Kinda...NR drew them because residents didn't want them.
I definitely want one, just not bad enough to put it as a 1st or 2nd choice
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kinda...NR drew them because residents didn't want them.
Ppl do this in many other states. I don’t and haven’t saw the issue. Heck AZ will let you share pts and then the high pt holder can turn his tag back in and keep pts! U can share pts in Utah as well.OK so it appears there is some push back about the weapons segregation and I get that but not many comments on the piggyback of the points...one person above did say that everyone in the group goes back to 0.
Thats fine but what about the guy who has points for his brother, his sister, his wife, his buddy, his buddy's buddy, and so on. He uses those points averaged every single year in essence drawing a primo tag for double the price. Nobody sees something wrong with this? I guess another way to look at it is that the guy is only harvesting one animal and the other tag potentially goes unfilled....so there is that. Just seems a bit shandy to me.
Good conversation and reading on this thread for sure.
Kinda...
I definitely want one, just not bad enough to put it as a 1st or 2nd choice
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
or 3rd choice?Kinda...
I definitely want one, just not bad enough to put it as a 1st or 2nd choice
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Nr's can get the same number of tags as residents for all species.
The leftover resident tags being drawn by nr in the initial drawing will be changing. There will be very high resident support for that. In my home antelope unit of 16, 73% of the tags in the initial draw went to nr. %73! Name another limited quota unit in another western state that issues 3/4 of the tags nr.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
NR drew them because residents didn't want them.
It's not 2010 anymore.lol yeah when I've been up there antelope hunting the residents laugh and tell me to kill them all because they don't want them. Pretty sure the state just dishes the tags out to NR's because somebody's got to kill the darn things.
lol yeah when I've been up there antelope hunting the residents laugh and tell me to kill them all because they don't want them. Pretty sure the state just dishes the tags out to NR's because somebody's got to kill the darn things.
Not necessarily, many of us play the odds for our drawing since we do not have PP for antelope.
What a load of crap...check the number of Residents applying for pronghorn tags, in particular the areas with good access.
Any resident that tells you they don't want pronghorn should be punched in the throat.
Can you tell me why "somebody's got to kill the darn things?"
This mentality is everything I dislike about hunters and why I choose to not associate with a vast majority of the "hunting" public. Pronghorn are a very unique and special species and worthy of respect. The amount of revenue generated by pronghorn via license sales, matching PR funds and other revenue, floats many other funding deficits from animals like sheep, moose, goat, and even sport fishing.
Total program costs for pronghorn are just over $4,000,000 while they generate over $13,000,000 in revenue.
Compare that to say bighorn sheep, with a program cost of $2,035,000 while generating only $1,505,000 in revenue.
Its all here, in black and white, crystal clear:
Any dipchit that says we don't want or need pronghorn around is total lacking in the basic ability to research, comprehend, and understand basic 3rd grade math. Also lacks the critical thinking skills to understand economic multipliers and the importance to local economies that they likely live and work in...by just having "the darn things" around that "nobody wants".
Like I said, these type of people need to be punched in the throat, and hard.
It's not 2010 anymore.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
What a load of crap...check the number of Residents applying for pronghorn tags, in particular the areas with good access.
Any resident that tells you they don't want pronghorn should be punched in the throat.
Can you tell me why "somebody's got to kill the darn things?"
This mentality is everything I dislike about hunters and why I choose to not associate with a vast majority of the "hunting" public. Pronghorn are a very unique and special species and worthy of respect. The amount of revenue generated by pronghorn via license sales, matching PR funds and other revenue, floats many other funding deficits from animals like sheep, moose, goat, and even sport fishing.
Total program costs for pronghorn are just over $4,000,000 while they generate over $13,000,000 in revenue.
Compare that to say bighorn sheep, with a program cost of $2,035,000 while generating only $1,505,000 in revenue.
