Wyoming 90/10 for elk

[cgasner1]

If the outfitters are going to get half of the available tags because it’s the job they wanted to do shouldn’t the other half go to the insta hunters since they also made the choice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BuzzH]

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.

Sebastian, I've had those tables longer than you've known they existed.

The landowner program is fine the way it is. It gives qualifying landowners 2 tags per year per species that occupy their land at 2000 use days a year.

I have no grievance with giving landowners tags if they tolerate public wildlife using their lands.

There are a couple things I would tighten up regarding corporate loopholes, but other than that the landowners program is fine.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

@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.

I appreciate your continued opposition to the outfitter draw and I am in complete agreement. However, blaming NRs for this current state of the TF is misplaced. How does “NRs going ape chit” and “joining forces with WOGA” affect anything? WY residents will decide how this plays out and not NR hunters, they can’t vote in WY. NRs had no play in this from the beginning. While you might have only wanted 90/10 for big 5, your fellow WY residents were more than willing to throw NRs under the bus to get 90/10 DEA. Sounds more like WY residents joined forces with WOGA. Hopefully some WY residents share your views on the matter.

 

[BuzzH]

I appreciate your continued opposition to the outfitter draw and I am in complete agreement. However, blaming NRs for this current state of the TF is misplaced. How does “NRs going ape chit” and “joining forces with WOGA” affect anything? WY residents will decide how this plays out and not NR hunters, they can’t vote in WY. NRs had no play in this from the beginning. While you might have only wanted 90/10 for big 5, your fellow WY residents were more than willing to throw NRs under the bus to get 90/10 DEA. Sounds more like WY residents joined forces with WOGA. Hopefully some WY residents share your views on the matter.

I'll tell you how...WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner, some runt from Nevada to testify on behalf of the NRs who were going apechit about the first 90-10 bill. A bill specific to the big 5.

That pissed off a lot of residents, it also pissed off the bill sponsor. After that happened the next bills were 90-10 for all species...the NRs and WOGA poked the bear.

Today, the bill sponsor is now way up the leadership ladder of the republican state Senate.

The outfitters are afraid of his leadership role, Sy admitted it to the task force. The outfitters are willing to give up 90-10 to assure themselves 40% if what's left.

There's blood in the water, past feuds with scores needing settled, and a shrinking resource driving this.

NRs screwed up fighting the initial bill...and it's biting them in the ass now, big-time.

It wasn't like they weren't warned...but they were just too busy doing victory laps drunk on perceived power they had killing 90-10 to listen.

Just a typical story of short term gain for long term pain...nrs screwed themselves.

 

[Laramie]

I'll tell you how...WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner, some runt from Nevada to testify on behalf of the NRs who were going apechit about the first 90-10 bill. A bill specific to the big 5.

That pissed off a lot of residents, it also pissed off the bill sponsor. After that happened the next bills were 90-10 for all species...the NRs and WOGA poked the bear.

Today, the bill sponsor is now way up the leadership ladder of the republican state Senate.

The outfitters are afraid of his leadership role, Sy admitted it to the task force. The outfitters are willing to give up 90-10 to assure themselves 40% if what's left.

There's blood in the water, past feuds with scores needing settled, and a shrinking resource driving this.

NRs screwed up fighting the initial bill...and it's biting them in the ass now, big-time.

It wasn't like they weren't warned...but they were just too busy doing victory laps drunk on perceived power they had killing 90-10 to listen.

Just a typical story of short term gain for long term pain...nrs screwed themselves.

Your point is well taken but it wasn't their choice to have that guy represent non-residents as a whole. I think everyone takes it personally the way you are stating it when in reality many of us do understand the position of residents and do appreciate the opportunities we have.

 

[BuzzH]

Your point is well taken but it wasn't their choice to have that guy represent non-residents as a whole. I think everyone takes it personally the way you are stating it when in reality many of us do understand the position of residents and do appreciate the opportunities we have.

