Posting unit #'s

[SDHNTR]

I'd bet that the people that listen solely to the jackasses on a YouTube video are part of the 90% of hunters that kill 10% of the elk. Their lack of research and effort is really not helping them kill more animals. But their funds are definitely appreciated by the F&G departments.

Correct, but I don’t care that they aren’t successful and aren’t killing the vast majority of elk. I don’t want all those crowds in the woods. I don’t want all those people fouling up draw odds. It’s time to separate the men from the boys. Let’s reward the dedicated, not just anyone and everyone.

Yes, their funds are needed and appreciated. But rather than open the floodgates and encourage every swinging unit to apply (and pay the Newbergs to market such, Barf!) what they could do instead that would help the truly dedicated is to require non refundable licenses to be purchased up front, with a check, in order to apply. A real, full fledged license. Not some small game thing. Game agencies would get their money, and the hunting experience wouldn’t be reduced for the truly dedicated. And don’t I don’t buy the crap about how that would turn things into a rich man’s game (more than it already is). It would just force guys to be more dedicated. To save a lil extra, maybe not blow their cash on their Mtn Ops and ho Hunt subscriptions and flat brims and lifted trucks. And it would force guys to really think about where they apply and spend their dollars, rather than carpet bombing the west because it’s (relatively) cheap and easy to do so. I think it would provide a better experience for all. Status quo doesn’t work anymore. Change needs to happen.

 

[SDHNTR]

I still weight the responsibility of the non-resident tag scarcity dilemma much more heavily on Western states wildlife management departments ability to willfully decrease the supply just to jack up the prices around application fees, preference points and ancillary BS charges more than I blame social media. They love selling preference points, small game and fishing licenses they know nobody will use and application fees. It's free money. My basis for that opinion is that hunting license sales are still at the same number they were 40 years ago. Same amount of hunters, less non-resident tag allocations.

You seriously think game agencies are intentionally reducing supply? Come on! Those tags enable the take of an animal. Without animals, we can’t have the numbers of tags! And guess what? We don’t have the animals to give anyone and everyone a tag! I can’t believe I’m even saying this out loud.

And yes, there is the R vs NR debate, but when the R’s pay the majority of taxes in that state, the R’s win, deservedly!

 

[LuvsFixedBlades]

You seriously think game agencies are intentionally reducing supply? Come on! Those tags enable the take of an animal. Without animals, we can’t have the numbers of tags! And guess what? We don’t have the animals to give anyone and everyone a tag! I can’t believe I’m even saying this out loud.

And yes, there is the R vs NR debate, but when the R’s pay the majority of taxes in that state, the R’s win, deservedly!

Yes, wildlife management agencies are reducing the supply of NON-RESIDENT tags electively, which is the topic I've been discussing. Yes, wildlife is scarce. But, the discussion I've been having is about scarcity of NR tags vs. total tags available, not the scarcity of critters.

And, just so you know, funding for state wildlife agencies comes from three main sources (Wildlife for All); 1) license fees; 2) federal grants; 3) general funds. The relative contribution of these sources varies widely by state.

Traditionally, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses has been the most important source of revenues for state wildlife agencies, followed by federal grants under the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts. For most states these two sources still comprise more than two-thirds of their wildlife agency revenues. Many state wildlife agencies do not receive ANY general funds from their legislature and are considered “enterprise” agencies because they rely on the sale of a product (licenses, preference points, application fees, OHV registration, etc.) for most of their revenue, and Federal grants from national excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment, so don't give me that residents pay the taxes so they deserve all the tags line of BS, because people outside of your resident state are the ones paying for your wildlife management.

You're welcome for the education.

 

[SDHNTR]

Yes, wildlife management agencies are reducing the supply of NON-RESIDENT tags electively, which is the topic I've been discussing. Yes, wildlife is scarce. But, the discussion I've been having is about scarcity of NR tags vs. total tags available, not the scarcity of critters.

