Wyoming proposal to slash Non-resident hunters

[mlgc20]

Maybe the non hunting citizens in these states need to better understand that amount money they loose and that it costs them to manage wildlife because of the welfare resident hunters receive.

When 10% of tags and licenses sales funds 70% of the budget....the other 90% of sales amounts to welfare for hunters.

It's only a matter of time until a lawmaker who doesn't care about the resident hunter vote takes a look at this. (Or some anti-hunting groups will get it on the ballot somewhere.) They might reason that they can raise money from increased resident license fees and hurt hunting. They could position it as "We give resident hunters 90% of the tags and then on top of that, give them a 90% discount off the market rate." Not pointing specifically at Wyoming.

 

[Dos Perros]

@Cpgfan I'm mostly being tongue in cheek (I don't really have a black gay grandma).

The point I was trying to make that maybe didn't come across is that non-residents do exert some influence over other aspects of life in Wyoming. If you want a dude like me to come heavy in support of Wyoming residents' issues then maybe don't throw NR hunters under the bus so much?

I am seriously though going to move to WY. Currently have property in ID and would like to sell and then buy in WY, build there, establish residency, get on that gravy train with y'all.

 

[Trial153]

It's only a matter of time until a lawmaker who doesn't care about the resident hunter vote takes a look at this. (Or some anti-hunting groups will get it on the ballot somewhere.) They might reason that they can raise money from increased resident license fees and hurt hunting. They could position it as "We give resident hunters 90% of the tags and then on top of that, give them a 90% discount off the market rate." Not pointing specifically at Wyoming.

Agree. Pile onto that argument the cost of maintaining public land and who pays for that.....and maybe its time to start talking about adding way more capitalistic to hunting in general .

Public land transfers might have some more potential upside then we would like to admit

 

[Shooter264]

Not a big oil and gas influence where I live, so my local economy would be fine as would the overall economy. Plus if we removed oil and gas from federal lands we would see a bigger push in solar and wind.

But hey, you would still be able to hunt right.

Your last statement explains 100% of your ignorance. Shit in our economy as long as yours isn’t affected. Let’s replace a few facilities per section which equate to a few acres of disturbance per section and replace them with hundreds of turbines and solar panels. That makes a ton of sense. Here’s the future you’re dreaming of on your public lands. I’ll take the one that doesn’t cause all the disturbance and kill thousands of birds per year

 

[tdhanses]

Your last statement explains 100% of your ignorance. Shit in our economy as long as yours isn’t affected. Let’s replace a few facilities per section which equate to a few acres of disturbance per section and replace them with hundreds of turbines and solar panels. That makes a ton of sense. Here’s the future you’re dreaming of on your public lands. I’ll take the one that doesn’t cause all the disturbance and kill thousands of birds per year

Interesting couldn’t the same argument be made for resident tags, shit on the NR while the R isn’t affected.

Guess my point is WY is small population size, the NR can have a huge affect on WY outside of hunting and the more WY turns people off the less they are likely to support WY economically or federally. If WY lost gas, oil and coal, I assume it would destroy the economy there, this would directly affect less then 700k people out of 330 million. WY needs the NR support.

Yes my costs would increase overall but not substantially compared to how WY is treating the NR.

 

[idig4au]

I’m feeling a little nauseous. All I want to do is hunt Bighorn sheep again (hunted CO with my recurve in 2007) and have been investing in the WY draw and applying for 22 years to do that. Wyoming was my last hope at not having.1% chance of drawing.

Ditto, I’m in same boat. I hope I can draw out this year.

 

[307]

I’m pro oil, just not on federal lands, pretty simple as that.

This would 100% guarantee that federal lands are sold to private interests.

 

[tdhanses]

This would 100% guarantee that federal lands are sold to private interests.

Yeah but as a NR that would have limited opportunities would I still care, I enjoy hunting but if I can’t hunt why do I care? And don’t say because I should care about the animals WY owns, they would be fine without public land.

 

[wapitibob]

Non residents don't fund 90% of the WY game dept.

 

[Dos Perros]

This would 100% guarantee that federal lands are sold to private interests.

Lol.

 

[Trial153]

This would 100% guarantee that federal lands are sold to private interests.

Good. I could buy their land owner tags.

 

[Jaden Bales]

I’d like to hear what Game and Fish has to say and also the task force they mentioned at the end of the session. Thank you guys for those video links. Where can I find Thursday’s link if you don’t mind?

Solid question. They'll post up the link here: https://www.wyoleg.gov/Calendar/20210303/Meeting

You can find pretty much everything legislature at wyoleg.gov

 

[Fatcamp]

We can not just go to Walmart and buy pronghorn tags, well maybe the very few left after the leftover draw. The licenses we can go but OTC are usually all General licenses. LQ is the rub, not general tags.

Point being you are not hurting for tags in any way.

 

[BigBird69]

What about special license fees? I didn't see them mentioned. Maybe I just missed it.

 

[JFK]

What about special license fees? I didn't see them mentioned. Maybe I just missed it.

In the proposed legislation there wouldn’t be a special draw. Just one big NR draw where everyone pays what equates to current special draw fees. Would make it nearly impossible to determine draw odds the first year it was implemented.

 

[Fitzwho]

Non residents don't fund 90% of the WY game dept.

Correct. Non-residents account for 77% of license/point revenue. $43.6 million vs $9.2 million in 2020.

 

[Laramie]

Wish they would have waited for June 1st...smh. The deer and antelope draws are going to be completely unpredictable this year. Even if it doesn't pass, I bet you see some people point dumping.

 

[hutty]

I get a resident wanting a bigger piece of the pie for the same amount. As a non resident, when it comes to less chance to hunt for more money I need to voice an opinion for what its worth.

According to 2020 license sales from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, non-resident hunting license sales account for 74% of license revenues generated for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department

USFWS- WSFR Historical License Data

Quick email I sent out to Senators


Dear Senator:

I am contacting you in regards to Senate File 103. I am a non-resident hunter that would be adversely affected by this bill.

Senate File 103 would not only increase the fees associated with hunting in Wyoming, but would also decrease the allocation of non-resident tags. I understand paying more than residents, and the current cap on tags. I do take umbrage with having to pay more for tags, with less opportunities to hunt in Wyoming.

According to 2020 license sales from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, non-resident license sales account for 74% of license revenues generated for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. I would hope that non-resident hunters and the revenue we generate via license sales; along with direct spending (hotels, sporting goods, restaurants, bars, taxidermy, butchering) would be taken into consideration when considering Senate File 103. Less non-resident hunters translates to decreased spending in Wyoming.

I ask you and your fellow Senators on the Senate Travel, Recreation and Wildlife Committee to vote unfavorable on Senate File 103.

 

[Fitzwho]

Wish they would have waited for June 1st...smh. The deer and antelope draws are going to be completely unpredictable this year. Even if it doesn't pass, I bet you see some people point dumping.

@Laramie - This is pending legislation introduced about 10 days ago, not official as of yet.

 

[dukeball33]

WY seems to receive decent federal funding when compared to their population size.

https://www.fws.gov/wsfrprograms/Subpages/GrantPrograms/WR/WRFinalApportionment2021.pdf

USFWS-WSFR Wildlife Restoration Program

It's easy to digress and follow tangents... WY is also a headwater state for every major river basin in the US that ultimately provides benefit to the entire country... so those federal dollars are probably well spent. Even keeps the lights on in Vegas and crops growing in California...