Wyo Task Force - Nonres Comments!

[Ranger 692]

Buzz, any idea when this will potentially be taken up in the legislature? What’s the earliest this could take effect if recommended then passed? 2023?

 

[LostArra]

There will be NO loss of NR full priced elk tags (7,250 issued per regulation),

Ha! Come on Buzz. A much larger percentage of those 7250 full price elk tags will now be General only. The 90-10 will sweep a good sized chunk of LE full price tags out of the non-resident draws and into the resident pool. That"chunk" number will be made up with more General tags to get back to 7250 No resident is concerned about General tags. They just want fewer non residents in the LE areas.

 

[Jimss]

Nonres be aware that 90/10 means that high demand limited tags for nonres will be cut in 1/2 for all big game species. You can be guaranteed that 90/10 will be presented for ALL BIG GAME SPECIES to this year's legislature. It's been there and failed the last 2 years.

There has been an alarming number of nonres that have emailed their displeasure to the legislature for 90/10 and that's one big reason there was an appointed a task force. If you are a concerned nonres be sure to submit comments for the next task force meeting prior to the July 6 deadline. Believe it or not your comments whether super short or long help!

Here's the link: https://sites.google.com/wyo.gov/wyomingwildlifetaskforce/home/public-input

 

[Jimss]

Forgot to mention, there are a gob of red flags blowing in the Wyo wind when outfitters are willing to allow 90/10 to go for the Big 5 species? It's like shooting themselves in the foot! You can bet there is talk of set aside outfitter and landowner tags on the agenda! Why not turn Wyoming into the new New Mexico! You want to talk about upsetting a pile of nonres hunters see what happens if outfitters and landowners want a cut of additional tags. This happened in Colo several years ago! Outfitters stripped public draw tags directly away from BOTH Colo resident and nonres hunters. There are a lot of members on the task force that would likely be in favor of this.....pretty scary stuff if you are a Wyo res OR nonres that enjoys DIY hunting on public land!

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, any idea when this will potentially be taken up in the legislature? What’s the earliest this could take effect if recommended then passed? 2023?

The TRW committee made it clear this past session...have us a 90-10 bill for this February session or else.

Its the first priority issue that the task force is going to address and its my guess the bill for the big-5 will be done after the July 8 TF meeting this week. It was considered low hanging fruit, from what I could gather talking to the task force members, as well as the public testimony. All the members seem to be on board with getting a bill to the legislature and seem supportive of 90-10 for the big-5.

The bill will head to the legislature in Feb and will be put into effect in 2023 when it passes. I don't think this one is an "if"...have been wrong before, but the support was over-whelming.

I guess we'll know more on the 8th.

 

[BuzzH]

Ha! Come on Buzz. A much larger percentage of those 7250 full price elk tags will now be General only. The 90-10 will sweep a good sized chunk of LE full price tags out of the non-resident draws and into the resident pool. That"chunk" number will be made up with more General tags to get back to 7250 No resident is concerned about General tags. They just want fewer non residents in the LE areas.

And the problem with that is?

I'm told constantly that since General tags are OTC for residents, and because the hunting is so good in general areas, there's nothing for us Residents to complain about when we don't draw LQ elk tags.

The way I got it figured, if the general areas are good enough for Residents, NR's should be beside themselves happy with increased numbers of general tags...yes?

 

[BuzzH]

Mainly the NR who has applied for 20+ years for sheep will get screwed the most this time around. Moose guys a little.

Right, the elk tag quantities stay the same but the ratio goes to 90% general tags, so the “theoretical” quality goes down. Take away the opportunity to draw limited quota tags for the NR and give them general for 5-6 $50 points and a $1200 tag.

Next time around the deer antelope tags will be reduced. First by quality and them quantity.

Sadly, I see the outfitters getting 1/2 the NR licenses that remain to sell to the highest bidder as part of this deal and it is going to make New Mexico look like a bargain once all back door deals done.

