Lobbying Wyoming game and fish negatively affecting non-resident elk hunters

[Rifleman86]

Western non-resident hunters , fngs, and lurkers I know your out there or looking at this thread and frustrated. You have had goals of a western hunting trip and looked at the insanity. The first thing I would like to say is there are some great people on this sight helpful ,generously willing to share info etc. Dont kid yourself there are also some that feel 1 non-resident in there state is too many . You are viewed as the enemy, competition. They do not want non-resident hunting. I respect their opinion.
Non -resident western hunters do we have a leg to stand on , bargining chips, negotiating power ? Are we working from a position of strength or weakness ? Obviously MONEY is the best one. Most western game/fish departments rely heavily on non-resident license fees. At what point and how do we use that bargining chip ?Other thoughts on Federal land use ? Contacting state senators / congressman involved in office of tourism. There must be lawyers/ politicians looking at this situation scratching their heads looking at legal angles. Throwing thoughts /options out there. Any other western non-resident hunters have any ideas

I don’t think anyone would say that it isn’t a luxury now.

I probably spend close to $2k in tags, preference points and fees to do one western hunt a year for 10 days. That’s not including the probably $1000-1500 I’ll spend on the trip in gas and a hotel on the way out and back.

Is it doable on a middle class salary? Sure. Is it expensive? You bet. I don’t do much else for entertainment despite myself and my wife making 100k plus.

Luckily a moose or sheep tag is as of now, within the realm of reality to most people I’d they are lucky enough to draw one. Same with an eastern elk tag.

Hell hunting itself is a privilege. I don’t like to play the class warfare card, I’m better off than most. But I don’t want us to enter a world where an elk tag costs 5-10 grand.

We’re already seeing this happen in the east where the days of a door knock and a handshake we’re all you needed is long gone. Now a quality lease costs 5k minimum and the sport is dying.

I don’t want to see the same thing happen to the west, even if the draw odds need to come down for biological or social reasons.

There are lots of countries where you can pay big money to shoot trophy game on a private ranch. In the US the average dude can pay a reasonable amount to hunt them on millions of acres of public ground.

That’s pretty awesome and I want to keep it that way.

 

[Paul_E_Hunter]

Being a FNG -albeit an old FNG...I wonder how this will affect hunter numbers in the future? It is only NR in the western states, much land in the east is being leased up & becoming inaccessible. It just seems to me that at some point the limited opportunity due to access and/or cost are going to decrease the number of hunters...and then the anti-hunters will be there in the courts and in the legislatures. As a few mentioned above, it is an economic system - supply and demand and as with any economic system it will self regulate. I'm blessed living in northern MN with many acres of public...course no elk yet here.

 

[bsnedeker]

Being a FNG -albeit an old FNG...I wonder how this will affect hunter numbers in the future? It is only NR in the western states, much land in the east is being leased up & becoming inaccessible. It just seems to me that at some point the limited opportunity due to access and/or cost are going to decrease the number of hunters...and then the anti-hunters will be there in the courts and in the legislatures. As a few mentioned above, it is an economic system - supply and demand and as with any economic system it will self regulate. I'm blessed living in northern MN with many acres of public...course no elk yet here.

I'm sure you are aware that there are elk in northern Minnesota. I'm sure you're also aware that MN does not allow NRs to apply for those tags. 0% NR allocation...not 1 single tag for NRs. They take some MONSTERS from that herd on a pretty regular basis.

As you said, it's supply and demand. Very few tags, very high demand, state decides to limit the opportunity to it's residents.

In the west, if/when the supply increases, or the demand decreases, you will see increased opportunity. It's pretty straight forward.

As far as the reduction in hunter numbers, yes, the percentage of people who consider themselves hunters in this country is declining in theory, but that has nothing to do with what is happening in western states. It's entirely driven by what's happening east of the Mississippi. Demand for Western hunting tags is at an all time high and continues to grow every single year. This is why prices are going up, and opportunities are going down. Again, very straight forward.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[tdhanses]

I'm sure you are aware that there are elk in northern Minnesota. I'm sure you're also aware that MN does not allow NRs to apply for those tags. 0% NR allocation...not 1 single tag for NRs. They take some MONSTERS from that herd on a pretty regular basis.

As you said, it's supply and demand. Very few tags, very high demand, state decides to limit the opportunity to it's residents.

In the west, if/when the supply increases, or the demand decreases, you will see increased opportunity. It's pretty straight forward.

As far as the reduction in hunter numbers, yes, the percentage of people who consider themselves hunters in this country is declining in theory, but that has nothing to do with what is happening in western states. It's entirely driven by what's happening east of the Mississippi. Demand for Western hunting tags is at an all time high and continues to grow every single year. This is why prices are going up, and opportunities are going down. Again, very straight forward.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

How many elk in the MN herd?

 

[bsnedeker]

How many elk in the MN herd?

A small enough number that the state has made the decision to only allow residents the opportunity to draw. It's a great example of a state doing the best it can with an extremely limited resource and prioritizing the people who reside in that state over non residents, as it should be.

