Wyoming wallet alert

[Treeshark]

1) $10m is a lot of money. Quick check shows it is about 10% of the current budget. At $500 that is 20,000 additional tags. That's a LOT.
2) You are most certainly going to price out youth and many hunters.
3) it disproportionally benefits certain landowners over others.
4) I'm not sure what problem it solves but it is a horrible way to solve a budget shortfall.

1. I didn’t say it made up $10m. 3-4 is possible.

2. Wyoming has already done that. Also, my idea is in addition to the draw.

3. You’re right, but so what? So do lots of other things, both in WY and other states.

4. I respectfully disagree. I think it makes a ton of sense.

See? It’s possible to disagree without personal jabs

 

[sccritterkiller]

Oh, and if you hate that and value hunting more than anything, uproot your life and move to Wyoming.

Or hunt one of the 49 other states, Africa, ect...find the best value for your dollar...times are changing and that value may not be WY anymore.

 

[Forkyfinder]

1. I didn’t say it made up $10m. 3-4 is possible.

2. Wyoming has already done that. Also, my idea is in addition to the draw.

3. You’re right, but so what? So do lots of other things, both in WY and other states.

4. I respectfully disagree. I think it makes a ton of sense.

See? It’s possible to disagree without personal jabs

10m. 100k resident hunters. pretty easy to find another 100 dollars for them to fork over on tags, bonus points, and apps.

 

[Treeshark]

wealthy hunters just jump in and grab the same landowner tags on a yearly basis.

One common misconception that I see a lot on HT is that landowner tags are necessarily expensive. Take a few minutes to look at some online- you can get them for less than most people realize.

The more that hit the market, the cheaper they become. I won’t say Western hunting is ever going to be cheap for guys who live elsewhere, but landowner tags can definitely be a “blue collar” option if guys take the time to look.

 

[SaskHunter]

Of course, the issuing landowner would need to open up their own land as well.

36 posts in and now we're talking about access, the only thing that benefits the DIY guy.

This is the only way this would make any sense. Want landowner tags? Open up your land for unrestricted walk-in access.

 

[AntelopeWalker406]

Or hunt one of the 49 other states, Africa, ect...find the best value for your dollar...times are changing and that value may not be WY anymore.

Right. I mean NZ would be an awesome place to live for hunting.

 

[Treeshark]

10m. 100k resident hunters. pretty easy to find another 100 dollars for them to fork over on tags, bonus points, and apps.

Totally agree, but did you see how crazy the WY guys on here went over a $15 increase?

My plan has a better chance at becoming reality than these guys parting with an additional $100.

 

[Treeshark]

36 posts in and now we're talking about access, the only thing that benefits the DIY guy.

This is the only way this would make any sense. Want landowner tags? Open up your land for unrestricted walk-in access.

Yeah baby, now we’re getting somewhere!

Colorado and NM’s landowner programs absolutely increase access, I expect Wyoming’s will as well.

 

[TheTone]

Will landowners be required to report the tag sales as income and be taxed on it? How would the actual sale price of the tags be reported?

 

[wytex]

I strongly disagree.

This would be a huge financial windfall for Wyoming residents, huge opportunity increase for DIY NRs (remember, these would be unit-wide).

Most importantly, it would further incentivize private landowners to increase game populations. At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that anything that puts more game on the landscape is a good thing.

Umm, have you heard of the elk population issues in SE Wyoming, we don't nee more of them we need access to hunt them and transferable LO tags would hurt that prospect for most R and NRs.
Residents do not want transferable LO tags but I could agree with a small price increase for our licenses and for sure raise the price of NR doe/fawn tags.

 

[Treeshark]

Will landowners be required to report the tag sales as income and be taxed on it? How would the actual sale price of the tags be reported?

Great question. I think you’d have to collect that via some other method for the state other than via income tax obviously, but in essence yes- a part of the fee would need to be reallocated back to the residents of the state. Low hurdle to figure out logistically.

That’s where a big part of the win for non-hunting residents would come from.

