Wyoming 90/10 for elk

[wapitibob]

Buzz testified against some of it but it was a moving target over 2 days. Initial chatter was the special draw tags would go to outfitters.

 

[baz77]

On Tuesday Morning, Dr. Shaffer presented the outline of a "Grand Compromise" his subcommittee would work on and brink back to the full WWTF at the June 8-9 meeting:

• Eliminate the current 7,250 cap on nonresident elk tags and go to regional management of elk for nonresident hunters similar to how deer are managed now.
• 50% Special Outfitter Draw - so 50% of all nonresident limited quota deer, elk and antelope tags, and 50% of elk nonresident general tags would only be available to nonresident hunters who had committed to use an outfitter
• 90/10 tag allocation for all deer, elk and antelope units with a 30% or less resident hunter draw odds
• 3-year wait period for resident hunters who draw a high demand limited quota tag - with "high demand" being 30% or less draw odds. Hunters would be able to purchase general tags during the wait period and/or apply for limited quota tags in hunt areas that were not "high demand" in terms of draw odds (31% or greater odds).
• 24-hour resident hunter head start for leftover tags
• Increase nonresident tag prices across the board to offset any budget shortfalls caused by the above changes

This has to be a joke..

 

[FlyGuy]

I really wish WY would split up seasons/offer or expand type 9 tags. Create more opportunities for hunters as I doubt even 25% of Non-res hunt archery and then travel back to hunt rifle. (That’s just an estimation, I’ve never seen any real data).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[RyanT26]

Buzz testified against some of it but it was a moving target over 2 days. Initial chatter was the special draw tags would go to outfitters.

All of them?

 

[Jimss]

One additional consideration is that nonresident landowners currently take tags off the top before the nonres draw even happens. Nonres landowner tags are currently unlimited and issued to all nonres landowners that qualify. If you are wealthy and buy a great chunk of land in Wyo that qualifies you can currently be issued tags each and every year. There are no caps on landowner tags and it’s possibly landowners can take every tag prior to the draw.

Examples of the flawed landowner system is in 2021 70% of unit 124 elk nonres tags were handed over to nonres landowners even though 70% of the land in 124 is public. Around 30% of total nonres quotas in elk units 16, 19, 22, 31, 24, 49, 63, and 111 were handed over to nonres landowners before the public draw even though 60 to 87% of the land in those units is public.

The same landowner deal is true with several high demand deer and antelope units. More examples on how nonres diy/oyo hunters are getting screwed!

The landowner system is a mess! With 90/5/5 nonres will be screwed even worse. Nonres diy/oyo hunters actually will be issued a lot fewer than 5% of the quotas with the current landowner system!

Another reality check for nonres diy/oyo hunters are:
1) current nonres quotas cut in 1/2 by 90/5/5 or 90/10.
2) nonres landowners currently take up to 70% of nonres tags off the top of nonres quotas prior to the draw.
3). Outfitters would take an additional 50% of nonres tags out of the nonres public draw quota for their clients that sign contracts prior to the draw.

With that said, diy/oyo nonres will actually be left with less than 5% of the quotas once landowner tags are taken off the top.

I really believe nonres that have devoted years to applying for tags and paying expensive pref pt fees in Wyo deserve a little more consideration and respect.

 

[tdhanses]

The fact is in the next 10 years we all better be a resident of a western state if we want to hunt in the west, yes resident odds will drop but that’ll be the only real opportunity in the future.

 

[BuzzH]

@BuzzH what is your feeling on the “Grand compromise” actually happening?

I don't know, the task force is all over the map.

IMO, there are some poison pills in it that I don't think Residents will allow to pass.

 

[BuzzH]

@Glockster26, what concerns me is that if the task force recommends full 90-10 for DEP and the special fee NR tags going to outfitters, that bill may very well pass. Might be enough resident support for that. Hicks made the comment during the task force meeting that none of these ideas in the grand compromise would pass as stand alone bills.

In talking with those of us that are really involved, we (Residents) are having a hard time with NR's getting kicked that hard.

While there's plenty of NR folks on this board and others that deserve no mercy, I think the outfitters have went wayyyyy too far. Also, IMO, its fundamentally wrong to show this level of favoritism to one industry via a set aside of a public asset.

If you were around at the start of this, all we originally asked for was 90-10 for the big-5. Non Residents went ape chit and joined forces with WOGA to kill those first couple bills we ran.

Out of the ashes of that dumpster fire, 90-10 got passed for the big-5 and now the NR's WOGA "friends" are more than willing to throw them under the bus in exchange for 90-10 if they get 40-50% of the remaining 10 percent.

Its going to come down to how many Residents WOGA can win over with the carrot of 90-10.

NR's should have played this one smarter from the beginning, but too late now.

I'll keep you posted.

 

[Jimss]

Buzz, what is your opinion on the current res and nonres landowner system? It seems like there is a lot of wiggle-room for bargaining a larger % of tags than what 90/10 or 90/5/5 offers? The current landowner system certainly seems like it isn't functioning as it was originally designed? Do you think caps on landowner tags would benefit both Wyo res and nonres DIY/OYO hunters?

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, what is your opinion on the current res and nonres landowner system? It seems like there is a lot of wiggle-room for bargaining a larger % of tags than what 90/10 or 90/5/5 offers? The current landowner system certainly seems like it isn't functioning as it was originally designed? Do you think caps on landowner tags would benefit both Wyo res and nonres DIY/OYO hunters?