Other states NR systems were not slashed 20+ years after the cost to participate in them were raised over 2000% over the years.

And no matter what Buzz says, a preference point system IS an investment. We were sold if we stay in the game long enough we will be in the max point pool. And that was sold at 25% not 10%.

Yes, they were. MT, CO, NM, OR, UT, AZ...all made massive changes to NR allocations, point systems, etc. in the past 20 years.

Show me the language or contract you signed that were "sold if we stay in the game long enough we will be in the max point pool"...or that the allocations would always stay the same.

Produce he language and I'll agree with you.

You and every other point purchaser got exactly what you were sold...points.

 

[Lawnboi]

Tags or money back from points. Quit moving the goal post. And if you got a problem call buzz at 1-800- ALMYELK, tell em they are your tags and you want them now!

 

[BuzzH]

Tags or money back from points. Quit moving the goal post. And if you got a problem call buzz at 1-800- ALMYELK, tell em they are your tags and you want them now!

The goal posts could always be moved to 100-0....

1-800-CRYARVR

 

[N2TRKYS]

No, not correct...a slight reduction would be more correct.

There will be NO loss of NR full priced elk tags (7,250 issued per regulation), no loss to region wide NR deer tags, and NR's would still get over 50% of the pronghorn tags in WY under 90-10.

I reckon its all how you define "massive reduction"...me, I wouldn't call it that. I respect the fact you may see it differently.

I compare Wyoming to other States that I apply in...I'm not treated nearly as well as a NR in any of them.

If the reduction is so slight, why are you in such an uproar about it? Serious question.

 

[Lawnboi]

The goal posts could always be moved to 100-0....

1-800-CRYARVR

The sarcasm dosnt sound as good coming from a politician

 

[BuzzH]

If the reduction is so slight, why are you in such an uproar about it? Serious question.

Not in an uproar about it at all...just time to make the change happen and Residents here want it.

I support that...pretty simple really.

I guess I could always ask NR's the same question...why the uproar if the reductions are so slight and your opportunity to hunt Wyoming really isnt going to change that much? Serious question.

 

[Fordguy]

There are no points for goat and bison...so nobody is "invested" in those.

Secondly, buying points is an "investment" into gaining another point, no guarantee of a tag.

You are correct about the revenue for small towns in Wyoming...hunters make up a very small portion of spending within the tourism industry here. Fishing is a much larger part of revenue for local businesses than hunting ever thought of being. Look at the number of hikers, snowmobilers, ATV'ers, rock climbing, camping, skiing, etc. and you quickly realize that hunters aren't that significant within the tourism industry. Just not the numbers to compete with other user groups.

Finally, what Residents here are asking for is nothing more than what Residents in MT, ID, ND, SD, UT, AZ, NM, CO, etc. get for license allocations in their states.

The task force is aware of how Residents in those states get 90% or in more in most cases, of the sheep, moose, goat and bison type tags there. The Residents here want the same thing and the task force is going to make that recommendation to the Legislature. Its a reasonable, equitable, and fair expectation for Residents here.

That's the whole point of this task force, to put Wyoming Residents on equal footing with other States and give Residents more opportunity.

Ordinarily I would agree with your assessment on a state by state basis, except that wyoming has fewer residents than any of the states you mention and more land than most. If you average the population per sq mile, wyoming has a considerably lower population than any state you mention. How many tags does 1 person need? How much opportunity does one person need? Wyoming is a good sized state with a small population and A LOT of public land. Unless I'm missing something ( which is possible)-at 80/20 the residents of Wyoming already have more opportunity than the other states you listed that are currently at 90/10.
I'm divided on this issue, certainly don't want a reduction in the allotment of nonresident tags, but I would like to hear the more about the justification for going to 90/10.

 

[Fatcamp]

Remember, the same people pushing for these changes and the last set will be in the front row of the push to redefine what a "Full price" elk tag is. Welcome to your $1500 cow tag.

