The future of NR hunting in Wyoming

[Flyjunky]

Man, I wish each of my posts on here were monetized. Robby!?

Where did this monetized bit come in? I thought we were talking about increased demand out west?

If we are going to start talking about monetizing then lets go back to the beginning days with books and magazines talking about hunting out west. I can remember reading Petersen's hunting magazine in the 70's-80's and the whole thing was basically traveling out west to hunt.

Traveling out west to hunt has always been popularized but the media today has greater reach which obviously is the result we are seeing now.

 

[Flyjunky]

Some comments are borderline putting words into other people’s mouths. Speculation is often best kept to ourselves unless there’s something to back it up, otherwise it just becomes rumors.

thank you

 

[bozeman]

Censoring of posts...in .....10.......9........8........7.........

 

[PablitoPescador]

It's also a bit ironic to be criticizing "those influencers" while talking hunting on a site like Rokslide...just saying.

We also have to remember that because of the promotion of western hunting many of the things we enjoy today, product wise, most likely wouldn't be available. Without the huge rise in demand and the money people are willing to spend high end rifles, scopes, clothing, etc wouldn't be near what we have access to right now.

It's a double edged sword and we can either accept the fact that it isn't going back to the good ol' days or we can find another hobby.

I’m just using the platform that reaches a lot of like minded people to share my concerns about something we all love. If that’s ironic then so be it.

My grandpa did 7 sheep hunts in his life and killed some incredible animals. All with some of the shittiest gear known to man. Blue jeans, flannels and packs that would destroy the spinal column of any man. I don’t hear him crying about how he didn’t have nice gear. Good gear makes hunting easier and more comfortable which I think you could also argue attracts more people who otherwise wouldn’t be gobbling up western tags. Not to mention all the people who now think they can shoot 1200 yards. I think quality gear as a whole is having a negative impact as well. The barriers to entry are getting smaller every year.

At a certain point we have to decide whether we love hunting culture more than actual hunting. We’re getting to the point where most hunters are going to be sitting on their coach all season long watching hunting celebs go on badass hunts while they wait 10 years to draw a general tag.

 

[Flyjunky]

I’m just using the platform that reaches a lot of like minded people to share my concerns about something we all love. If that’s ironic then so be it.

My grandpa did 7 sheep hunts in his life and killed some incredible animals. All with some of the shittiest gear known to man. Blue jeans, flannels and packs that would destroy the spinal column of any man. I don’t hear him crying about how he didn’t have nice gear. Good gear makes hunting easier and more comfortable which I think you could also argue attracts more people who otherwise wouldn’t be gobbling up western tags. Not to mention all the people who now think they can shoot 1200 yards. I think quality gear as a whole is having a negative impact as well. The barriers to entry are getting smaller every year.

At a certain point we have to decide whether we love hunting culture more than actual hunting. We’re getting to the point where most hunters are going to be sitting on their coach all season long watching hunting celebs go on badass hunts while they wait 10 years to draw a general

I agree but we can blame the influencers as much as we want but we all have a hand in this jar. If we didn't follow, watch the vids, etc then they wouldn't have a platform.

How many complaining on this thread about influencers aren't from out west? How many complaining moved out west in the last 10 years specifically to hunt? This blame game can go on for a long time but it is what it is and we'll have to learn to live with it.

Instead of dividing it might be a better use of time to see if we can come together for better management and tag distribution through our collective voice through voting and $$? Seems to me we complain a lot about tags while public land and tag allocations get eaten up by "other" groups who seem to stand more united than public land diy hunters.

edit- I will add that I think of Randy kind of like carbon offsets. He may bring people out West but he also puts his $$ where his mouth is. He has done and continues to stand up for public land diy'ers more than most any other person. I believe he has done more behind the scenes than many give him credit for. He may get a lot out but he also gives a lot back which is more than many of the influencers can say.

 

[robby denning]

Censoring of posts...in .....10.......9........8........7.........

If it breaks the rules, yeah, but haven’t seen that yet.

 

[Trackerbacker]

Novel idea.

All states should remove all NR tags.

All money spent (relative to Pittman robertson) should remain within said state collected from.

Residents then would be the sole funding of their states 'resources'.

No other funding shall be derived from outside the state, in regards to money spent on state resources.

Then said residents can't complain about said non-residents.

All in favor, say aye

 

[wapitibob]

The only place there are more hunters is in unlimited otc units, draw units aren't increasing tags by any significant number. If you're seeing too many hunters, quit asking for spots on a forum. As for tag demand, it's only going up, same for every outdoor activity. You can hunt every year if really want to.

 

[Trackerbacker]

Randy Newberg’s recent video titled “burn your points” just struck me as being incredibly ironic. Here we have an influential hunting figure who’s main gig is to show thousands of people how to do a diy western hunt. He talks about how demand has gotten so bad that the best strategy is now to scrounge up whatever tag you can get because it ain’t gonna get any better. To top it off the video is sponsored by Gohunt! It’s time to quit funding the people and companies who are destroying western hunting.

.....so...anyway....what happens to rokslide?

I'm not talking about only the monetary benefit, simply the excess information out there for people is making hunting in the west easier and easier. This site alone has enough info for anyone who has never seen a hunting video to make it possible to go out west with all the info they will ever need.

It's simple economics, if hunting wasn't so popular, and the willingness of people to spend countless dollars on stuff they truly don't need, do you honestly think companies would be investing as much as they do now?

Btw, I don't think any of this is a positive. I would rather go into the woods like it was 35 years ago but that ain't gonna happen.

 

[Fatcamp]

I'm not talking about only the monetary benefit, simply the excess information out there for people is making hunting in the west easier and easier. This site alone has enough info for anyone who has never seen a hunting video to make it possible to go out west with all the info they will ever need.

It's simple economics, if hunting wasn't so popular, and the willingness of people to spend countless dollars on stuff they truly don't need, do you honestly think companies would be investing as much as they do now?

Btw, I don't think any of this is a positive. I would rather go into the woods like it was 35 years ago but that ain't gonna happen.

Ya, but forums require reading and research. Far different from a video.

As an example the number of people using scopes that fail versus some of the more durable brands, because they have been popularized by money culture. Due diligence, here and other places, would show you this, but videos are easier.

 

[Will_m]

Btw, I don't think any of this is a positive. I would rather go into the woods like it was 35 years ago but that ain't gonna happen.

Definitely on the same page with you here.

 

[SummitsCalling]

Novel idea.

All states should remove all NR tags.

All money spent (relative to Pittman robertson) should remain within said state collected from.

Residents then would be the sole funding of their states 'resources'.

No other funding shall be derived from outside the state, in regards to money spent on state resources.

Then said residents can't complain about said non-residents.

All in favor, say aye

Would be amazing if implemented. The amount of western states (not counting CA) that would have their budgets smashed would be comical.

Odd thing how the entire country is required to pay for only R to enjoy a resource as things are going. Times will change eventually due to the greed of a few.

 

[Archer86]

Would be amazing if implemented. The amount of western states (not counting CA) that would have their budgets smashed would be comical.

Odd thing how the entire country is required to pay for only R to enjoy a resource as things are going. Times will change eventually due to the greed of a few.

What's comical is the amount of complaining about pr fund. time to put your money where your mouth is if you don't like how funds are distributed your not being forced to purchase products that support it.

You guys all complain about it but how much nr hunting do your states offer? That's on the same level as most western states.

So the same guys saying supply and demand when it comes to hunting tag prices should be fine with western states that supply some of the best hunting the west has to offer receiving more pr funds to help keep that but since more and more nr hunters are getting involved and making it harder to get that tag in your pocket got to complain about something.

 

[Hnthrdr]

It’s not getting any easier for western state’s both res and nonres to draw tags. The sad news about Wyo and Colo is that both state’s residents are complaining it’s getting tougher and tougher to draw high demand tags.

Colo has been known to be the West’s most nonres friendly state handing out otc elk tags and 20 to 35% of d/e/a limited tag quotas to nonres. What happens if Colo and Wyo decrease nonres opportunity? It becomes even tougher to draw highly limited tags in Colo, Wyo and states across the West.

Your numbers are off for Co, with landowner tags going to mostly NR via outfitters, it’s 40%+ non res in a lot of units, and it is gonna have to change. Co could handle it with a population of less than 3 mil and not as many res hunters now we are pushing 6 mil with more and more res hunters something has to give, of course we are gripping about it

 

[SummitsCalling]

What's comical is the amount of complaining about pr fund. time to put your money where your mouth is if you don't like how funds are distributed your not being forced to purchase products that support it.

You guys all complain about it but how much nr hunting do your states offer? That's on the same level as most western states.

So the same guys saying supply and demand when it comes to hunting tag prices should be fine with western states that supply some of the best hunting the west has to offer receiving more pr funds to help keep that but since more and more nr hunters are getting involved and making it harder to get that tag in your pocket got to complain about something.

If anything more products across the outdoor industry should be slapped with P-R tax, just not sport shooting. Speaking of which if I so could choose for the money I spend to not be sent to states like Wyoming, which you are defending (since you live there) I would.

The state I live in is the most generous to NR in the country across all species, which frankly should be cut to zero based on what states like WY and UT do as an example.

What WY R contribute is next to nothing compared to what the rest of the country has to fork over to maintain those animals that they have little to no access too. Funds should be tied to access, cut access to 10% only get 10% of federal funding. Would be fun huh? Would actually force R to have skin in the game instead of going on forums complaining it's all about them and not the next generation having access. Keep people away from access, tough for people to defend the outdoors who live in other states who don't have the same opportunities when certain groups come for your hunting. Washington is a great example of that.

 

[Archer86]

If anything more products across the outdoor industry should be slapped with P-R tax, just not sport shooting. Speaking of which if I so could choose for the money I spend to not be sent to states like Wyoming, which you are defending (since you live there) I would.

The state I live in is the most generous to NR in the country across all species, which frankly should be cut to zero based on what states like WY and UT do as an example.

What WY R contribute is next to nothing compared to what the rest of the country has to fork over to maintain those animals that they have little to no access too. Funds should be tied to access, cut access to 10% only get 10% of federal funding. Would be fun huh? Would actually force R to have skin in the game instead of going on forums complaining it's all about them and not the next generation having access. Keep people away from access, tough for people to defend the outdoors who live in other states who don't have the same opportunities when certain groups come for your hunting. Washington is a great example of that.

What you fail to see is that pr funds where never there to guarantee a nr or resident for that matter a hunting tag it is for conservation to keep the species around for future generations not just hunting and I am willing to bet that a majority of pr funds are supplied from non hunters.

Washington is a great example of what you are promoting they are using your blue print to do it also there argument is since they fund more as non hunters they should have more say then hunters.

Alaska is the perfect example thats for sure. Wyoming has the wilderness rule but alasak has the guide requirement so for 40k you can go hunt sheep goat or brown bear talk about opportunities. Wyoming should think about that model

Pittman Robertson fund 2020

Alaska 43,456,838
Wyoming 16,073,808

Based on those numbers I would say Alaska needs to be more generous or we should pull some of that funding nr don't get nearly enough

 

[SummitsCalling]

What you fail to see is that pr funds where never there to guarantee a nr or resident for that matter a hunting tag it is for conservation to keep the species around for future generations not just hunting and I am willing to bet that a majority of pr funds are supplied from non hunters.

Washington is a great example of what you are promoting they are using your blue print to do it also there argument is since they fund more as non hunters they should have more say then hunters.

Alaska is the perfect example thats for sure. Wyoming has the wilderness rule but alasak has the guide requirement so for 40k you can go hunt sheep goat or brown bear talk about opportunities. Wyoming should think about that model

Pittman Robertson fund 2020

Alaska 43,456,838
Wyoming 16,073,808

Based on those numbers I would say Alaska needs to be more generous or we should pull some of that funding nr don't get nearly enough

Who are the greatest conservationists for animals, not PETA. It's sportsman, who chose to be taxed through P-R. The problem is once access is lost so goes the hunters, who are the same advocates for the animals who also vote.

Blue print existed way before I mentioned it, see CA, and MT bears, wolves and grizz. A great example is WY, you can't even hunt grizzlies in your own state. Says a lot when a state cannot manage it's own animals, huh? Grizzly/brown bear is OTC in AK.

You are correct, AK has a guide rule but AK is a different beast then driving up to the woods in WY. Very experienced people die yearly in AK wilderness. What you failed to mentioned is your very own outfitters control the wilderness requirement then charge $10k+ for an elk hunt. AK has general tag elk without the $10k fee, and $2k tag. So a good portion of your animals are locked behind 20-30 year wait and outfitters.

One good thing about AK, every species you mentioned is OTC/general tag without a 20-30 year wait without broken promises and opportunity being taken

AK is 6x the size of WY, has more animals and opportunity for everyone, yet WY recieved 1/3 the funding AK does. Seems some cuts need to be made to some state P-R funding.

 

[Archer86]

Who are the greatest conservationists for animals, not PETA. It's sportsman, who chose to be taxed through P-R. The problem is once access is lost so goes the hunters, who are the same advocates for the animals who also vote.

Blue print existed way before I mentioned it, see CA, and MT bears, wolves and grizz. A great example is WY, you can't even hunt grizzlies in your own state. Says a lot when a state cannot manage it's own animals, huh? Grizzly/brown bear is OTC in AK.

You are correct, AK has a guide rule but AK is a different beast then driving up to the woods in WY. Very experienced people die yearly in AK wilderness. What you failed to mentioned is your very own outfitters control the wilderness requirement then charge $10k+ for an elk hunt. AK has general tag elk without the $10k fee, and $2k tag. So a good portion of your animals are locked behind 20-30 year wait and outfitters.

One good thing about AK, every species you mentioned is OTC/general tag without a 20-30 year wait without broken promises and opportunity being taken

AK is 6x the size of WY, has more animals and opportunity for everyone, yet WY recieved 1/3 the funding AK does. Seems some cuts need to be made to some state P-R funding.

We can't hunt grizzly because there are listed under the Esa come on you know dang well the feds will do what they want alaska has so much control huh didn't they just shut down some sheep hunting and they are not even listed on the Esa. Just wait brown bear ban headed your way.

Alaska is mostly otc because it's to expensive to access. Maybe we should fund some big road project in there so we can get some nr in there by the thousands and see how you like it then

Then you defend the guide rule. I think wyomings wilderness rule should go. Last I checked though moose and caribou are located in the same area as brown bear in alaska so please explain again how it's so dangerous yet nr can go hunt moose and caribou all they want.

Then pr funds first you implied it should be based of population numbers that contribute but now it's land mass that should justify allocation. so its whatever fits your agenda really got it!

 

[cuerro viejo]

What you fail to see is that pr funds where never there to guarantee a nr or resident for that matter a hunting tag it is for conservation to keep the species around for future generations not just hunting and I am willing to bet that a majority of pr funds are supplied from non hunters.

Washington is a great example of what you are promoting they are using your blue print to do it also there argument is since they fund more as non hunters they should have more say then hunters.

Alaska is the perfect example thats for sure. Wyoming has the wilderness rule but alasak has the guide requirement so for 40k you can go hunt sheep goat or brown bear talk about opportunities. Wyoming should think about that model

Pittman Robertson fund 2020

Alaska 43,456,838
Wyoming 16,073,808

Based on those numbers I would say Alaska needs to be more generous or we should pull some of that funding nr don't get nearly enough

Then remove the hunting license sales out of the P&R equation.

Having to buy a license just to apply in drawn with idiotic odds is the shadiest way to maximize potential PR money

 

[Archer86]

Then remove the hunting license sales out of the P&R equation.

Having to buy a license just to apply in drawn with idiotic odds is the shadiest way to maximize potential PR money

There is no hunting license sale equation in the pr fund. Might want to read a little into that the pr fund is only funded from firearm , ammo , archery equipment, and firearm parts.

States choose how they make you apply and what you have to purchase to apply in said state and it has nothing to do with the pr fund