I propose the “Fair opportunity in America’s Outdoors Act”

[bsnedeker]

Oh i get that, but if nonresident prop up a state why not get more of that states resources?

I mean I get it if WY only needed 10% in federal funding but it need 50% for it’s overall state budget, not just wildlife.

States can easily manage the wildlife and number of license available.

WY can’t even afford itself.

The States That Are Most Reliant on Federal Aid

MoneyGeek’s analysis identified the states most reliant on federal funding and found an intriguing correlation between dependency and political leaning.

www.moneygeek.com

8 states in the entire country are tax positive.

Are those the only 8 states that should be able to set their own tag allocations?

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[tdhanses]

8 states in the entire country are tax positive.

Are those the only 8 states that should be able to set their own tag allocations?

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

Many don’t rely on 50% of their funding coming from the feds or nonresidents, not only is WY wildlife propped up by nonresidents half its state budget is.

Its a welfare state by any account, otherwise it would make changes to not be so reliant on federal funding.

 

[bsnedeker]

Many don’t rely on 50% of their funding coming from the feds or nonresidents, not only is WY wildlife propped up by nonresidents half its state budget is.

Oh, so it's the percentage that upsets you. At what specific percentage of funding should states be relieved of their rights to set tag allocations?

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Rainyday]

We want to turn them over to the states so they can properly manage. Residents of these western states dont want to pony up the tax dollars to do that. Instead, they want the rest of the country to do it. They will give you a big shpeel about how you can still hunt squirrels and look at birds there. Mean while they are going continually cut your tags at the same time they tell you how you arent needed. Buy our products, send money, but dont bother applying for tags basically.

Oh and if you dont move there your selfish. Thats my favorite one. As a lot of people would love to just drop everything and go west, but you know, they have actual commitments in life other than themselves.

Gotcha thanks for clearing that up for me. I see where you are coming from but of all the things the federal government wastes my tax dollars on maintaining public lands in states I’m not a resident of is the last thing I’m worried about lol. I don’t mind pitching in a few bucks for public lands anywhere in the country even if I rarely use them

 

[CJ19]

Gotcha thanks for clearing that up for me. I see where you are coming from but of all the things the federal government wastes my tax dollars on maintaining public lands in states I’m not a resident of is the last thing I’m worried about lol. I don’t mind pitching in a few bucks for public lands anywhere in the country even if I rarely use them

By all means go ahead, that is your right and i dont blame you 1 bit. There are indeed worse things a guy can slend money on.

 

[tdhanses]

Oh, so it's the percentage that upsets you. At what specific percentage of funding should states be relieved of their rights to set tag allocations?

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

Well for starters if a state receives 50% of it’s funding it should really look in the mirror at it’s overall approach, it’s like that kid who has parents to fund half it’s life.

But I did say earlier tag allocations should be based on the support received by nonresidents, federal funding percentage.

 

[BuzzH]

Gotcha thanks for clearing that up for me. I see where you are coming from but of all the things the federal government wastes my tax dollars on maintaining public lands in states I’m not a resident of is the last thing I’m worried about lol. I don’t mind pitching in a few bucks for public lands anywhere in the country even if I rarely use them

100% agree with you.

The entire land management budget is about 1/4 of 1% of the national budget.

Most Americans call their few dollar (if that) a year in taxes well worth it to manage federal lands.

 

[diamond10x]

And all of that is only possible with public lands right? Otherwise while you’ll have a tag you’ll have nowhere to actually use it if public lands weren’t there.

I think I sort of get the disconnection. I have no clue where you live, but would you drive 15 hours to go ride your dirt bike on a trail in Southern Arizona, camp on blm land in eastern Wyoming, or hike some place? I personally never would, it’s pointless as I can do all that on our ranch here at home and not have to abide by anybody’s rules but my own.

The ones saying you’re not losing anything live by these public lands so therefore use them for other than hunting because that’s the closest place they have. If I lived close by these public lands, sure I’d rip around on my four wheeler but I’m not going to drive 15 hours to do it, and I highly doubt they would either.

 

[BuzzH]

Well for starters if a state receives 50% of it’s funding it should really look in the mirror at it’s overall approach, it’s like that kid who has parents to fund half it’s life.

But I did say earlier tag allocations should be based on the support received by nonresidents, federal funding percentage.

Wyoming's revenue is 36% from federal funds...not 50.

 

[bsnedeker]

Well for starters if a state receives 50% of it’s funding it should really look in the mirror at it’s overall approach, it’s like that kid who has parents to fund half it’s life.

But I did say earlier tag allocations should be based on the support received by nonresidents, federal funding percentage.

ok, so you're saying that every state that is tax negative should give up the percentage of their wildlife equal to the amount they get from the feds?

Yeah, I think that would be difficult to get to work. Everytime a hurricane hits in the SE they are going to have to find a bunch of NRs to come down and blast deer.

But hey, good luck with that.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[tdhanses]

I think I sort of get the disconnection. I have no clue where you live, but would you drive 15 hours to go ride your dirt bike on a trail in Southern Arizona, camp on blm land in eastern Wyoming, or hike some place? I personally never would, it’s pointless as I can do all that on our ranch here at home and not have to abide by anybody’s rules but my own.

The ones saying you’re not losing anything live by these public lands so therefore use them for other than hunting because that’s the closest place they have. If I lived close by these public lands, sure I’d rip around on my four wheeler but I’m not going to drive 15 hours to do it, and I highly doubt they would either.

All the while we are paying to keep most of the states with the largest tracts of public solvent.

 

[tdhanses]

Wyoming's revenue is 36% from federal funds...not 50.

Well why does it rely so heavily on federal funding, my state doesn’t. Maybe it’s time for some income taxes to be implemented.

 

[BuzzH]

I think I sort of get the disconnection. I have no clue where you live, but would you drive 15 hours to go ride your dirt bike on a trail in Southern Arizona, camp on blm land in eastern Wyoming, or hike some place? I personally never would, it’s pointless as I can do all that on our ranch here at home and not have to abide by anybody’s rules but my own.

The ones saying you’re not losing anything live by these public lands so therefore use them for other than hunting because that’s the closest place they have. If I lived close by these public lands, sure I’d rip around on my four wheeler but I’m not going to drive 15 hours to do it, and I highly doubt they would either.

You have no idea...we have boatloads of snowmobilers that come from the Midwest just to ride their sleds here on public land. Just last night drove by a local hotel with several dozen enclosed trailers from Nebraska, Kansas, Wisconsin, Michigan, the Dakota's, etc.

 

[BuzzH]

Well why does it rely so heavily on federal funding, my state doesn’t.

Look it up...

 

[CJ19]

100% agree with you.

The entire land management budget is about 1/4 of 1% of the national budget.

Most Americans call their few dollar (if that) a year in taxes well worth it to manage federal lands.

If its so nominal, residents in these states can pay their own way. Afterall, all ive been hearing is how self sufficient these states are. Its time western states pay their fair share.

 

[Rich M]

ok, so you're saying that every state that is tax negative should give up the percentage of their wildlife equal to the amount they get from the feds?

Yeah, I think that would be difficult to get to work. Everytime a hurricane hits in the SE they are going to have to find a bunch of NRs to come down and blast deer.

But hey, good luck with that.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

What we’re saying is leave it alone.

Bunch of folks get on and tell other folks that its their ball and noone else can play. When the other kids are the ones that bought the ball.

Either it is a really difficult concept or you never played w kids before. Buzz and his buddies are wanting to block out the folks who ultimately pay for his fun BUT he wants them to keep paying for it. And they are using the state govt.

Maybe there is a way to involve the fed govt so the nr dont get royally screwed. Like bringing in the teacher to a playground squabble, which is all this is.

 

[tdhanses]

Look it up...

Just cracks me up a state that is so adamantly me first relies so heavily on nonresident’s as a whole, you would think that would eat at them knowing they are propped up by so many others they don’t like.

 

[tdhanses]

You have no idea...we have boatloads of snowmobilers that come from the Midwest just to ride their sleds here on public land. Just last night drove by a local hotel with several dozen enclosed trailers from Nebraska, Kansas, Wisconsin, Michigan, the Dakota's, etc.

Yup but boatloads are what .05% of the population.

 

[bsnedeker]

What we’re saying is leave it alone.

Bunch of folks get on and tell other folks that its their ball and noone else can play. When the other kids are the ones that bought the ball.

Either it is a really difficult concept or you never played w kids before. Buzz and his buddies are wanting to block out the folks who ultimately pay for his fun BUT he wants them to keep paying for it. And they are using the state govt.

Maybe there is a way to involve the fed govt so the nr dont get royally screwed. Like bringing in the teacher to a playground squabble, which is all this is.

And what we're saying is no one cares about your opinion. I'm sure that's tough to hear but it's true.

If applications in the west start going down then things might change, but with the demand at an all time high the states can pretty much do whatever they want because for every one guy that drops out 5 guys will try to grab his spot.

It's supply and demand. It's not complicated. Go ahead and cry to the feds if you want. They'll tell you that states manage their wildlife. End of discussion.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[BuzzH]

If its so nominal, residents in these states can pay their own way. Afterall, all ive been hearing is how self sufficient these states are. Its time western states pay their fair share.

We do....you pay no more for land management than I do. No bigger percentage of your federal taxes go to land management than mine.