 

[Fordguy]

Remember, the same people pushing for these changes and the last set will be in the front row of the push to redefine what a "Full price" elk tag is. Welcome to your $1500 cow tag.

Lets hope not. $1500 buys a lot of really nice ribeyes.

 

[BuzzH]

Ordinarily I would agree with your assessment on a state by state basis, except that wyoming has fewer residents than any of the states you mention and more land than most. If you average the population per sq mile, wyoming has a considerably lower population than any state you mention. How many tags does 1 person need? How much opportunity does one person need? Wyoming is a good sized state with a small population and A LOT of public land. Unless I'm missing something ( which is possible)-at 80/20 the residents of Wyoming already have more opportunity than the other states you listed that are currently at 90/10.
I'm divided on this issue, certainly don't want a reduction in the allotment of nonresident tags, but I would like to hear the more about the justification for going to 90/10.

Why should Wyoming residents be discriminated against just because of our population when it comes to license allocations?

How many tags does one person need? Depends on the person I suppose, but 6-15 a year doesn't seem unreasonable for a State like Wyoming.

How much opportunity is "too much"? Is there ever too much? I like to hunt 30-60+ days a year.

Should we limit NR's to no tags if they live in a State that allows 10-12-20-unlimited tags for whitetails to their residents? I mean why should they be allowed to come to WY at all if they have all that opportunity in the State they're residents in?

You're asking questions that can't be answered.

But, to answer honestly, if I'm going to put up with the climate here, lower wages, etc. it has to be worth my time. IMO/E, we have just barely enough opportunity to keep me living here.

 

[N2TRKYS]

Not in an uproar about it at all...just time to make the change happen and Residents here want it.

I support that...pretty simple really.

I guess I could always ask NR's the same question...why the uproar if the reductions are so slight and your opportunity to hunt Wyoming really isnt going to change that much? Serious question.

I don’t have several post on these topics defending them and then talk about how little it’ll actually effect the NR like you do. Since it’s your train of thought and logic, I thought I would ask you.

Since you didn’t want to answer that one, I’ll ask you a different one. How many elk and deer tags is a resident allowed to get a year vs a NR?

 

[BuzzH]

I don’t have several post on these topics defending them and then talk about how little it’ll actually effect the NR like you do. Since it’s your train of thought and logic, I thought I would ask you.

Since you didn’t want to answer that one, I’ll ask you a different one. How many elk and deer tags is a resident allowed to get a year vs a NR?

Same for both R and NR...to answer your question.

 

[Fordguy]

6-15 seems like a lot of tags, depending on species. From experience, I can tell you that 3 or 4 Michigan whitetail deer will feed a family of 6 for a year if you make use of pasta, beans and rice. I'm not going to make the assumption that anyone is depending on game animals for their meals, but I've certainly been there.

As far as tag numbers go, there's no reason a guy can't hunt 30-60 days a year on 2 or 3 tags. I do it every year. Actually I probably put in more days than that.
For me, opportunity is about being out in the field, hunting, not about tag numbers, but without a tag there's no opportunity.

I've never hunted a western state 2 years in a row, and never for more than a single species in a year. Reducing the chances that I'll hunt your state even that much when you can buy otc tags in mine (pretty much unlimited) any time you want seems a little... Off. Especially when you take into account that an awful lot of the huntable land in Wyoming is not state owned land.

 

[Jimss]

Nonres are in line to lose 1/2 of their current limited deer elk and antelope tags. That’s a significant cut. Especially when nonres contribute 77% of license and pref pt revenue to the WG&F. As I’ve posted all along Wyo res contribute $0.00 to the WG&F in the form of deer elk and antelope pref pt revenue!

The WG&F has been blessed with an increase in nonres applicants every year. With 90/10 they stand to loose pref pt revenue as nonres drop out of the drawings due to skyrocketing draw odds after tags are cut in half. There also will be a drop in new hunters willing to pay high pref pt fees to begin applying for units that suddenly take twice as long to draw.