Wyoming > Hicks at it again

[CForest]

This is quite the bill. I cant imagine it passing the way it is, but seems pretty obvious that a change somewhere between where it is now and this bill is in the near future.

 

[Tradewind]

I think hanging your hat on the economic benefit non resident hunters offer a state is a mixed bag, at best.

More than a few residents who vote, show up at meetings, pay local taxes, want a chance to hunt for a bighorn, mountain goat, moose, etc ,would in their ideal world, totally exclude non resident hunters. That is not a fair view, but it is held by a portion of resident hunters in every state that draws significant interest from non residents.

Figuring out how to fairly divide a pie that is insufficient to meet the demand is difficult. Since residents vote and no residents don't,, it isn't likely that non residents will get a very large slice.

Montana has long had a 90/10 split on licenses that require a drawing. I don't ever recall hearing from a resident hunter that it should be changed to offer more tags to non residents.

Everyone understands money, sooner or later. NR bring a lot of it every year. Even if you don't pay attention to it. Yeah, I'll hang my hat on that because it is the most valid argument you can bring.

 

[beginnerhunter]

Right or wrong aside (since WY has the right to do whatever they want anyway), between this and the Idaho stuff I feel like future western big game hunting is going to be an impossibility for me in the near future. And that just makes me sad. Really wish I'd had the wherewithal and money to start this several years ago.

 

[Trial153]

This bill isnt passing. Howver some form of 90/10 is and this just primes the pump to see who's hands need grease.

 

[406dn]

Everyone understands money, sooner or later. NR bring a lot of it every year. Even if you don't pay attention to it. Yeah, I'll hang my hat on that because it is the most valid argument you can bring.

And that might be one more reason every western state puts non resident fees sky high for big game tags. Almost no one outside of the outfitters depends meaningfully on non resident hunters. There is far more tourism wrapped up in the National Parks than big game hunting.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Who from Wyoming can carry the flag to eliminate landowner tags, or make them only valid on their own property? I bet Larry won't be open to that idea.

 

[Kearnsie14]

No, pronghorn tags would not likely see any appreciable reduction looking at it from a total tag standpoint. It would shift only 10% of the tags out of the original NR application pool. The only thing this will change is some of the better units will see better odds for Residents, but that also leaves more tags in the mid-tier units that residents normally would draw to shift into the NR pool. Remember, any tags the Residents don't draw in the initial draw, drop to the NR pool. It would be more of a "shift" than a reduction in regard to pronghorn. NR's already draw more pronghorn tags than residents, and that wouldn't change under a 90-10 split.

As to elk, same thing. Statutorily NR's receive 7,250 full price elk tags. Again, there would just be a shift from 16% to 10%, but the difference in LQ tags would be made up by issuing more general tags to meet the 7,250 cap.

So, there is no way that NR elk and pronghorn tags are going to be cut by 40% and 36%...mathematically impossible.

In both cases, under this ridiculous bill, there would be 30% of the tags that were only available through an outfitter set aside. Which, makes no sense and why this bill is going to flop and never get anywhere.

This is an excellent clarification. I totally missed that the first time through. Thanks.

 

[BuzzH]

Who from Wyoming can carry the flag to eliminate landowner tags, or make them only valid on their own property? I bet Larry won't be open to that idea.

He wouldn't be happy with that...but probably all for it if he didn't own land and get a LO tag.

 

[JM77]

Who from Wyoming can carry the flag to eliminate landowner tags, or make them only valid on their own property? I bet Larry won't be open to that idea.

There will be 90/10 for every species long before Wyoming even thinks about taking landowner tags away. Any bets?

 

[Hunt West]

There will be 90/10 for every species long before Wyoming even thinks about taking landowner tags away. Any bets?

I agree with you on that and I’d even go as far to say that there will be a push to make those LO tags transferable before they would eliminate them. It would be met with huge resistance from residents but I could see certain people making this push.

 

[Pucky Freak]

If I don't see some massive pressure put on by them opposing this bill in committee, well, then I'll call them out on it then.

This is pretty strong language from WYOGA. Is that a decent start for massive pressure, @BuzzH ? (see New Information Added section at the bottom)

GOHUNT // The Hunting Company

GOHUNT empowers hunters with the tools, technology, gear, and resources they need to get the most out of their time in the field.

www.gohunt.com

 

[The Hedgehog]

There will be 90/10 for every species long before Wyoming even thinks about taking landowner tags away. Any bets?

No doubt and I don’t blame residents though that would truly suck for those of us who like to frequent your state. I hope some of you will think hard about others before voting for that. Is that extra 10% really hurting your ability to get out and enjoy WY annually?

 

[rmauch20]

This is pretty strong language from WYOGA. Is that a decent start for massive pressure, @BuzzH ? (see New Information Added section at the bottom)

GOHUNT // The Hunting Company

GOHUNT empowers hunters with the tools, technology, gear, and resources they need to get the most out of their time in the field.

www.gohunt.com

That is a classic example of strongly worded letter. I am a bit surprised by it, but pleasantly surprised.

 

[mdeerjunkie]

There goes Wyoming......

 

[Pucky Freak]

There goes Wyoming......

 

[cur dog]

There will be 90/10 for every species long before Wyoming even thinks about taking landowner tags away. Any bets?

Says the Wyoming landowner.

 

[mariano742]

No doubt and I don’t blame residents though that would truly suck for those of us who like to frequent your state. I hope some of you will think hard about others before voting for that. Is that extra 10% really hurting your ability to get out and enjoy WY annually?

yeah it’s 10% to them but it’s 50% of the non resident tags.

 

[Buffs35]

As a proud former Wyoming resident, seems a strange time to potentially limit out of state spending when the state deficit is growing.

 

[gburk]

The gohunt article reads it like I did, that the 90% resident share could conceivably override the 7250 full price license quota. In any case I’m still confused how they would work together.
The WOGA opposition smells legitimate based on the letter on gohunt, though I have no idea in reality. Not knowing any better I would attribute the 30% outfitter clause to Shaul in pursuit of more support for his resident subsistence hunter purity law.

As a resident, I buy all of those things when I hunt in Wyoming.


The 7250 is just used to figure out how many NR gen tags to issue. Take Full price NR elk tags issued, whether 16% or 10% doesn't matter. Subtract that number from 7250 and you have how many gen tags are issued. Currently NR's get around 13,000 total elk tags once LQ tags, gen tags, red price cow tags and leftovers are factored in.

I am not sure if Rob Shaul speaks for the majority of Wyo residents. I suspect that he does. After attending the last set of Comm meetings regarding NR elk tag distribution I would say his view is shared by about 90% of the res hunters in attendance. That being said I dont think most of that 90% have given it much thought other than it takes them too long to draw a Little Mnt elk tag.

 

[JM77]

Says the Wyoming landowner.

Correct, it's the landowners that would throw a fit and Ag still has a lot of pull in this state. Personally, with half the state being private land and our wildlife relying on much of that land, it's a small price to pay with a couple tags a year.