Its all here, in black and white, crystal clear:
Any dipchit that says we don't want or need pronghorn around is total lacking in the basic ability to research, comprehend, and understand basic 3rd grade math. Also lacks the critical thinking skills to understand economic multipliers and the importance to local economies that they likely live and work in...by just having "the darn things" around that "nobody wants".
Like I said, these type of people need to be punched in the throat, and hard.
What a load of crap...check the number of Residents applying for pronghorn tags, in particular the areas with good access.
Any resident that tells you they don't want pronghorn should be punched in the throat.
Can you tell me why "somebody's got to kill the darn things?"
This mentality is everything I dislike about hunters and why I choose to not associate with a vast majority of the "hunting" public. Pronghorn are a very unique and special species and worthy of respect. The amount of revenue generated by pronghorn via license sales, matching PR funds and other revenue, floats many other funding deficits from animals like sheep, moose, goat, and even sport fishing.
Total program costs for pronghorn are just over $4,000,000 while they generate over $13,000,000 in revenue.
Compare that to say bighorn sheep, with a program cost of $2,035,000 while generating only $1,505,000 in revenue.
Its all here, in black and white, crystal clear:
Any dipchit that says we don't want or need pronghorn around is total lacking in the basic ability to research, comprehend, and understand basic 3rd grade math. Also lacks the critical thinking skills to understand economic multipliers and the importance to local economies that they likely live and work in...by just having "the darn things" around that "nobody wants".
Like I said, these type of people need to be punched in the throat, and hard.
Hey just passing along what I've heard from life-long Wyoming residents. Try having Texas plates and telling someone you're antelope hunting, hear the same thing every year and then they laugh while trying to con me into hanging a white flag on my truck and driving around.Neighbors of my kids up there say it, guys at the fly shop in Laramie, couple ranchers I met, lots of folks. I spend some time up there and try to be social and I've heard it a lot. I don't take it as they don't want any around but I've heard "Pronghorn to us is like the hogs are to you down there." and things of that nature.
As for the math, of course they generate more revenue 75% of the tags going to NR's who pay out the nose. Sell 75% of your Elk tags to NR and see what that does to Elk tag revenue.
No, 75% of the tags don't go to NR's...
Come on Buzz, you're not going to nitpick numbers are you? This chain of conversation started down this rabbit hole after you quoted my reply to the guy referencing 73% of initial draw tags going to NR for his unit. Yes we all know the numbers are lower for total tags and lower for other units, probably much lower, but the point of my reply to you referencing the revenue stands that the revenue is higher due to the fact the NR's have a bigger chunk of tag allocation and are paying more per tag, and NR's have a bigger chunk of tag allocation because R's simply aren't that excited to hunt them. How's that for a run-on non-stop sentence? I'm not going back to proof read it I hope it's not too squirrely.
I'm having trouble reconciling a couple of your posts... It seems like in one breath you are lamenting NR opportunity in Wyoming, but in other posts you are espousing the value of the wildlife resource in terms of revenue and benefit to the local economy, a large part of which is paid for by NR. I hunted Wyoming this year and had a great time. I picked up leftover antelope doe tags and deer tags and had a good experience. I am thankful that Wyoming gives such great opportunity to NR hunters - and it does for sure. I guess I don't understand why NR seem to be disproportionately disliked in WY... Perhaps NR aren't disliked any more than any other state, but organizations like Mountain Pursuits and hearing stories about flat tires and encounters with angry ranchers sure make it seem like we are persona non grata. Most folks here, myself included, seem to love Wyoming and are happy with the opportunity to hunt there - every year if they so choose, so I guess I don't get why you seem so frustrated with NRs.I agree with you about the January deadline for applying, but the later draw date absolutely needed to happen and does make total sense for all kinds of valid reasons. WOGA was not happy about the draw being pushed back, and in a last ditch effort to salvage the "loss" of the early draw, they got the commission to agree to keep the deadline January 31.