And, just so you know, funding for state wildlife agencies comes from three main sources (Wildlife for All); 1) license fees; 2) federal grants; 3) general funds. The relative contribution of these sources varies widely by state.

Traditionally, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses has been the most important source of revenues for state wildlife agencies, followed by federal grants under the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts. For most states these two sources still comprise more than two-thirds of their wildlife agency revenues. Many state wildlife agencies do not receive ANY general funds from their legislature and are considered “enterprise” agencies because they rely on the sale of a product (licenses, preference points, application fees, OHV registration, etc.) for most of their revenue, and Federal grants from national excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment, so don't give me that residents pay the taxes so they deserve all the tags line of BS, because people outside of your resident state are the ones paying for your wildlife management.

You're welcome for the education.

Nope, not my state. No one comes here to hunt. No one is that dumb.

 

[IrkedCitizen]

And yes, there is the R vs NR debate, but when the R’s pay the majority of taxes in that state, the R’s win, deservedly!

Speaking of taxes, everyone who owns a home/ property in Colorado just got a swift kick to the proverbial testes by their county assessor. My assessor determined that my home is worth $196,000 MORE than it was last year. Yay for that... Equity good. Extra taxes no good.

 

[hobbes]

Ran two Google searches of two popular Colorado units. Added "Rokslide" just because that's where we are.

"Rokslide Colorado Unit XX" yielded 13 hits on the first and 18 hits on the second unit number. Remove "Rokslide" and the number goes up because it includes a lot of other sites.

That's only threads with the unit number in their title and not the rest of the information on the unit that can be dug out of general threads where folks spill their guts.

That info is there for the whole world. If you can't recognize the problem, you're blind.

 

[SDHNTR]

Ran two Google searches of two popular Colorado units. Added "Rokslide" just because that's where we are.

"Rokslide Colorado Unit XX" yielded 13 hits on the first and 18 hits on the second unit number. Remove "Rokslide" and the number goes up because it includes a lot of other sites.

That's only threads with the unit number in their title and not the rest of the information on the unit that can be dug out of general threads where folks spill their guts.

That info is there for the whole world. If you can't recognize the problem, you're blind.

Yep. And Rokslide’s reach is minuscule compared to YouTube. I know dozens of good hunters. I can count on one hand the number of them that are members here, yet they ALL use YT.

 

[Laramie]

I don't think you and I are as far off on this issue as it seems. I couldn't agree more with your point on the affects advancements in technology have had. Access to easy information, GPS, mapping software and added safety measures like cell phones and satellite comms (InReach) units have emboldened many non-mountain folks to venturing into the Western backcountry to hunt.

I still weight the responsibility of the non-resident tag scarcity dilemma much more heavily on Western states wildlife management departments ability to willfully decrease the supply just to jack up the prices around application fees, preference points and ancillary BS charges more than I blame social media. They love selling preference points, small game and fishing licenses they know nobody will use and application fees. It's free money. My basis for that opinion is that hunting license sales are still at the same number they were 40 years ago. Same amount of hunters, less non-resident tag allocations.

Even though we disagree on that point, I bet we'd get along just fine. Have a great season!

You are missing some data that you aren't considering. Take Wyoming antelope for instance. Their population has dropped rapidly and not just from this past years winter kill. Here is a snip of a graph showing 2003 through 2013.


At the same time, Wyoming's human population has been ever increasing - up almost 30% from 1990.

Many non-residents want to be mad at western states but the writing was on the wall. State agencies are forced to take care of residents first, thus the shift in tag allocation percentages. The price hikes? That is just free market capitalism. I don't like it as I sit on a pile of moose points for Wyoming but I'm still paying it as they haven't hit my threshold yet.

This all relates to the limited resource topic- As opportunities shrink information becomes more and more valuable. I don't like that some are making a mint off this information but the reality is if they don't, someone else will. Rokslide, right now, is choosing to limit that amount of free info being placed out there. I think it's a great business decision that will pay off for them in the long run. Make people put in a little work and become loyal here before they can access it - brilliant really. I hope it works.

