90/10 Rejected

[Jaquomo]

What's the threshold for leasing prices on federal land for grazing. I've heard it's LOW.

It is way low, ostensibly to keep beef prices low(er) and help cattle ranchers because their operating margin is so low as it is. So essentially a "subsidy".

 

[CoHiCntry]

They had the ability to apply for and draw those tags before they became leftovers. The reason they are leftovers is because residents didn’t apply for them.

My statement was more in a general sense that all states should cater to their residents. If there's a resident that wants a leftover tag than in my opinion they should be afforded that opportunity before a resident of another state. YMMV...

 

[Jaden Bales]

RE: Resident Preference in Leftovers. They did a presentation on how many people apply in a party for the regular draw, but then try to pick up a cow/calf, or WTD license in the leftover draw back in May. (I think?) Essentially, it's like if you, your dad, and your cousin want to hunt the same type 1 license, but not everyone wants a cow tag out in Timbuktu for meat, they can't have separate 2nd and 3rd choices.

I was unsure if it would make a difference to give preference originally, but based on their presentation, there were quite a few resident folks who applied in parties in the first draw, then by themselves in the second draw to snag freezer filler tags.

 

[Cant hit em]

Lil baby Jesus thank you

 

[tdhanses]

Higher prices may reduce participation some but it won’t be really noticeable.

 

[tdhanses]

Buzz H should be along shortly to tell everyone why they are wrong about something.

He got banned awhile ago, so don’t hold your breath.

 

[Indian Summer]

My statement was more in a general sense that all states should cater to their residents. If there's a resident that wants a leftover tag than in my opinion they should be afforded that opportunity before a resident of another state. YMMV...

Are there states where residents don’t have more and better opportunities?

 

[CoHiCntry]

Are there states where residents don’t have more and better opportunities?

I sure hope not… we obviously don’t see eye to eye on this. No big deal, moving on.

 

[chase4545]

My two cents. After the initial draw, I would prefer the reissuance and other leftover tags go to instate hunters only. I like that Colorado is giving priority to youth for 2nd draw. The odds are so stacked in the youth's favor I don't even apply as a resident. Not having drawn any tags other than a privet land only for my property I am only holding out hope with the reissuance or Idaho/Nevada.
High tag cost is a preference for me as well out of state. The challenge for this lies with opportunity for all vs turning this whole hunting thing into a European elitist hunting thing, which I despise. At a certain point, a person has to turn to landowner tags. As an example here in Colorado, I have a unit I love to hunt. Its a generally poor area but I like it because I can hunt it every year (for the most part). Tags are generally available every two to three years. Fourth season is 5 to 6 years. If I pull a landowner tag its $2,500.00 through one of the brokers. Currently, I play the odds in the reissuance and I typically pull it. If I were an out-of-stater and lost my ability to pull reissuance and 2nd draw for that matter I'd have to turn to landowner tags which would proly drive up those costs as well. This whole hunting game is turning into a high-priced thing that most can't afford even these days. If we drive up tag costs it would push most opportunities to those who can afford them. I see there really isn't a way around this unless we deal with fewer and fewer odds for all.

 

[Brooks]

He got banned awhile ago, so don’t hold your breath.

 

[Fatcamp]

My two cents. After the initial draw, I would prefer the reissuance and other leftover tags go to instate hunters only. I like that Colorado is giving priority to youth for 2nd draw. The odds are so stacked in the youth's favor I don't even apply as a resident. Not having drawn any tags other than a privet land only for my property I am only holding out hope with the reissuance or Idaho/Nevada.
High tag cost is a preference for me as well out of state. The challenge for this lies with opportunity for all vs turning this whole hunting thing into a European elitist hunting thing, which I despise. At a certain point, a person has to turn to landowner tags. As an example here in Colorado, I have a unit I love to hunt. Its a generally poor area but I like it because I can hunt it every year (for the most part). Tags are generally available every two to three years. Fourth season is 5 to 6 years. If I pull a landowner tag its $2,500.00 through one of the brokers. Currently, I play the odds in the reissuance and I typically pull it. If I were an out-of-stater and lost my ability to pull reissuance and 2nd draw for that matter I'd have to turn to landowner tags which would proly drive up those costs as well. This whole hunting game is turning into a high-priced thing that most can't afford even these days. If we drive up tag costs it would push most opportunities to those who can afford them. I see there really isn't a way around this unless we deal with fewer and fewer odds for all.

