R vs. NR tag allocation

[MallardSX2]

^^^ You know the answer to that. lol

 

[bsnedeker]

It's a rare post of yours that you don't make a snide, assish comment. It's why I misunderstood your comment actually- figured you were being your usual sarcastic-ass self.

That's probably because you only read my responses to your posts which, I'll admit, is going to have a bias towards sarcasm and highlighting ridiculousness.

 

[bmart2622]

Nah, its a pretty accurate statement

 

[cuerro viejo]

Sounds like you should talk to your state department about doing a damage hunt, which only allows antlerless elk to be killed. Its a very far cry from a blue chip limited entry tag. Youre trying to tell me that 1 bull elk does $20k in damages a year?

I got no issues with elk now, I have land that splits two states. Before both states had Elk hunting options, I just waited until herd crossed into the State that has a 365 day 24hr x 7 day open season on elk and lay down as much as the herd we can. Might be 3 or might be 12. They leave for a while eventually come back few months later and we will shoot more. Now both states have elk hunting so population is managed better and we have OTC tags so its easy to lease out to recoup damages and push out the elk.

No. Im saying one 380 bull can bring in $20k. That one bull tags buys a-lot of tolerance with a land owner. But I have seen bull cost me 8k in sprinkler damage.

the whole point of a LO tag system is tolerance, the goal is for those tags to produce revenue to get close or exceed losses to build tolerance or even give incentive for better habitat etc, but its still tolerance anyway you look at it.

its a successful program nation wide, we could absolutely do away with them, and let state ag departments trump state wildlife, like they did for decades, just like I was able to lay down single herd when needed

 

[bmart2622]

Im not sure what state you are in or referring to but in MT a landowner tag is not transferable and cant be sold to the highest bidder. So you allow hunting on your property?

 

[Scoot]

That's probably because you only read my responses to your posts which, I'll admit, is going to have a bias towards sarcasm and highlighting ridiculousness.

Thank you for demonstrating my point.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Do you allow hunters to access and hunt your property to help out with this terrible elk problem you have?

have to have a season on when they are present. If they are there in spring that means nothing to hunting, hence why LO get unit wide tags.

 

[bmart2622]

So is that a no?

 

[cuerro viejo]

Im not sure what state you are in or referring to but in MT a landowner tag is not transferable and cant be sold to the highest bidder. So you allow hunting on your property?

yes I have alot of it in enrolled in a state walk in hunting program

NM, CO, NV, UT, all have transferrable elk tags. Okla dropped LO tags and just went straight OTC with harvest quota. TX is open season no tag required

 

[bmart2622]

I only hunt MT and know nothing about other states so I cant/wont speak to that

 

[Hnthrdr]

Texans42, with that much acreage you gotta be an oil guy and a hobby rancher? Or did your family settle most of the south west?

 

[DiabeticKripple]

90/10

there is no other answer.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Texans42, with that much acreage you gotta be an oil guy and a hobby rancher? Or did your family settle most of the south west?

??? I'm tiny compared to a few of my neighbors.

 

[RdRdrFan]

Do you allow hunters to access and hunt your property to help out with this terrible elk problem you have?

As someone who has experience in this I will answer for him. His answer may be different than mine.

Absolutely not.

Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, a lot of hunters open the door to many more problems than solutions for a landowner. It’s just a fact of life. Then add the liability issue in and it’s just not worth the risk.

You want to know how to get landowners on board with a “no tag” option? Pay them for the damage. Pay them for the grazing rights. Do surveys to determine how many wildlife animal units are present on average and set a grazing rate per unit.

Landowners are not typically selling tags as a way to get rich. It’s a way to supplement the losses that they are taking from the wildlife.

 

[bmart2622]

As someone who has experience in this I will answer for him. His answer may be different than mine.

Absolutely not.

Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, a lot of hunters open the door to many more problems than solutions for a landowner. It’s just a fact of life. Then add the liability issue in and it’s just not worth the risk.

You want to know how to get landowners on board with a “no tag” option? Pay them for the damage. Pay them for the grazing rights. Do surveys to determine how many wildlife animal units are present on average and set a grazing rate per unit.

Landowners are not typically selling tags as a way to get rich. It’s a way to supplement the losses that they are taking from the wildlife.

Ok, so elk cause problems on your property and you dont let people come hunt them and then want to complain that you have too many elk? I know that some states do pay subsidies for wildlife damages. As far as am I concerned, if a landowner wants money from the government to offset damages from wildlife the first thing they should check is how many hunters they have allowed to hunt....if its zero then thats the exact amount you get from the government

 

[Hnthrdr]

??? I'm tiny compared to a few of my neighbors.

It’s all relative, my family spot is 800 down from 6500 when settled, which doesn’t even register for most ranches, but it has live water in AZ, awesome spot, but helps me very little with hunting considering it’s AZ, just saying land rich these day typically implies either deep pockets or prior family settled it

 

[flatlanderhuffandpuff]

Touchy subject, rightfully so.

I would think based on where the animals reside within the state should come into play. For example, if a huge herd of elk are residing on Federal land than anything goes as to who can draw a tag. If it's state owned and cared for then the preference should be on state residents.

The undisputed fact is NR are a huge economic factor that the states need to consider. Our small group will spend $4k on tags, $700 on 2 nights of hotels, several hundred on fuel and a few more on groceries before we kill maybe one elk over a 10 day trip. All told we will leave $5K at a minimum in the state when we leave.

Even in PA there are additional doe tags I would like to draw that I can't due to the NR hunters. It's not so bad considering they bring in a bunch of money to our state.

 

[RdRdrFan]

Ok, so elk cause problems on your property and you dont let people come hunt them and then want to complain that you have too many elk? I know that some states do pay subsidies for wildlife damages. As far as am I concerned, if a landowner wants money from the government to offset damages from wildlife the first thing they should check is how many hunters they have allowed to hunt....if its zero then thats the exact amount you get from the government

The government gets paid by ranchers who graze their livestock on public land. Private landowners should get paid by the owner of the animals grazing on their land…..in this case it is the state.

I can assure you that folks with your entitled attitude are a large part of the reason that access to private land has dried up. You are entitled to nothing on land that someone else owns. Not one single thing.

 

[bmart2622]

I could care less if I hunt public land. I dont think Im entitled to anything on anyone's land. You aren't entitled to my money to help with your damages when you wont let people hunt. Take up your issues with your state instead of crying here

 

[wapitibob]

The government gets paid by ranchers who graze their livestock on public land. Private landowners should get paid by the owner of the animals grazing on their land…..in this case it is the state.

Sounds good, we'll pay LO's the same rate they pay for grazing on public and we keep the lo tags.