the other 2 were not. The wages and tips for those two guides left the state.

 

[TOGIE]

wonder what percentage of outfitted lands owners even reside in the state.

it's fun looking at the tax addresses of large ranches in western states on onx.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

You are forgetting that not all of the guides nor outfitted businesses are set up in the state in which they guide/outfit. I don't know the ratio but when I worked for a waterfowl outfitter, there were 3 guides and outfitter. The outfitter and myself were from the state but the other 2 were not. The wages and tips for those two guides left the state.

Let's say 25% of the $ stays in the state, it's still probably more $ than the avg DIY hunter spends in state.

 

[TOGIE]

Let's say 25% of the $ stays in the state, it's still probably more $ than the avg DIY hunter spends in state.

we've gone rounds on this.

tldr: that's probably not true, at all. especially in the context of where it's spent and the degree to which local businesses benefit in guided v. diy. but we also don't really have any good objective data to say either way.

 

[bts09]

It's not at all greed. Non residents deserve zero percent of the states issued tags. Everyone's home state has super cheap and plentiful opportunities to hunt (except maybe Connecticut and Rhode island?) So no one is getting priced out of opportunity. So let the states set NR prices as high as the market will pay and good for them taking advantage of the crazy hot and popular market right now that will fetch top dollar for those tags.

I don't know, seeth07. Those seem like blanket and demonstrably wrong statements. "Super cheap and plentiful opportunities"? Doubtful, unless you're saying opportunities to get outside and not opportunities to actually be successful in harvesting something.

I don't disagree that no one is currently getting priced out. I, for example, am priced out of hunting in Texas but am not priced out of Wyoming. Yet. I'd like it stay that way. So yeah, I think there are some states that still allow for the low-budget guy (me) to hunt and be successful.

As for "non residents deserve zero percent of the states issued tags," I do disagree there. The game animals are the property of the state, no question. Much of the land on which they reside is not. It's mine. And it's yours. And its 300 million other people's. So if states only issue tags valid on state land or private land, then yeah, I think non-residents "deserve" zero of those. As long as states keep issuing tags valid on federal land, then it's not fair to say that non-residents don't "deserve" any of those tags. Do they have as good of a claim as residents? Maybe not.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

we've gone rounds on this.

tldr: that's probably not true, at all. especially in the context of where it's spent and the degree to which local businesses benefit in guided v. diy. but we also don't really have any good objective data to say either way.

If the avg elk hunt is $7500, it's pretty reasonable to think the avg hunter spends an additional $500 on tip/dining/lodging/fuel etc in state.

I doubt the avg DIY hunter spends $2k / year in state in addition to the tag costs. Still, that's also comparing to only 25% of outfitter $ staying in state.

 

[RIVER_RAT]

I don't know, seeth07. Those seem like blanket and demonstrably wrong statements. "Super cheap and plentiful opportunities"? Doubtful, unless you're saying opportunities to get outside and not opportunities to actually be successful in harvesting something.

I don't disagree that no one is currently getting priced out. I, for example, am priced out of hunting in Texas but am not priced out of Wyoming. Yet. I'd like it stay that way. So yeah, I think there are some states that still allow for the low-budget guy (me) to hunt and be successful.

As for "non residents deserve zero percent of the states issued tags," I do disagree there. The game animals are the property of the state, no question. Much of the land on which they reside is not. It's mine. And it's yours. And its 300 million other people's. So if states only issue tags valid on state land or private land, then yeah, I think non-residents "deserve" zero of those. As long as states keep issuing tags valid on federal land, then it's not fair to say that non-residents don't "deserve" any of those tags. Do they have as good of a claim as residents? Maybe not.

The state isn't keeping any NR from enjoying the federal lands. U can hike, swim, ride, lick posion ivy etc all u want but letting NR come harvest state managed game animals is privilege not a right.

 

[TOGIE]

If the avg elk hunt is $7500, it's pretty reasonable to think the avg hunter spends an additional $500 on tip/dining/lodging/fuel etc in state.

I doubt the avg DIY hunter spends $2k / year in state in addition to the tag costs. Still, that's also comparing to only 25% of outfitter $ staying in state.

keep in the context of how much is it benefitting local business and it starts to look different.

let's do two stereotypical hunters:

guided - drives or flies to wyoming, maybe grabs a big mac and heads to ranch. stays at ranch 5-7 days shoots something and leaves. maybe the hit up the local burger join for beers and a burger, or maybe just gasses up and grabs another big mac on his way out.

diy - drives to wyoming and hunts for 5-7 days, makes at least 3 gas stops while hunting, grabs some gatorades, few cans of dip each time, probably got a big mac coming through cheyenne, hits up a local restaurant probably at least twice during the trip, makes a grocery run for goods at the in town grocery store, forgot game bags and extra knife blades so hits up the local shop, might stay at a local hotel or airbnb and eat out nearly every night, hits up the local donut shop one morning, hits up a coffee shop a few times, everyone shoots something and celebrates at the local join with beer and burgers. gets another big mac after filling tank and grabbing more gatorade and dip before leaving town.

is that how it actually works for every guided or diy hunter, no. but it's a more accurate concept of what's going on.

