Wyoming 90/10 for elk

[BuzzH]

WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner on behalf of WOGA.

You can spin this however you like but non-resident DEA hunters had zero influence on the Compromise.
WOGA simply found a way to own the TF.
If TF members felt the need to "retaliate" because of non-res Big 5 hunter email input then they are spineless crooks who should never have served on the committee in the first place..

Glad to see you're also catching on.

 

[Buckshot85]

So unfortunate on many levels for many people.
Most of you gentlemen here have forgotten more about the systems in place than I could ever know.
I've done DIY and have done guided hunts in Wyoming.
I love this state!!!!!
I love the smells, the views, the animals and have enjoyed conversations with it's residents.
I have rode my Harley there from Wisconsin just to ride around the state to get "my fix".
It's getting to be the same everywhere for a lot of things with little logical reason.
We all love "our" hunting, but clearly hate sharing.
All states have non-resident/resident tension on some level.
I learned long ago that God makes more critters every year. We are the ones that eff it all up.
Like I said earlier, I will finish out my points however I can and not reapply, but I will continue to visit Wyoming and get what I can from her even if it's simple serenity.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,

I appreciate your perspective and the work you do for sportsman, both res and NR.

Based on your answer I detect a bit of frustration with the events regarding the big 5 and the apparent celebration afterwards. That’s understandable, but I hope that doesn’t color your message as you work to influence these decisions.

I have only hunted WY once before (I got lucky on a LE in the random, best elk hunt of my life) and 5 years later I’m finally going back with a Gen tag in my pocket this Fall and I’m thrilled to get back up there.

I can tell you that I have absolutely no idea who Kyle Menzsner is. Hell I don’t even know what “WOGA” stands for (but I’ll google both of them after this post). I Had no idea about any of the events taking place that pissed anyone off and I would bet the majority of NR elk and deer hunters are just like me in that. The point being, these were the actions of a “few” and not the majority.

It’s disappointing when anyone makes important decisions out of spite or with an emotional response. It’s even more disappointing when that comes from leaders with great responsibility. I sincerely hope this Task force and the state leadership that’s involved will take a deep breath. There is so much at stake here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This post is worth reading twice...FlyGuy gets exactly what's going on.

Politics at work...and its the same story everywhere in every state.

 

[tdhanses]

The fact is WY residents overall want more tags and trophy tags, if it passes then it’s clear that the majority of residents could careless about NR and why should they. In the end hunting will be a rich mans sport Resident or not, in the mean time we all should play the game, this is going to be the wave across the west, there are still plenty of opportunities for NR for now, we will have to adjust and become residents in the long game for DEA.

There are zero conservation orgs with NR interests and to say some influencers represent the majority is a joke, all these people that say they are butt hurt because of one NR are just looking for an excuse to push their narrative the way they want, the sheep will follow because as it stands today it will not effect them negatively, down the road the sheep will be out of the game unless they have $$$.

Truthfully for those that want to hire an outfitter annually this could be a windfall to hunt WY whenever you want, the majority in the points game can’t afford or won’t spend the cash to hunt outfitted.

 

[mxgust]

Wyoming Wildlife Taskforce

Welcome to the Wyoming Wildlife Taskforce

sites.google.com

They update this site periodically with public comment sections for the task force meetings. I'm sure people could also reach out to WOGA and any other interested parties, as well as the representatives involved

 

[Rifleman86]

At this point, I feel like the only way to fight any of this is federal legislation that puts bumpers on how states treat nonresidents, or else they lose PR funding. We literally have no other voice at this point. You don’t get to soak up millions on federal wildlife funds, all while allowing residents and outfitters to have their own personal hunting utopia on federal lands while essentially locking out the rest of the country from hunting the land they own.

For the record I’m not saying that because I want to take away anything from the resident, or that I don’t think outfitters should be able to run a business. State residents should have much better access/cost than the rest of us. But there comes a point when you are treated so unfairly by state agencies and have such little voice I see no other option, other than just resigning to quit hunting or move.

We’ve done it with highway funds, I don’t see why it couldn’t be done with PR dollars.

Unilateral state management has been really good for all of us, up until it hasn’t.

 

[roosiebull]

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

i know this is a bummer for all of us NR hunters, but i do find it refreshing they take care of their residents, even if it screws my odds of drawing a tag there..... probably not a very popular perspective, but it's good for residents.

the outfitter thing is kind of weird, especially in NR outfitters are able to take advantage of that (not sure if that's the case or not)

again, probably not popular opinion, and certainly doesn't benefit me at all, but i like seeing residents/locals having some priority on tags

 

[BuzzH]

At this point, I feel like the only way to fight any of this is federal legislation that puts bumpers on how states treat nonresidents, or else they lose PR funding. We literally have no other voice at this point. You don’t get to soak up millions on federal wildlife funds, all while allowing residents and outfitters to have their own personal hunting utopia on federal lands while essentially locking out the rest of the country from hunting the land they own.

For the record I’m not saying that because I want to take away anything from the resident, or that I don’t think outfitters should be able to run a business. State residents should have much better access/cost than the rest of us. But there comes a point when you are treated so unfairly by state agencies and have such little voice I see no other option, other than just resigning to quit hunting or move.

We’ve done it with highway funds, I don’t see why it couldn’t be done with PR dollars.

Unilateral state management has been really good for all of us, up until it hasn’t.

Could always resort to hunting your own state...just a thought.

 

[dirtytough]

Just make sure you guys keep donating to all the conservation orgs, corner crossing go fund me, grizzly delisting, etc. That way you can go fishing and read stories in magazines about a resident or guided non res that killed another animal of a lifetime. You might even get a thank you postcard in the mail from the conservation org.

Non res you better get yours as soon as you can everywhere.

 

[Buckshot85]

Could always resort to hunting your own state...just a thought.

Go piss up a rope.

 

[hoff1ck]

I mean this in all seriousness, but what impact can non-residents really have in this political arena? It seemed like public outcry for the changes in Montana last year made little difference. I did my best to reach out and do what I felt like I could, but it’s hard to look at these things with much optimism once it’s in the form of a bill.

I’d also love to hunt my own state for elk, but Michigan odds are abysmal and at the chance I do pull a tag in my hunting lifetime, it’s one and done. I love elk hunting and everything about it, but it seems like on the surface anyways, opportunities continue to dwindle.

 

[Rifleman86]

Could always resort to hunting your own state...just a thought.

Listen Buzz, I know you are fighting the good fight here, and I do sincerely appreciate it.

I don’t necessarily think more federal involvement is a good thing, I’m just pointing out it’s the only option I can think of for nonresidents to gain a voice on how wildlife is managed on land they own.

As you well know, there is always political backlash when things get pushed too far by one party, whether that’s Republicans vs Democrats or States vs Feds.

The wildlife commission might be wise to keep that in mind before they go too crazy.

 

[Wags]

I'm interested to see what the overall financial impact will be on businesses when this is said and done.

Sucks to see this happening but I'm also not surprised. Nobody hates hunters more than hunters and that multiplies when you change the license plate.

 

[FlyGuy]

i know this is a bummer for all of us NR hunters, but i do find it refreshing they take care of their residents, even if it screws my odds of drawing a tag there..... probably not a very popular perspective, but it's good for residents.

the outfitter thing is kind of weird, especially in NR outfitters are able to take advantage of that (not sure if that's the case or not)

again, probably not popular opinion, and certainly doesn't benefit me at all, but i like seeing residents/locals having some priority on tags

After a little digging around (Btw, I never could find anything about anyone named Kyle menzsner or any other spelling close to that); this is what I think is behind the guide pool…

I don’t know where this number came from, but I read that approximately 25% of all NR tags are guided hunts. WOGA staunchly opposes reducing the number of NR elk & deer tags down to 90/10 b/c that will translate to about a 50% decrease in revenue from NR hunters. My assumption here is that they are attempting to get the WOGA on board with the 90/10 by allocating half of those tags thru guides. That way the guides won’t take a hit on income (and maybe even get a nice bump? I didn’t do the math); residents get their 90% of all the tags. Everybody wins and the bill can pass.

Except NR like me get absolutely screwed with less tags - and likely another large price increase (I’d expect all NR tags to cost what it does for a special soon). But nobody gives a shit about us b/c they have zero consequences from NR. No voice. No say. We fund the programs but we have no seat at the table.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[BuzzH]

Listen Buzz, I know you are fighting the good fight here, and I do sincerely appreciate it.

I don’t necessarily think more federal involvement is a good thing, I’m just pointing out it’s the only option I can think of for nonresidents to gain a voice on how wildlife is managed on land they own.

As you well know, there is always political backlash when things get pushed too far by one party, whether that’s Republicans vs Democrats or States vs Feds.

The wildlife commission might be wise to keep that in mind before they go too crazy.

Here's the problem...how is PR funding allocated currently? You may want to look into that, nothing about it is tied to Federal Land ownership.

You, like many others, are trying to tie land ownership to PR funding as well as your alleged "right" to another States wildlife. Neither of which are correct.

If you're going to deny Wyoming, Nevada, and other states citizens access to our wildlife based on the notion that Federal Land percentages should be the deciding allocation tool, then states like yours should receive essentially ZERO PR dollars. You have zip for federal lands that NR can hunt, therefore very little PR funding.

Of course you have the trouncing of States Rights and existing federal regulations to over-come that absolutely give each State the right to discriminate against NR hunters any way they wish. And, you have yet to come with how to allocate PR funding based on Federal Land ownership without hosing states that have very few federal lands.

So I say, your option of Federal intervention is not viable and won't ever happen. Good luck with the campaign because you're going to need that along with convincing states to give up rights they've had for a couple hundred years.

 

[FlyGuy]

Going from 16% to 10% has such a small effect on a residents draw odds, but a tremendous effect on a NR.

Is the issue here really about draw odds, this doesn’t change much to correct that? From what I gather, the complaints seem to be much more about overcrowding. This change really does nothing at all to effect that, same amount of hunters, just a change in demographics.

A far better solution to this overcrowding issue, that I’m sure we could all agree on (res or NR) is to green light corner crossing and unlock millions of acres of public land. That would do FAR greater good to disperse hunters across the landscape and ease up the tensions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[BuzzH]

After a little digging around (Btw, I never could find anything about anyone named Kyle menzsner or any other spelling close to that); this is what I think is behind the guide pool…

I don’t know where this number came from, but I read that approximately 25% of all NR tags are guided hunts. WOGA staunchly opposes reducing the number of NR elk & deer tags down to 90/10 b/c that will translate to about a 50% decrease in revenue from NR hunters. My assumption here is that they are attempting to get the WOGA on board with the 90/10 by allocating half of those tags thru guides. That way the guides won’t take a hit on income (and maybe even get a nice bump? I didn’t do the math); residents get their 90% of all the tags. Everybody wins and the bill can pass.

Except NR like me get absolutely screwed with less tags - and likely another large price increase (I’d expect all NR tags to cost what it does for a special soon). But nobody gives a shit about us b/c they have zero consequences from NR. No voice. No say. We fund the programs but we have no seat at the table.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Bolded part is wrong...Sy is cutting deals for 90-10 right now. He has no choice or he wont get an outfitter set aside.

 

[BuzzH]

Going from 16% to 10% has such a small effect on a residents draw odds, but a tremendous effect on a NR.

Is the issue here really about draw odds, this doesn’t change much to correct that? From what I gather, the complaints seem to be much more about overcrowding. This change really does nothing at all to effect that, same amount of hunters, just a change in demographics.

A far better solution to this overcrowding issue, that I’m sure we could all agree on (res or NR) is to green light corner crossing and unlock millions of acres of public land. That would do FAR greater good to disperse hunters across the landscape and ease up the tensions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Clarification:

I'll remind you that only elk would be a 6% gain, and its not insignificant to the Residents that would get to hunt LQ elk areas that normally would not have.

For deer/pronghorn it would be a 10% gain.

Look, I'm going to oppose any outfitter set asides and I know a lot of other Residents that will too. If the set asides don't pass, neither will 90-10.

 

[BuzzH]

Go piss up a rope.

And you wonder why Wyoming Residents are thinking cutting a deal with Sy and the outfitters may be the best course to take.

 

[Rifleman86]

Here's the problem...how is PR funding allocated currently? You may want to look into that, nothing about it is tied to Federal Land ownership.

You, like many others, are trying to tie land ownership to PR funding as well as your alleged "right" to another States wildlife. Neither of which are correct.

If you're going to deny Wyoming, Nevada, and other states citizens access to our wildlife based on the notion that Federal Land percentages should be the deciding allocation tool, then states like yours should receive essentially ZERO PR dollars. You have zip for federal lands that NR can hunt, therefore very little PR funding.

Of course you have the trouncing of States Rights and existing federal regulations to over-come that absolutely give each State the right to discriminate against NR hunters any way they wish. And, you have yet to come with how to allocate PR funding based on Federal Land ownership without hosing states that have very few federal lands.

So I say, your option of Federal intervention is not viable and won't ever happen. Good luck with the campaign because you're going to need that along with convincing states to give up rights they've had for a couple hundred years.

Here's the problem...how is PR funding allocated currently? You may want to look into that, nothing about it is tied to Federal Land ownership.

You, like many others, are trying to tie land ownership to PR funding as well as your alleged "right" to another States wildlife. Neither of which are correct.

If you're going to deny Wyoming, Nevada, and other states citizens access to our wildlife based on the notion that Federal Land percentages should be the deciding allocation tool, then states like yours should receive essentially ZERO PR dollars. You have zip for federal lands that NR can hunt, therefore very little PR funding.

Of course you have the trouncing of States Rights and existing federal regulations to over-come that absolutely give each State the right to discriminate against NR hunters any way they wish. And, you have yet to come with how to allocate PR funding based on Federal Land ownership without hosing states that have very few federal lands.

So I say, your option of Federal intervention is not viable and won't ever happen. Good luck with the campaign because you're going to need that along with convincing states to give up rights they've had for a couple hundred years.

Sure, states own wildlife, and nonresidents don’t have a “right” to other states wildlife.

I get all that. You are correct. Yet somehow the ESA passed and WT and WY can’t have a Grizzly season. Sure seems like some trampling of states rights there.

Shit in theory the 2nd Amendment protects my right to own a firearm. Tell that to the guy who lives in Manhattan.

My point being, WY doesn’t have a ton of pull on the federal level. That’s a fact.

Enough people from the 49 other states get pissed off about not being able to hunt “their” land things can change, and it might not be for the best with respect to WY residents or WOGA.

Who knows what exactly that would look like, it probably won’t look like what I suggested, but to say retribution on the federal level isn’t possible is overstating your position a bit. Especially when all those WOGA members need to have a permit to operate on federal land.

Personally I’d rather we all work together to make hunting better for all of us, improve access, habitat, etc.