 

[LuvsFixedBlades]

You are missing some data that you aren't considering. Take Wyoming antelope for instance. Their population has dropped rapidly and not just from this past years winter kill. Here is a snip of a graph showing 2003 through 2013.
View attachment 564639

At the same time, Wyoming's human population has been ever increasing - up almost 30% from 1990.

Many non-residents want to be mad at western states but the writing was on the wall. State agencies are forced to take care of residents first, thus the shift in tag allocation percentages. The price hikes? That is just free market capitalism. I don't like it as I sit on a pile of moose points for Wyoming but I'm still paying it as they haven't hit my threshold yet.

This all relates to the limited resource topic- As opportunities shrink information becomes more and more valuable. I don't like that some are making a mint off this information but the reality is if they don't, someone else will. Rokslide, right now, is choosing to limit that amount of free info being placed out there. I think it's a great business decision that will pay off for them in the long run. Make people put in a little work and become loyal here before they can access it - brilliant really. I hope it works.

I agree with you on the increasing human population issue as a whole. Which is why I mentioned the development and constant recreational use of wintering, calving/fawning and migratory areas being a major problem So, we are in agreement there.

The graph you posted for antelope isn't really relevant because it ended ten years ago. If you want to get historical, In 1976 there were only 400,000 antelope in the entire USA, as of 2022, before this years winter kill, there were 400,000 in Wyoming alone, which is the highest population of any state. So, I'm not that worried about antelope. The increasing prevalence of EHD is concerning, however, and that will need to be monitored closely. Winterkill will be what it will be year by year. Tag quotas will be adjusted accordingly.

The deer population in WY was actually increasing from 2012 up to 2016 when they were hit hard by winter kill and EHD. Antelope and deer are highly susceptible to unfavorable winter conditions, so your beef is largely with mother nature as it pertains to those species.

Moose have been hit hard by increased pressure from predators. Wolves came into the picture in the early 90's and griz have quickly been expanding in numbers and territory. Moose also have been affected by winter ticks and parasites heavily. Not that those things improve the inventory, but they are significant additional natural causes unrelated to hunting pressure. WGFD should add tags for wolf and grizz, increasing hunting opportunities while reducing predators, a win-win.

The number of elk in Wyoming has doubled from 65,000 in 1980 to 117,000 in 2021. So, that's a bonus in my view, even though some people in WY now complain there are too many, LOL.

On to my point about the money.

Free market capitalism DOES NOT drive non-resident tag allocation ratios, period. Otherwise, the people paying the most money would get all the tags. That is how free market capitalism works. The resource goes to the highest bidder, and that would be the non-residents paying 10X what the residents do. I have an advanced degree in economics, and that's Econ 101. Free market capitalism does not "force states to take care of residents first" as you say. That is actually the opposite of free market capitalism and does not allow the two variables to adjust freely with market conditions. Resident tax dollars aren't the primary funding source for wildlife management in most states either, so I don't want to hear about that being the driver for allocation preference.

The ancillary fees administered upon non-residents have nothing to do with free market economics and everything to do with free money. Free market capitalism does not electively reduce non-resident tag allocations and increase preference point fees so egregiously that states make more money off of NR points than they do off of resident license sales. It does not dictate you must buy a small game/fishing license annually to qualify to enter a lottery (the draw) or buy preference points. Free market does not dictate you should pay an extra $72 for an archery stamp after you paid the same fees any other hunter does to obtain what is essentially an equal value license. There are no increased costs to the state for someone using archery equipment, AND archery has the lowest harvest % overall, so it's less impactful on the resource. Free market capitalism doesn't dictate that non-resident hunters are banned from access to over 3 million acres of Federal wilderness ground without paying huge sums of money for a guide when every other user group regardless of residency status is allowed. All of that my friend is called extortion, not free-market fluctuation due to supply and demand variables.