Its functioning fine and should be left alone.

 

[Rich M]

NR's should have played this one smarter from the beginning, but too late now.

I'll keep you posted.

Thanks Buzz.
Figured that the Task Force was gonna sock it to NR, just not how bad and how quickly. This sure beats those guys saying it would happen far off distance.

 

[Indian Summer]

Referring specifically to elk what % of non resident hunters are already using outfitters? Deer and even more so antelope are much more accessible to non res diy hunters than elk. Then there’s the aspect of packing an elk out. So I’m thinking that plenty of NR elk hunters, especially the ones who are once in a lifetime or once every 5 or more years have no interest or ability to hunt elk on their own. I try to stay calm when shit is hitting the fan so before we all come unglued I have to wonder how much of a difference the 50% of tags set aside for the outfitter welfare program will actually make. If 50% of the out of staters are already booking guided hunts it wouldn’t have as much of an impact as lots of us would think at a glance.

Between the outfitter set aside idea and the bullshit restrictions on wilderness hunting those outfitters are out of hand. I can only hope that being so greedy will come back to bite them in the ass someday.

 

[UpNorth89]

I'm tired of outfitters thinking they need to be guaranteed a bigger piece of the pie. Run a good business and do some decent advertising and you'll stay busy just like any other business. They already screwed up New Mexico with this nonsense.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[Tod osier]

Glad my elk points are burnt and I hope to burn antelope (please, please, please).

Who could have seen that once a 90:10 was established for the big 5, that deer, elk, antelope would be next? Also, with reduced NR opportunity, i can imagine that the change will impact residents because people will move to wy for opportunity, increasing resident numbers and decreasing hunt quality. Who will benefit in the end? Not NR, not residents, but the guide industry.

 

[LostArra]

@Glockster26,


NR's should have played this one smarter from the beginning, but too late now.

I'll keep you posted.

I'm not really following how non-residents invested in Big 5 points somehow caused this "Compromise" by sending emails to the Task Force seeing as how there are no non-residents on the Force. Would things be different if they had remained totally silent?

This "Compromise" seems scripted entirely by WOGA and bought by the TF. Maybe I don't understand the definition of compromise. Did WOGA want 100% of the NR tags??

 

[Jimss]

Buzz, I guess we will agree to disagree on the landowner tag issue. There are unlimited number of landowner tags currently issued to those that qualify. These unlimited tags are taken off the top prior to the public draw. Take a look at the tables I've enclosed and how they impact both res and nonres quotas for elk, deer, and antelope. Landowner tags significantly impact every nonres. If high demand nonres tags are cut by 75% with 90/5/5 the % of nonres landowner tags issued in these tables will increase even more dramatically than they already are.

Another flaw in the landowner system is that landowners are buying up parcels of Wyo land that qualify them for landowner tags each and every year. To wealthy landowners it is definitely worth investing in land solely for the purpose of drawing tags each yeaer. Buzz, do you really believe the system was originally designed to do this?

Take a look at the elk, deer, and antelope charts and see what I'm talking about. I really believe the flaws in the current landowner system have grave impacts on DIY/OYO hunters......especially public nonres! The impacts to Wyo res are bound to increase as Wyo population grows and more res purchase land.....many will buy land for the sole purpose of obtaining high demand tags each year!

If caps were placed on high demand limited landowner tags it will solve a lot of the problems and provide public hunters (especially nonres) more opportunity. I really believe this should be a compromise that the Task Force is considering! It will favor a lot of nonres but only negatively impact a few nonres landowners that currently are able to purchase high demand tags each and every year! Even though with caps in place, nonres landowners may not purchase tags every year but they still will receive tags on a regular basis. It certainly seems like something to consider. If res don't want thisat least change the nonres landowner system.

 

[Afhunter1]

What are the requirements to get a NR landowner tag?

 

[Laramie]

I'm tired of outfitters thinking they need to be guaranteed a bigger piece of the pie. Run a good business and do some decent advertising and you'll stay busy just like any other business. They already screwed up New Mexico with this nonsense.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I am not in favor of outfitter welfare. That said, there are many good outfitters that struggle to get consistent numbers of booked clients to draw each year. In some lower tag number areas, it is feast or famine but yet they have to keep up the expensive leases year after year regardless of the number of clients they have draw tags.

This won't happen but... To me an ok compromise would be outfitter set asides in areas with fewer than (insert number) tags that are mostly private and no set aside in higher tag number areas/general or areas that are primarily public.

 

[hunt1up]

Wyoming is one of my favorite states and places to go hunt. I think this year will be like 9 out the past 12 seasons that I've hunted there. I've always appreciated the opportunity and willingly paid the tag increases as they've come. I've met/spoke with many wardens and biologists who were awesome so I figured that price is what is needed to keep good people like that doing their job.

But that outfitter pool proposal is a real kick in the sack. 90/10 on LE elk tags, hey whatever. But 50% of NR tags to outfitters? I don't see how they could have proposed something worse than that.

I feel like Clark Griswold when he opens up his Christmas bonus and it's a subscription to the Jelly of the Month Club. I hope that doesn't really happen.

 

[DanimalW]

I have no issue with a state doing things that better the opportunities for their own resident hunters. They should. I have a huge issue with a state supporting folks making a business out of hunting over individual hunters. I have nothing against outfitters, but I don’t think they should receive anymore special privileges than they already get.