 

[seeth07]

I don't know, seeth07. Those seem like blanket and demonstrably wrong statements. "Super cheap and plentiful opportunities"? Doubtful, unless you're saying opportunities to get outside and not opportunities to actually be successful in harvesting something.

I don't disagree that no one is currently getting priced out. I, for example, am priced out of hunting in Texas but am not priced out of Wyoming. Yet. I'd like it stay that way. So yeah, I think there are some states that still allow for the low-budget guy (me) to hunt and be successful.

As for "non residents deserve zero percent of the states issued tags," I do disagree there. The game animals are the property of the state, no question. Much of the land on which they reside is not. It's mine. And it's yours. And its 300 million other people's. So if states only issue tags valid on state land or private land, then yeah, I think non-residents "deserve" zero of those. As long as states keep issuing tags valid on federal land, then it's not fair to say that non-residents don't "deserve" any of those tags. Do they have as good of a claim as residents? Maybe not.

I'm sorry, I did forget about Texas. There are indeed very few opportunities to be successful there on big game hunts. Not impossible but its not easy from what I have heard from close friends that live there - even for small game and waterfowl.

As far as a NR having the right to hunt the animals that reside on federal lands, nothing is stopping you from enjoying those animals on those lands. Its still the states choice whether or not you can have a bullet or arrow and enjoy them. You literally can go to Wyoming, run around with an elk call and have 99% of the enjoyment of a hunt. DON'T EVEN NEED A TAG TO DO IT. Might upset some guys that do have a tag but its public land, you can do it. You just miss out on the actual kill and part 2 fun packing them out.

 

[bts09]

I agree with that, seeth07--certainly everyone is entitled to do all those things. Where I disagree is the notion that non residents don't ALSO deserve to harvest animals on those lands. Could states stop them from doing it? Probably (though that would certainly bring a lawsuit, and maybe even a winning one). But that's not the same question as whether non residents deserve the opportunity to hunt their federal lands in other states. And I think we just disagree on that. Which is, of course, fine.

 

[TheTone]

So are outfitters struggling to book clients? If so it seems the free market approach would seem to be you either lower prices to attract a broader customer base or provide more/better service at current prices

Instead it seems outfitters want to price out the evil DIY hunter or make the government subsidize/force people to use them

My home state offers a ton of outfitter allocated tags both for general season and controlled hunts. A huge % of the general tags don’t get used and are reallocated to the public and a huge chunk of the controlled ones aren’t actually applied for in a draw but rather sold by the outfitters, usually at way above the tag price, and with no service provided by the outfitter to the purchaser

 

[QuazyQuinton]

I'm sorry, I did forget about Texas. There are indeed very few opportunities to be successful there on big game hunts. Not impossible but its not easy from what I have heard from close friends that live there - even for small game and waterfowl.

As far as a NR having the right to hunt the animals that reside on federal lands, nothing is stopping you from enjoying those animals on those lands. Its still the states choice whether or not you can have a bullet or arrow and enjoy them. You literally can go to Wyoming, run around with an elk call and have 99% of the enjoyment of a hunt. DON'T EVEN NEED A TAG TO DO IT. Might upset some guys that do have a tag but its public land, you can do it. You just miss out on the actual kill and part 2 fun packing them out.

Clearly you and I are miles apart on philosophy of hunting.

QQ

 

[Wind Gypsy]

keep in the context of how much is it benefitting local business and it starts to look different.

let's do two stereotypical hunters:

guided - drives or flies to wyoming, maybe grabs a big mac and heads to ranch. stays at ranch 5-7 days shoots something and leaves. maybe the hit up the local burger join for beers and a burger, or maybe just gasses up and grabs another big mac on his way out.

diy - drives to wyoming and hunts for 5-7 days, makes at least 3 gas stops while hunting, grabs some gatorades, few cans of dip each time, probably got a big mac coming through cheyenne, hits up a local restaurant probably at least twice during the trip, makes a grocery run for goods at the in town grocery store, forgot game bags and extra knife blades so hits up the local shop, might stay at a local hotel or airbnb and eat out nearly every night, hits up the local donut shop one morning, hits up a coffee shop a few times, everyone shoots something and celebrates at the local join with beer and burgers. gets another big mac after filling tank and grabbing more gatorade and dip before leaving town.

is that how it actually works for every guided or diy hunter, no. but it's a more accurate concept of what's going on.

I agree that bars, restaurants, hotels get more on average from a DIY guy than a guided guy. But it's not like the gas, groceries, drinks, etc that a hunter has from his outfitter all showed up from out of state.

I'd prefer the numbers between DIY and Outfitted were a wash or favored the DIY guy but I can't be intellectually honest and still think that overall $ brought into and kept in state per hunter are that close.