Wyoming > Hicks at it again

[rwc101]

There is also the intrinsic value of being able to fish or hunt in a state.

Fishing licenses are not kept artificially low to support the fisherman that utilizes fly shops, hotels and guides. They are kept low to support the guy that goes once or twice a year with his kids to closest fishing pond he can find and the 60 yr old retiree that fishes 50 days a year and keeps a full limit each time. Both of these groups are covered by my in-laws.

I'm not sure what artificially low even means in this context. It's a government agency that is accommodating the citizenry's desire to fish. Nobody wants a $250 resident fishing license. They won't sell, and the public (and the business owners) would get pissed. Anglers spend 7.8 billion more each year than hunters. Ignoring their economic impact would be foolish for any state.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I don't understand the alternative. Stop doing all fisheries management and native fish restoration because fishing licenses don't cover it themselves?

I'm just simply pointing out the absurdity of peoples economics... "if I like it screw it it can run a massive deficit, if I don't like it I don't want money spent on it period."

If you claim that fiscal conservatism with regard to a state wildlife budget is imperative you essentially have to put aquatic programs on the block.

If you allow that there are net societal benefits to subsidizing things for the greater good... well then welcome to the real world, pull up a chair and lets talk about how we can pay for things we love.

TLDR I was being a Troll

 

[rwc101]

I'm just simply pointing out the absurdity of peoples economics... "if I like it screw it it can run a massive deficit, if I don't like it I don't want money spent on it period."

If you claim that fiscal conservatism with regard to a state wildlife budget is imperative you essentially have to put aquatic programs on the block.

If you allow that there are net societal benefits to subsidizing things for the greater good... well then welcome to the real world, pull up a chair and lets talk about how we can pay for things we love.

TLDR I was being a Troll

I love a good argument where everyone agrees.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

There is also the intrinsic value of being able to fish or hunt in a state.

I'm not sure what artificially low even means in this context. It's a government agency that is accommodating the citizenry's desire to fish. Nobody wants a $250 resident fishing license. They won't sell, and the public (and the business owners) would get pissed. Anglers spend 7.8 billion more each year than hunters. Ignoring their economic impact would be foolish for any state.

A annual NR fishing license + king stamp in AK runs you $245...

On the face of it I totally agree with you though. Especially in a state like WY where tax revenue goes into the general fund and then is then apportioned to the state agency. So fishing dollars are being used for wildlife.

 

[rwc101]

A annual NR fishing license + king stamp in AK runs you $245...

Well, we probably agree in that an annual nonresident license in a global fishing destination like AK salmon fisheries is absurdly cheap, but that's an exceptional case.

 

[madtom]

I'm just simply pointing out the absurdity of peoples economics... "if I like it screw it it can run a massive deficit, if I don't like it I don't want money spent on it period."

If you claim that fiscal conservatism with regard to a state wildlife budget is imperative you essentially have to put aquatic programs on the block.

If you allow that there are net societal benefits to subsidizing things for the greater good... well then welcome to the real world, pull up a chair and lets talk about how we can pay for things we love.

TLDR I was being a Troll

Thanks, I suffer from the TLDR syndrome often.

 

[oswald2581]

Well, we probably agree in that an annual nonresident license in a global fishing destination like AK salmon fisheries is absurdly cheap, but that's an exceptional case.

I agree, especially when you look at the quality of fish you are bringing home when you fish AK. Try and make someone pay $245 to go fish Trout in Wyoming, wont happen.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Well, we probably agree in that an annual nonresident license in a global fishing destination like AK salmon fisheries is absurdly cheap, but that's an exceptional case.

People pay $600 to go on a hike with a rifle in Colorado so you never know.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

There is also the intrinsic value of being able to fish or hunt in a state.

I'm not sure what artificially low even means in this context. It's a government agency that is accommodating the citizenry's desire to fish. Nobody wants a $250 resident fishing license. They won't sell, and the public (and the business owners) would get pissed. Anglers spend 7.8 billion more each year than hunters. Ignoring their economic impact would be foolish for any state.

Artificially low means that the revenue brought in from license sales is not sufficient to cover the costs of fisheries management.

I don't disagree with anything you stated in this post. However, the fisherman that is traveling from other states, hiring guides, staying in motels, and shopping at Jack Dennis is not scared away by a higher priced license. Its the general citizenry that typically fishes at most a couple times a year with spinning rod held upside-down that is. IMO.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Artificially low means that the revenue brought in from license sales is not sufficient to cover the costs of fisheries management.

I don't disagree with anything you stated in this post. However, the fisherman that is traveling from other states, hiring guides, staying in motels, and shopping at Jack Dennis is not scared away by a higher priced license. Its the general citizenry that typically fishes at most a couple times a year with spinning rod held upside-down that is. IMO.

I bet if you sold a fly fishing stamp, same idea as an archery stamp, in CO you could charge residents $1000 and would sell those puppies hand over fist.

Might have to throw them a bone with a Simms decal for left side of their brand new Tacoma to match the one on the right.

 

[JM77]

Now that's what I call getting out in the weeds!

 

[rwc101]

Artificially low means that the revenue brought in from license sales is not sufficient to cover the costs of fisheries management.

I don't disagree with anything you stated in this post. However, the fisherman that is traveling from other states, hiring guides, staying in motels, and shopping at Jack Dennis is not scared away by a higher priced license. Its the general citizenry that typically fishes at most a couple times a year with spinning rod held upside-down that is. IMO.

I get what you're saying (except the artificially low thing, and you're probably right.

 

[rwc101]

I bet if you sold a fly fishing stamp, same idea as an archery stamp, in CO you could charge residents $1000 and would sell those puppies hand over fist.

Might have to throw them a bone with a Simms decal for left side of their brand new Tacoma to match the one on the right.

No way. They'll just spend $599 on their rod vault and drive around making it look like they fly fish like they usually do anyway.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

No way. They'll just spend $599 on their rod vault and drive around making it look like they fly fish like they usually do anyway.

[INSERT] "joke about whipping out your rod at a moments notice"[/INSERT]

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Now that's what I call getting out in the weeds!

Wait till I start complaining about State funded put and take pheasants.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Wait till I start complaining about State funded put and take pheasants.

I wondered what this line item was... 6B1X Bird Farms, $761,656

though to be fair... 6D10 Feedgrounds $1,887,847... which is like half the biologist personnel budget.

 

[antelopedundee]

I just checked, there are 3,970 people sitting with 11+ points for sheep in Wyoming. So if the quotas go to 10 per year that will take 397 years to churn through them to get to the guy sitting with 10 points right now. Wyoming currently makes the purchase of a point mandatory for sheep at $150. Something seems broken with that. (Even at 40ish tags we are talking 100 years so it is still broken even without this change).

That's almost as bad as the guy who won $3 million in the Arkansas lottery. $1 a year for 3 million years.

 

[antelopedundee]

I think the word "issued" is a whole nuther can of worms. Not allocated to, but "issued". That would seem to mean that the leftover antelope licenses would not be available for nonresidents to purchase if it got the number of licenses issued to fall below 90%.

Allocated applies only to the initial draw. After the initial draw, un-issued resident licenses are rolled over into the NR allocation. At least for antelope. After the leftover draw it's first come, first served.

 

[WapitiBob]

The Bill is going nowhere and after a few days of getting lit up I wouldn't be surprised if Hicks pulls it. He'll have a much better chance next year with a properly written Bill and some support already in place.

 

[JM77]

DOA