Hopefully some day the herd will grow enough to allow more opportunity for residents, and maybe some day non-residents as well.



Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Gutshot007]

How many elk in the MN herd?

Estimated number 126 February 2020. Like "fleas on a hound" over running all that private land they're on. I think Minnesota last draw handed out 2 bull tags, 8 either sex and 20 cow. Seriously I really think it would be great to open it up to non residents. Start a point system. Send $100 /year to the state. Odds are after 142 years you can draw a coveted "cow tag " for $5000. You get the tag, but oh wait there's non-where to hunt because it 99%private !

 

[Wyobohunter]

Estimated number 126 February 2020. Like "fleas on a hound" over running all that private land they're on. I think Minnesota last draw handed out 2 bull tags, 8 either sex and 20 cow. Seriously I really think it would be great to open it up to non residents. Start a point system. Send $100 /year to the state. Odds are after 142 years you can draw a coveted "cow tag " for $5000. You get the tag, but oh wait there's non-where to hunt because it 99%private !

I believe the point was that the state of MN is managing that little herd as they see fit. That’s exactly what they should do. The fact that there is more public land in WY is irrelevant. You are allowed to come use the public land here just like any resident. WY has the elk numbers to support resident hunting and allow some NR to come hunt elk as well. That’s exactly what we do. You’re welcome.

 

[tdhanses]

A small enough number that the state has made the decision to only allow residents the opportunity to draw. It's a great example of a state doing the best it can with an extremely limited resource and prioritizing the people who reside in that state over non residents, as it should be.

Hopefully some day the herd will grow enough to allow more opportunity for residents, and maybe some day non-residents as well.



Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

Yeah but is it a few hundred animals or thousands? Hard to compare a NR op in a state with only a few hundred animals, if there were only 100 mt goat or bighorns in MT there understandably wouldn’t of ever been a NR op.

I doubt the herd is ever allowed to get big, like here in KS it’s managed to keep a few hundred on the military base and wipe out everything off it, therefore it never grows. Too much development and people, I wish they would try to expand the herd and stop all hunting outside of the military base but the AG business is too loud since it’ll be them feeding the herds not the feds.

Also if MT ever only gave out 20 tags for anything, I’d expect them to 100% go to residents, but I doubt you want to see that few of tags issued even though a few years of that would vastly help the elk herds decimated by wolves, same for mule deer.

 

[tdhanses]

I believe the point was that the state of MN is managing that little herd as they see fit. That’s exactly what they should do. The fact that there is more public land in WY is irrelevant. You are allowed to come use the public land here just like any resident. WY has the elk numbers to support resident hunting and allow some NR to come hunt elk as well. That’s exactly what we do. You’re welcome.

But on the flip side, if half the public was sold in WY and replaced in KS, MN, MO, KY, TN and WI these elk herds could be managed to grow and increase resident opportunities.

Fact is if there was more public land in every state and less in the west, people wouldn’t really be too upset about allocations in the west, if they can hunt most of the same animals in their home state as easily. Be greatfull the rest of the country see’s a need for so much public land in the west that provides amazing outdoor opportunities in the west.

 

[bsnedeker]

But on the flip side, if half the public was sold in WY and replaced in KS, MN, MO, KY, TN and WI these elk herds could be managed to grow and increase resident opportunities.

Fact is if there was more public land in every state and less in the west, people wouldn’t really be too upset about allocations in the west, if they can hunt most of the same animals in their home state as easily. Be greatfull the rest of the country see’s a need for so much public land in the west that provides amazing outdoor opportunities in the west.

And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bicycle.

I try to keep my opinions on things based on the reality that we actually live in, not some hypothetical world where this country was constructed entirely differently than it actually is.

 

[bsnedeker]

Yeah but is it a few hundred animals or thousands? Hard to compare a NR op in a state with only a few hundred animals, if there were only 100 mt goat or bighorns in MT there understandably wouldn’t of ever been a NR op.

I doubt the herd is ever allowed to get big, like here in KS it’s managed to keep a few hundred on the military base and wipe out everything off it, therefore it never grows. Too much development and people, I wish they would try to expand the herd and stop all hunting outside of the military base but the AG business is too loud since it’ll be them feeding the herds not the feds.

Also if MT ever only gave out 20 tags for anything, I’d expect them to 100% go to residents, but I doubt you want to see that few of tags issued even though a few years of that would vastly help the elk herds decimated by wolves, same for mule deer.

What difference does the number of animals make? Think about what you are saying for just 1 second.

Let's say there are 50 elk in MN, and MT has 120,000 elk. You think that MN should be able to delegate their elk tags to residents because it's a "small" number, and you think that MT shouldn't because it's a big number? Ok, that means that you believe that somewhere between 50 and 120,000 there is a specific number of elk where the state should not be allowed to manage their own elk....tell me, where is that number? Also, give me even one tiny bit of logic as to how you arrived at that number. Hint: Don't waste your time, because you have no logical basis for your argument.

Ok, so let's not base it on just pure elk numbers, let's base it on something else. I know you are a big fan of getting rid of public lands, so let's tie that in. Let's throw something about federal land in there...