Raising pricing doesn't significantly deter very many people from staying in the points game either. It just shows you how much people value hunting. And, if they reduced those costs, it wouldn't significantly increase new hunters getting into the points game. It's literally been tried, tested and analyzed 6 ways from Sunday by Colorado Parks and Wildlife, and we have more non-resident big game hunters than any other state anywhere in the country, bar none, by a mile.

Demand for tags greatly outweighs the supply of the wildlife resource, absolutely, no question. But, don't tell me intentionally raping non-residents out of their hard earned money because you know you can is free market capitalism. That is called B***S**T.

 

[stanginthe11s]

sooo, is now a good time to ask which CO unit will be best this year?

 

[SDHNTR]

You are missing some data that you aren't considering. Take Wyoming antelope for instance. Their population has dropped rapidly and not just from this past years winter kill. Here is a snip of a graph showing 2003 through 2013.
View attachment 564639

At the same time, Wyoming's human population has been ever increasing - up almost 30% from 1990.

Many non-residents want to be mad at western states but the writing was on the wall. State agencies are forced to take care of residents first, thus the shift in tag allocation percentages. The price hikes? That is just free market capitalism. I don't like it as I sit on a pile of moose points for Wyoming but I'm still paying it as they haven't hit my threshold yet.

This all relates to the limited resource topic- As opportunities shrink information becomes more and more valuable. I don't like that some are making a mint off this information but the reality is if they don't, someone else will. Rokslide, right now, is choosing to limit that amount of free info being placed out there. I think it's a great business decision that will pay off for them in the long run. Make people put in a little work and become loyal here before they can access it - brilliant really. I hope it works.

Bravo! You sir, are someone who gets it.

 

[IrkedCitizen]

sooo, is now a good time to ask which CO unit will be best this year?

Every unit west of I-25 is going to produce a giant this year.

 

[SDHNTR]

I agree with you on the increasing human population issue as a whole. Which is why I mentioned the development and constant recreational use of wintering, calving/fawning and migratory areas being a major problem So, we are in agreement there.

The graph you posted for antelope isn't really relevant because it ended ten years ago. If you want to get historical, In 1976 there were only 400,000 antelope in the entire USA, as of 2022, before this years winter kill, there were 400,000 in Wyoming alone, which is the highest population of any state. So, I'm not that worried about antelope. The increasing prevalence of EHD is concerning, however, and that will need to be monitored closely. Winterkill will be what it will be year by year. Tag quotas will be adjusted accordingly.

The deer population in WY was actually increasing from 2012 up to 2016 when they were hit hard by winter kill and EHD. Antelope and deer are highly susceptible to unfavorable winter conditions, so your beef is largely with mother nature as it pertains to those species.

Moose have been hit hard by increased pressure from predators. Wolves came into the picture in the early 90's and griz have quickly been expanding in numbers and territory. Moose also have been affected by winter ticks and parasites heavily. Not that those things improve the inventory, but they are significant additional natural causes unrelated to hunting pressure. WGFD should add tags for wolf and grizz, increasing hunting opportunities while reducing predators, a win-win.

The number of elk in Wyoming has doubled from 65,000 in 1980 to 117,000 in 2021. So, that's a bonus in my view, even though some people in WY now complain there are too many, LOL.

On to my point about the money.

Free market capitalism DOES NOT drive non-resident tag allocation ratios, period. Otherwise, the people paying the most money would get all the tags. That is how free market capitalism works. The resource goes to the highest bidder, and that would be the non-residents paying 10X what the residents do. I have an advanced degree in economics, and that's Econ 101. Free market capitalism does not "force states to take care of residents first" as you say. That is actually the opposite of free market capitalism and does not allow the two variables to adjust freely with market conditions. Resident tax dollars aren't the primary funding source for wildlife management in most states either, so I don't want to hear about that being the driver for allocation preference.