Wasn't their choice, but you should have heard the hero worship for him "saving" nrs at the time.

Kyle got what he was after, another ram for himself...and likely a free hunt via WOGA.

He did manage to piss off the wrong senator along the way as well as a bunch of residents.

And here we are....

 

[Chad E]

I'll tell you how...WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner, some runt from Nevada to testify on behalf of the NRs who were going apechit about the first 90-10 bill. A bill specific to the big 5.

That pissed off a lot of residents, it also pissed off the bill sponsor. After that happened the next bills were 90-10 for all species...the NRs and WOGA poked the bear.

Today, the bill sponsor is now way up the leadership ladder of the republican state Senate.

The outfitters are afraid of his leadership role, Sy admitted it to the task force. The outfitters are willing to give up 90-10 to assure themselves 40% if what's left.

There's blood in the water, past feuds with scores needing settled, and a shrinking resource driving this.

NRs screwed up fighting the initial bill...and it's biting them in the ass now, big-time.

It wasn't like they weren't warned...but they were just too busy doing victory laps drunk on perceived power they had killing 90-10 to listen.

Just a typical story of short term gain for long term pain...nrs screwed themselves.

That's BS Buzz. I'm a non resident. I don't apply for the big five very often. I honestly don't have an issue with the big 5 going 90 10 but I did have sympathy for nonresidents heavily invested in a point system to get the rug yanked.
That all being said I sure as hell didn't support whomever Kyle mesner is especially if he has anything to do with WOGA the group that keeps me out of the wilderness in wyoming "for my own good" I didn't get the option of being asked if I want to be represented by him or WOGA

Your post reads of crooked politics backdoor deals etc and your angle is Nonresidents are getting what we deserve....thats bullshit and you know it.

 

[LostArra]

I'll tell you how...WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner, some runt from Nevada to testify on behalf of the NRs who were going apechit about the first 90-10 bill. A bill specific to the big 5.

That pissed off a lot of residents,

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..

 

[Chad E]

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.

That's like suggesting a contractor in a small town(low tag number unit) should get subsidies cause it's so tough. This is America I thought we believed in capitalism and free market.

 

[BuzzH]

That's BS Buzz. I'm a non resident. I don't apply for the big five very often. I honestly don't have an issue with the big 5 going 90 10 but I did have sympathy for nonresidents heavily invested in a point system to get the rug yanked.
That all being said I sure as hell didn't support whomever Kyle mesner is especially if he has anything to do with WOGA the group that keeps me out of the wilderness in wyoming "for my own good" I didn't get the option of being asked if I want to be represented by him or WOGA

Your post reads of crooked politics backdoor deals etc and your angle is Nonresidents are getting what we deserve....thats bullshit and you know it.

Glad you're finally catching on.

 

[Laramie]

That's like suggesting a contractor in a small town(low tag number unit) should get subsidies cause it's so tough. This is America I thought we believed in capitalism and free market.

I understand and agree. However, if we are going to compromise something going that route would make a lot more sense. The public isn't going to hunt those areas anyways because they are private and under outfitter leases. There are non-residents waiting in line for the hunts. To me it would be the least impactful outfitter welfare to DIY non-residents.

 

[BuzzH]

"I'm here today to speak on behalf of non residents all across the country"...Kyle M.

Was in the committee room when he said it .

The trouble with not speaking up for yourself is you let others speak for you.

 

[Chad E]

"I'm here today to speak on behalf of non residents all across the country"...Kyle M.

Was in the committee room when he said it .

The trouble with not speaking up for yourself is you let others speak for you.

Who says we didn't speak up for ourselves? Your litterally suggesting that nonresidents are being retaliated against for speaking up yet we should of spoke up?

Anyone can stand up and say I represent xxxx ....that doesn't make it true. Suggesting all nonresidents are at fault for a guy WOGA flew in for their benefit is painting with an awful broad brush.

 

[FlyGuy]

I'll tell you how...WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner, some runt from Nevada to testify on behalf of the NRs who were going apechit about the first 90-10 bill. A bill specific to the big 5.