 

[Treeshark]

we don't nee more of them we need access to hunt them and transferable LO tags would hurt that prospect

No it wouldnt- it would do the exact opposite of what you’re saying.

Like other states, Wyoming landowners receiving these tags would need to open up their own land to hunting.

 

[wytex]

No it wouldnt- it would do the exact opposite of what you’re saying actually.

Like other states, Wyoming landowners receiving these tags would need to open up their own land to hunting.

In a perfect world but if you think LOs would go for that you haven't lived in Wyoming.
They don not want the state telling them who can hunt their land, hence we have legislation to force hunters to pay for the grass elk are eating even if no access.

 

[Treeshark]

They don not want the state telling them who can hunt their land,

No worries, then they get their tags pulled the following year. That would be a super easy fix.

My opinion- working with landowners is a better path forward than working against them.

 

[nrpate05]

They could follow similar seasons that CO does, but just for non-residents. Have a few separate rifle seasons that are much shorter in length than they are currently. WGFD could increase tag sales and limit harvest. No idea how the numbers would shake out though.

 

[go4thebighorn]

As a lifelong Wyoming resident, license costs need to go up for us if we want to keep our hunting quality the way it is. Buck and Bull tag prices need to reflect the market increase. Leave the doe and cow tags cheap for those who need the meat. When a bull elk license is cheaper than a box of ammunition, there is a problem with the system.

 

[SAJ-99]

1. I didn’t say it made up $10m. 3-4 is possible.

2. Wyoming has already done that. Also, my idea is in addition to the draw.

3. You’re right, but so what? So do lots of other things, both in WY and other states.

4. I respectfully disagree. I think it makes a ton of sense.

See? It’s possible to disagree without personal jabs

So it doesn’t solve the budget shortfall and increases the animosity the average hunter has with both landowners and wealthy NRs (and probably all NRs by proxy).

I think the citizens of every state get to choose their system. As a NR I can elect to participate or not. What I am totally against is not distributing the cost of a public agency/service broadly to everyone. This belief that you can charge one group and not another creates division when we need unity, even if that unity comes from some level of shared pain.

“Move to that state” is as much nonsense as going in the NM thread and telling them if they don’t like the system they should move away. It gets us nowhere.

 

[Huntkook]

There's alot of ways that WYGF can increase revenue, one being increase residents licenses, increase applications fees for both residents and non-residents with a reasonable increase and charge application fees for leftover tags. I'd also increase the super tag drawing costs, $30 is pretty cheap for a chance to hunt three animals. In order to eat the elephant you have to do it one bite at a time.

 

[hank4elk]

Just enjoying the discussion...from NM.

My ideas for here,everyone would hate.

Residents need to pay up. Like real today 2024 prices.
LO tags, all final sales prices registered/listed and G&F gets 10% on top of tag fee. Outfitters and ranchers have to pay a real tax on it.
Take the LO tags and only residents can pay a trespass fee to hunt ranches. LOL

Keep NMG&F out of the state funding BS. Let them charge a real fee and get the $.

This state needs about 200% more enforcement officers as it is.
2700 sq mi per local officer range. Solo. LOL

 

[Dave N]

As a NR I have to say that from what I have seen posted and read elsewhere, residents of Wyoming really put up a fight when an increase in fees is mentioned. I get it, but NOTHING stays the same price forever! If your hunting license goes up $5 will you say it's too much and quit? I doubt it. If your tags go up $5, $10, $20, will you stop buying them? I doubt it. Pushing off higher prices on "the other guy" only works for so long before it has to hit home. I gave up hunting out west long before my wife's issues mainly because it cost a LOT of money to do so. People complain about hunting becoming a rich man's sport, and residents pushing increases onto non-residents constantly because they can't accept reality about their own costs are contributing to that in a huge way. It's time to grit your teeth and accept an increase in resident fees ACROSS THE BOARD. It won't put anyone in the poor house and it will increase funding where it's needed.

The landowner situation is a whole different subject but as an outsider I find it funny how they can deny hunting but cry about wanting paid for having big game on their land. Too much politics involved to change anything as far as I can tell.