Hmm....how about acres of public land per elk....ooops, nope, that wouldn't work out very well for you so we better look at something else. Oh, ok, let's look at the amount of federal dollars on public land per elk....nope, that's gonna be bad for you too.

Gee whiz, it's almost like your argument is entirely arbitrary and has no basis in logic or facts at all, and seems entirely based on you being butthurt that you aren't getting the number of tags you want. Could that be possible?

 

[Gutshot007]

I don't know if you guys have heard of the new Federal program ? it's called "Hunters feeding hunters" I guess it starts next year . The Federal government welfare land leases have decided to also legislate additional funding and provide HOT LUNCHES at all trailheads to returning hunters . AOC was quoted as saying "it''s inhumane to expect hunters to eat mountain house freeze dried meals with the high sodium and feet swelling" . Meals will be provided to all race,religions,sex,creed and caliber (even those shooting 6.5 Creedmoor will also be included). Free cheese provided at departure. Sorry no pizza or chocolate milk per Michelle Obama do to the obesity epidemic. Think of it resident and nonresident hunters sharing rice cakes on the mountain.

 

[Gutshot007]

Nutritious and delicious

 

[Wyobohunter]

But on the flip side, if half the public was sold in WY and replaced in KS, MN, MO, KY, TN and WI these elk herds could be managed to grow and increase resident opportunities.

It’s cute that you think that this is realistic. It’s ok to have dreams. Sometimes I dream that the trees in my yard will start to grow money leaves. Let’s both keep our fingers crossed. Until then I’ll have to settle with being “greatfull”.

 

[JakeSCH]

I haven't read any comments past the first page...but if my red state brothers really want to stop californians from moving to your state, I would make it easier to visit once a year and not give motive to move there. Lol

 

[tdhanses]

What difference does the number of animals make? Think about what you are saying for just 1 second.

Let's say there are 50 elk in MN, and MT has 120,000 elk. You think that MN should be able to delegate their elk tags to residents because it's a "small" number, and you think that MT shouldn't because it's a big number? Ok, that means that you believe that somewhere between 50 and 120,000 there is a specific number of elk where the state should not be allowed to manage their own elk....tell me, where is that number? Also, give me even one tiny bit of logic as to how you arrived at that number. Hint: Don't waste your time, because you have no logical basis for your argument.

Ok, so let's not base it on just pure elk numbers, let's base it on something else. I know you are a big fan of getting rid of public lands, so let's tie that in. Let's throw something about federal land in there...

Hmm....how about acres of public land per elk....ooops, nope, that wouldn't work out very well for you so we better look at something else. Oh, ok, let's look at the amount of federal dollars on public land per elk....nope, that's gonna be bad for you too.

Gee whiz, it's almost like your argument is entirely arbitrary and has no basis in logic or facts at all, and seems entirely based on you being butthurt that you aren't getting the number of tags you want. Could that be possible?

Reread what I said, I agreed with a 100% allocation to residents for states that have such a limited amount of tags, sub 20 tags for example. Never once did I say a state doesn’t have a right or what % they should even giv a NR, just pointing out how it’s silly to compare a state like MN with just over 100 elk in the state to one with 120k+ about NR opportunities.

Take the emotion down a level and relax.

 

[tdhanses]

And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bicycle.

I try to keep my opinions on things based on the reality that we actually live in, not some hypothetical world where this country was constructed entirely differently than it actually is.

Reality is none of us know the future of public lands but your right it’s more likely they are sold and not replaced then they would be replaced in other states and the way the country is headed don’t be shocked if this gets traction at some point once the AOC’s of the world realize it’s an easy transition of funds to those more in need then those of us that us them for hobbies, the far right would jump to join in.

 

[Fordguy]

Here we go again...

Federal Land Agency Managers' Frequently Asked Questions About Fish and Wildlife Management on Federal Lands

www.cfc.umt.edu

 

[bsnedeker]

Reread what I said, I agreed with a 100% allocation to residents for states that have such a limited amount of tags, sub 20 tags for example. Never once did I say a state doesn’t have a right or what % they should even giv a NR, just pointing out how it’s silly to compare a state like MN with just over 100 elk in the state to one with 120k+ about NR opportunities.

Take the emotion down a level and relax.

You are the one who needs to reread what you wrote, not me. There is absolutely no logic to any points you have made throughout this entire thread. You have literally advocated for punishing western states based on the number of NR tags they give out.

You think MN should be held to a different standard because of the number of elk in the state... so where's the line dude? What is the specific number of elk that should enable the state to set there own tag allocations without losing federal lands and funding?

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Paul_E_Hunter]

I hesitate to even mention but since I open the box..South Dakota has a lot more elk than MN, only open to residents as with their big horn sheep. North Dakota has more moose than MN now and yep only open to residents. As a NR I appreciate the opportunities afforded me to hunt in other states. As discussed above, it is each state's right to manage as they seem fit.

I did know of northern MN herd and I did the math and as a MN resident don't even bother. In fact, there is more than likely to be elk introduced just south of Duluth MN in the next several years. In my lifetime I doubt it will grow to a huntable population.