The more people you push out the more advocacy you lose. It's a priority for me so I don't care, but we should be cautious, I think.

 

[pirogue]

What's the threshold for leasing prices on federal land for grazing. I've heard it's LOW.

Another sore subject for many, such as the ranchers in the eastern half of the country who have to own or lease land for their cattle. They don’t have the advantage to pay a token fee to let their cattle roam on our taxpayer land and compete with elk and big game for grazing. Some get away with overgrazing, and we see less elk numbers.

 

[stonewall]

Are there states where residents don’t have more and better opportunities?

Texas. It sucks equally for resident and nonresident.

I really shouldn’t say that I guess; I’m one of the fortunate ones with some land access. But unless you own it or know someone who does, you’re only real opportunity is to pay for it.

 

[cnelk]

What's the threshold for leasing prices on federal land for grazing. I've heard it's LOW.

Its about $3 per cow/calf pair.
So if there are 200 pairs on a grazing allotment, it costs $600

Ranchers have to pay the fee regardless if they put the cattle on the NF or not, or lose the lease

Also, anyone that doesnt like this format shouldnt get pissed at the ranchers.
Go be pissed at the Forest Service

 

[cgasner1]

Its about $3 per cow/calf pair.
So if there are 200 pairs on a grazing allotment, it costs $600

Ranchers have to pay the fee regardless if they put the cattle on the NF or not, or lose the lease

Also, anyone that doesnt like this format shouldnt get pissed at the ranchers.
Go be pissed at the Forest Service

Made friends with a rancher here in Montana this year it’s pretty eye opening when your quiet and listen to the other side that he is on. This statement is 100% true they are just playing inside the rules that are established like us can’t blame the guy for trying to get a few more cows to market


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FlyGuy]

Well, my first thought here is that the task force actually did a pretty decent job all around.

My biggest concerns were the 90/10 and the 50% outfitter draw for NR, and those were almost unanimously voted down.

And I think the wait period makes some sense. It will probably increase demand in other areas a little, but it makes sense. It seems to work well in ID.

Anyway, I read the article and immediately felt a huge sense of relief. This could have gone way, way worse for the NR.

(Now, if they would just vote down that stupid Wilderness rule…. )


“What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, man would die from a great loneliness of spirit.“

Chief Seattle

 

[LostArra]

Its about $3 per cow/calf pair.
So if there are 200 pairs on a grazing allotment, it costs $600

Ranchers have to pay the fee regardless if they put the cattle on the NF or not, or lose the lease

Also, anyone that doesnt like this format shouldnt get pissed at the ranchers.
Go be pissed at the Forest Service

Agree but it's more than a little frustrating when the rancher is late in removing the cattle, like during archery elk season. Happened in Colorado multiple times. Cowboys on horses rounding up cattle can provide elk intel. "yes we spooked a herd and saw them running fast over that far ridge"
Pardon the hijack.

The TF rejecting the outfitter draw was the most important result.

 

[fatlander]

A 40-50% increase on nonresidents tags, in a state where non residents already pay 77% of the annual revenue, equates to non residents paying for ~110% of the current annual revenue.

Do we at least get dinner and a kiss first when we cross the Wyoming line with a tag in our pocket?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[River_Rat]

A 40-50% increase on nonresidents tags, in a state where non residents already pay 77% of the annual revenue, equates to non residents paying for ~110% of the current annual revenue.

Do we at least get dinner and a kiss first when we cross the Wyoming line with a tag in our pocket?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

U get the privilege of having said tag in ur pocket. A state allowing a nonresident to harvest a state managed game animal is a privilege not a right. And that goes for state or federal lands.

 

[fatlander]

U get the privilege of having said tag in ur pocket. A state allowing a nonresident to harvest a state managed game animal is a privilege not a right. And that goes for state or federal lands.

You get hosed. Living in the state doesn’t pay for the management of the resource. The revenue does. The numbers don’t lie, non residents contribute almost 8 dollars for every 2 dollars that residents contribute yet we get 10% of big 5 tags. And will one day get 10% of the rest of the big game tags.
Furthermore, western states receive more PR due to their geographic size while continuing to cut NR opportunity.

I have no problem paying double or triple the cost of current prices. With that said, I do have a problem paying exponentially more than residents for an increasingly dwindling slice of the pie.

I’m honestly surprised the fair and equitable inclusion lawyers haven’t found a way to exploit this in a class action lawsuit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk