Wyo Task Force - Nonres Comments!

[Chad E]

I can calculate 90-10 pretty easy...and that's the math that matters in this thread.

Typical Buzz debate tactic. When your called out on your numbers not proving what you want you change to neener neener we will get this through.

 

[BuzzH]

Typical Buzz debate tactic. When your called out on your numbers not proving what you want you change to neener neener we will get this through.

If the budget numbers are your concern...start a new thread.

This thread is about the Wyoming task force...nothing to do with budget. The important math and numbers are 90 and 10.

 

[amassi]

So non-residents and federal aid make up
62,993,085 of Wyoming’s $86 million budget

Most of the PR and DJ Money probably also comes from non-residents


I am familiar. Just stop using fuzzy math.

Get put of here with that math stuff, this is the internet

"federal aid" could very well be the taxes many Wyoming residents pay coming back home- it could also be from taxes non residents pay in wyomings tourism industry.
So if you take federal aid out, some or much of which could originate in Wyoming, non res still make up a hefty portion of wyo gf budget. Wyoming economy is (thriving?) On tourism and resource extraction so I'm sure the residents can afford to pay a little more to offset the cost of the unwashed foreign horde currently befallen their borders.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[RyanT26]

Ok buzz. Buzz ok.
But the reality is 71% of Wyoming fishing games budget comes from non-residents and federal aid which is more than likely mostly non-residents.
So by knowing that, I think that it should be a 70/30 split. 70% of the tags go to non-residents 30% of the tag go to residents.



Before buzz or any Wyoming resident shits their pants over that remark, it’s a joke.

 

[BuzzH]

Ok buzz. Buzz ok.
But the reality is 71% of Wyoming fishing games budget comes from non-residents and federal aid which is more than likely mostly non-residents.
So by knowing that, I think that it should be a 70/30 split. 70% of the tags go to non-residents 30% of the tag go to residents.

Disagree...since Residents do 90%+ of the actual WORK here, working for the GF department, NGO's, State Lands Office, our resident landowners tolerating wildlife here, our Resident hunters attending meetings, completing project work, advocating for wildlife here, volunteering our time on advisory committees, testifying in front of the state/federal legislature on wildlife, funding NGO's here, funding local businesses year round, etc. etc. etc. I think NR's should be thankful they get 10%, because they sure as shit aren't doing 10% of that work. Not even close.

The easiest thing I do for wildlife every year is to cut a check to another state to hunt as a NR there. I feel guilty that all I do is show up for vacation with a tag in my hand and sling a few hundred into their economy while hunting there. That's the absolute least I can do for the opportunity they provide...and I sure as hell don't expect more than 10% of their tags for that kind of crap effort put into their wildlife on my part. Cutting a check for a few hundred to maybe a couple thousand at most, to hunt another States wildlife is nothing to crow about. Its doing the absolute minimum...no question about it.

YMMV...

 

[RyanT26]

43.5 million is a lot of hundreds. I have no doubt you do a lot of work. I also think that you’re the minority.

 

[Bighorner]

Personally, as a wyoming resident, it would do me a heck of a lot more good to move to a 90% random draw 10% preference points for sheep/moose, and and leave the R/NR allocation the same. No to mention my childrens chances of ever drawing. The 90/10 split mainly benefits residents close to max points.

 

[Chad E]

Personally, as a wyoming resident, it would do me a heck of a lot more good to move to a 90% random draw 10% preference points for sheep/moose, and and leave the R/NR allocation the same. No to mention my childrens chances of ever drawing. The 90/10 split mainly benefits residents close to max points.

Your spot on. It was mentioned early that sy's kids and grandkids are screwed under the current system. I agree they are but that's way more a product of a mature point system than r/nr allocation. Certainly moving some tags from nr to resident helps drawing odds but let's be realistic on what's actually the reason kids today are screwed in point systems.

 

[Bighorner]

I agree completely the system is no longer working. Buzz has pointed out how numbers are down nearly across the board. I think we are all going to be looking at less opportunity R and NR as demand continues to out strip supply.

 

[TheTone]

I can’t fault residents for wanting 90-10, where it gets harder to figure is when residents are already getting multiple deer, elk and pronghorn tags per year. Also doesn’t sound good to say non res will still get a huge chunk of pronghorn tags, but probably not the ones they want; so residents just want the high demand, trophy units and non res can fight it out over small bucks and does in units with tougher access.

 

[Bigbull]

Typical Buzz debate tactic. When your called out on your numbers not proving what you want you change to neener neener we will get this through.

Yeah. I have seen that from him many times before.

Fortunately for Buzz, there is no arbiter of truth on a hunting forum.

 

[Crowmangler]

Whenever all you NR's do go to WY please stay the hell off Buzz's lawn

 

[RyanT26]

Whenever all you NR's do go to WY please stay the hell off Buzz's lawn

No way, I am going to pull up honking and waving, and ask for all his secret spots.

 

[Wags]

If WOGA thinks the residents of WY are going to concede outfitter set asides or transferable landowner tags for a 90-10 allocation for any species...they need to do some better ciphering.

So your saying if WY is willing to do the 90/10 BUT they want transferable vouchers you wouldn't support it?

 

[bayoublaster7527]

When

Sy Gilliland with WOGA already testified in favor of 90-10 for the big 5...you can listen to it at the task force web site.

Everyone, including the outfitters realize Wyoming has been way too generous with licenses for those species. They also realize that without significant changes to the allocations, their Resident kids and grandkids are screwed without 90-10.

So you’re saying WYOGA is backing 90/10 and wants nothing in return? Just because they feel it’s best for their kids and grandkids? I hope you’re right but please excuse me for being a bit skeptical of their intentions.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

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

1-800-CRYARVR

Heard it here first, WY resident push for 100-0 res/non res allocation.

 

[LostArra]

Transferable landowner tags are coming too. Sorry Buzz

 

[Lawnboi]

Heard it here first, WY resident push for 100-0 res/non res allocation.

Hey now remember those animals belong to the residents of state. We are lucky we get anything. Read as sarcasm

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I am always amused when proponents of 90/10 make the “it’s only fair!” statement but no one batted an eye when WYOGA pushed the wilderness rule (completely unfair regulation) through.

 

[RyanT26]

Heard it here first, WY resident push for 100-0 res/non res allocation.

Pssh. Give buzz the proper respect he’s not just some Wyoming resident. He’s the BHA Wyoming chair person.