That pissed off a lot of residents, it also pissed off the bill sponsor. After that happened the next bills were 90-10 for all species...the NRs and WOGA poked the bear.

Today, the bill sponsor is now way up the leadership ladder of the republican state Senate.

The outfitters are afraid of his leadership role, Sy admitted it to the task force. The outfitters are willing to give up 90-10 to assure themselves 40% if what's left.

There's blood in the water, past feuds with scores needing settled, and a shrinking resource driving this.

NRs screwed up fighting the initial bill...and it's biting them in the ass now, big-time.

It wasn't like they weren't warned...but they were just too busy doing victory laps drunk on perceived power they had killing 90-10 to listen.

Just a typical story of short term gain for long term pain...nrs screwed themselves.

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

 

[805Bowhunter]

I am understanding what this is proposing for LE tags (I think) but what I am still missing, and maybe its my intellect, but what would this doing for the general tag? Wouldn't this be making the general tag easier to draw for a NR? I may be missing something.

 

[Wags]

What are the requirements to get a NR landowner tag?

Last I checked it was 160 continuous acres with a 2000 hour per year usage requirement per species that you apply for.

Also, only ONE of the 2 tags you are allowed can be a full price tag (buck).

 

[Buckshot85]

Who says we didn't speak up for ourselves? Your litterally suggesting that nonresidents are being retaliated against for speaking up yet we should of spoke up?

Anyone can stand up and say I represent xxxx ....that doesn't make it true. Suggesting all nonresidents are at fault for a guy WOGA flew in for their benefit is painting with an awful broad brush.

AMEN!!!!!!

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I'll tell you how...WOGA flew in Kyle Menzsner, some runt from Nevada to testify on behalf of the NRs who were going apechit about the first 90-10 bill. A bill specific to the big 5.

That pissed off a lot of residents, it also pissed off the bill sponsor. After that happened the next bills were 90-10 for all species...the NRs and WOGA poked the bear.

Today, the bill sponsor is now way up the leadership ladder of the republican state Senate.

The outfitters are afraid of his leadership role, Sy admitted it to the task force. The outfitters are willing to give up 90-10 to assure themselves 40% if what's left.

There's blood in the water, past feuds with scores needing settled, and a shrinking resource driving this.

NRs screwed up fighting the initial bill...and it's biting them in the ass now, big-time.

It wasn't like they weren't warned...but they were just too busy doing victory laps drunk on perceived power they had killing 90-10 to listen.

Just a typical story of short term gain for long term pain...nrs screwed themselves.

I understand your point but it sounds like the blame for this falls on WOGA, not NRs. Kyle Mentzner is one individual who likely can’t even vote in WY. At the end of the day, it’s up to the TF, WOGA, and legislators in the decision cycle. Those legislators answer to their constituents, last I checked non residents can’t vote in WY. Hardly fair to blame folks that don’t get a vote in the matter.

 

[BuzzH]

Who says we didn't speak up for ourselves? Your litterally suggesting that nonresidents are being retaliated against for speaking up yet we should of spoke up?

Anyone can stand up and say I represent xxxx ....that doesn't make it true. Suggesting all nonresidents are at fault for a guy WOGA flew in for their benefit is painting with an awful broad brush.

NR's are being retaliated against. ONE NR showed up and pissed off the bill sponsor. There was ZERO talk of 90-10 from residents other than for the big-5 until that happened.

I can't flash back in time and change what happened, but you're denying that's the way it has shaken out is a you problem.

You're killing the messenger, who has been there when this all happened.

I don't like it either, but I also don't live in denial.

 

[BuzzH]

Last I checked it was 160 continuous acres with a 2000 hour per year usage requirement per species that you apply for.

Also, only ONE of the 2 tags you are allowed can be a full price tag (buck).

I don't think that's true...I personally know landowners that get 2 full priced tags for deer, elk, and pronghorn.