Name me another State that:
Gives NR's 25% of their sheep tags
Gives NR's 20% of their moose tags
Gives NR's 20% of their goat tags.
Gives NR's 20% of their bison tags.
Gives NR's 16% of their LQ elk tags.
Gives NR's 16% of their RP cow/calf tags
Gives NR's 20% of their LQ pronghorn tags.
Gives NR's 20% of their LQ deer tags.
Gives NR's 60% of their available pronghorn tags.
Gives NR's a crap load of region wide deer tags.
Drops all the leftover deer and pronghorn tags that aren't issued to R's in to the NR initial draw. Lots of Residents are pushing the GF to change that to another R draw for the leftover quota's BEFORE moving the tags to the second draw or dropping them to the NR's in the initial draw.
What gets tiresome, and really makes me question how hard I want to continue to support NR opportunity here, is when NR's complain and want even more. To the point that I think its well past time for some of the generosity we give NR's needing to be perhaps revisited to come in line with how other Western States treat NR's.
I apply for 8-10 states a year as a NR and I don't get treated that well in any other state I apply in, nor do I see any of the Residents in those other states I apply for clamoring to help increase my opportunities as a NR there. Not that I expect it, but it sure seems a very large disproportion of NR's bitch about not enough opportunity in Wyoming in comparison to other states that are far more restrictive on NR opportunity.
...and you missed the point that, regardless of who draws what, pronghorn are a revenue positive species for the economy of the State and also the Game and Fish.
Other animals, like sheep, moose, goat, etc. and even sport fishing don't pay for themselves. In other words, revenue generated from pronghorn pays the bills for the shortfalls of managing sheep, moose, goats, and sport fishing.
Fact.
I'm having trouble reconciling a couple of your posts... It seems like in one breath you are lamenting NR opportunity in Wyoming, but in other posts you are espousing the value of the wildlife resource in terms of revenue and benefit to the local economy, a large part of which is paid for by NR. I hunted Wyoming this year and had a great time. I picked up leftover antelope doe tags and deer tags and had a good experience. I am thankful that Wyoming gives such great opportunity to NR hunters - and it does for sure. I guess I don't understand why NR seem to be disproportionately disliked in WY... Perhaps NR aren't disliked any more than any other state, but organizations like Mountain Pursuits and hearing stories about flat tires and encounters with angry ranchers sure make it seem like we are persona non grata. Most folks here, myself included, seem to love Wyoming and are happy with the opportunity to hunt there - every year if they so choose, so I guess I don't get why you seem so frustrated with NRs.
I don't recall a large push for "more opportunity" for NRs, specifically as it relates to tag numbers - honestly, I think that WY gives us ample tags and I hope it doesn't decrease. I also understand NR angst about the recent change to the draw applications. I'm glad it was beneficial to wildlife management and the lawful allocation of tags, however I'm pretty sure that most NR are disappointed with the WGFD decision to side with WOGA and keep the application date at 31 Jan. I get that ultimately you don't care about that, since your concern is proper management and tag allocation, and I frankly don't expect anything other than WOGA looking out for themselves at the expense of everything else. It was a good decision that had poor execution, I suppose. I personally find WGFD's wilderness rule to be infuriating. I would honestly rather have the wilderness areas be a LE unit that I could never draw, rather than an area I can get on a general tag but never step foot in without a resident or guide. I don't know why that makes it more bearable - never hunting it because I can't draw the tag rather than an arbitrary rule that says I can't cross an invisible line, but that's my opinion.
I've read enough of your responses to know that this falls into your "yup, you're right, it sucks, good luck changing it" bucket. Fair enough, but we should be able to have these conversations without being labeled as whiny ungrateful NRs. Everybody looks after their own interests, whether it is you, WOGA, WGFD, or NRs... but we sure seem to take some heat for it.
On behalf of all the grateful NR hunters, thanks for protecting our privileges to hunt in WY.