The ancillary fees administered upon non-residents have nothing to do with free market economics and everything to do with free money. Free market capitalism does not electively reduce non-resident tag allocations and increase preference point fees so egregiously that states make more money off of NR points than they do off of resident license sales. It does not dictate you must buy a small game/fishing license annually to qualify to enter a lottery (the draw) or buy preference points. Free market does not dictate you should pay an extra $72 for an archery stamp after you paid the same fees any other hunter does to obtain what is essentially an equal value license. There are no increased costs to the state for someone using archery equipment, AND archery has the lowest harvest % overall, so it's less impactful on the resource. Free market capitalism doesn't dictate that non-resident hunters are banned from access to over 3 million acres of Federal wilderness ground without paying huge sums of money for a guide when every other user group regardless of residency status is allowed. All of that my friend is called extortion, not free-market fluctuation due to supply and demand variables.

Raising pricing doesn't significantly deter very many people from staying in the points game either. It just shows you how much people value hunting. And, if they reduced those costs, it wouldn't significantly increase new hunters getting into the points game. It's literally been tried, tested and analyzed 6 ways from Sunday by Colorado Parks and Wildlife, and we have more non-resident big game hunters than any other state anywhere in the country, bar none, by a mile.

Demand for tags greatly outweighs the supply of the wildlife resource, absolutely, no question. But, don't tell me intentionally raping non-residents out of their hard earned money because you know you can is free market capitalism. That is called B***S**T.

It’s not an intentional raping. It’s making them pay more for a consuming a resource that is not theirs. Which makes perfect sense to anyone with a brain. Don’t like it, hunt in your own state. Easy solution.

 

[Gutshot007]

Will NR western elk/deer hunting become a "once in a lifetime" deal someday ? (Unless cow/doe tags) . As Diy guy it seems to be heading towards NR's using guides . I look at money spent on gear tents , packs and all the other stuff maybe over time it will make sense not to invest and have someone else provide if it is a one time deal. Part of my personal goals and fun of hunting is to go multiple times and "figure things out" and learn from mistakes and the whole process(preparation). Hence purchasing gear to be used multiple times and hopefully wore out . I think those days are soon coming to an end . Saddened, not complaining about reality .

 

[LuvsFixedBlades]

It’s not an intentional raping. It’s making them pay more for a consuming a resource that is not theirs. Which makes perfect sense to anyone with a brain. Don’t like it, hunt in your own state. Easy solution.

Wyoming residents don't pay for their wildlife management. Everyone else does. Here is the fact sheet straight from WGFD website to prove it. To your earlier comment of they pay all the taxes so they deserve the tags, Wyoming has no individual state income tax or corporate income taxes. They have the lowest combined tax rate of any state in the lower 48 in fact. It's pretty much a welfare state when it comes to funding, including the management of it's federal wilderness areas, so you can take your uneducated self out into the street and kick rocks.

 

[Gutshot007]

Wow, money generated from license revenue 77% non -residents !

 

[LuvsFixedBlades]

My apologies to everyone in this thread for continuing to comment off of the thread's primary topic. It has gone way too far.

Differences in opinions make this forum great, but willfully ignorant people piss me off. Thanks to the moderators for being accommodating.

Have a great season everyone. Again, my apologies.

 

[Gutshot007]

DOes anyone know what 2.7 million interest "generated from commision accounts" is ? Would some of that be from holding NR money for months waiting for draw to occur ? Just asking

 

[IrkedCitizen]

 

[LuvsFixedBlades]

Wow, money generated from license revenue 77% non -residents !

And that 77% of funding is just the portion of license revenues paid for by non-residents. If you add the Federal grants and Federal aid, non-residents paid $69.1 million dollars to WGFD for it's management of state wildlife.

The WGFD collected only $800,000, or 0.9% of it's annual budget from the general fund (state tax dollars) in 2022, but that was too much for them, so they are eliminating that funding source in 2023, because of "the state's current financial crisis", LOL.

$12,000,000 in non-resident preference point sales alone. Which is $3,000,000 more than total revenue generated by every single revenue line item contributed by state residents combined.

Nope, it has nothing to do with money at all. It's a "free-market capitalism" model where pricing and allocations are a result of supply and demand.