Wyoming proposal to slash Non-resident hunters

[lak2004]

Between comments like this and others I've seen that you've spewed across 2 or 3 other message boards all day, I just can't imagine why there's such a large segment of hunters that want nothing to do with BHA

I wouldn't say that is fair representation. 1 dude doesn't make up a whole organization.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[RyanT26]

I wouldn't say that is fair representation. 1 dude doesn't make up a whole organization.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

He is the Wyoming board chair. You elect a ***" canoe to that level I would say it reflects quite accurate.

 

[lak2004]

???????? What irony and what facts?

Lots of tax payer dollars in programs through USDA, grazing subsidies, crop insurance, etc.

I'm a big fan of private landowners and ag, but there are just as many bad apples as there are in federal land management agencies (though there are many more checks and balances in implementing management decisions on public ground).

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[lak2004]

He is the Wyoming board chair. You elect a douche canoe to that level I would say it reflects quite accurate.

Just because you don't see eye to eye, that makes him a *--* canoe? I've got a plethora of buddies that I can argue til we are both blue in the face with. The internet is a funny realm...

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[Bigbull]

I wouldn't say that is fair representation. 1 dude doesn't make up a whole organization.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

One obnoxious and vocal dude in a leadership position is going to have consequences, and that’s not a secret. I think people basing their decision on an organization’s leadership is to be expected. Whether that’s “fair” or not, I have no idea.

 

[Bigbull]

Just because you don't see eye to eye, that makes him a *--* canoe? I've got a plethora of buddies that I can argue til we are both blue in the face with. The internet is a funny realm...

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

It has absolutely nothing to do with not seeing eye to eye. He is just, as you would say, a “*--* canoe.”

 

[RyanT26]

Just because you don't see eye to eye, that makes him a *--* canoe? I've got a plethora of buddies that I can argue til we are both blue in the face with. The internet is a funny realm...

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Honestly I just like to rile him up and argue with him. I called him a a$$hole earlier, but really most people think I am one to. Most of my friends are as well. We probably have way more in common then either of us would like to admit. Sometimes I agree with him as much as I hate to say that but I will stil argue just to argue.

 

[pdk25]

Everyone has their own opinion. My opinion right now is that if it is a draw for people that live in the State, there should be very little if any opportunity for those that don't reside in the state. Just the way that I feel.

 

[BuzzH]

Interesting take. I somewhat agree. I'm not sure that it even needs to be taken so far it could be as simple as setting resident and nonresident tag percentage, and setting A ratio for resident to nr fees.


For example 75/25 resident to non resident tag split and non resident license fees can be up to but not exceed 10 times the resident license fee. Pretty simple.

Oh that would be sweet....lets see, about $110 for a resident elk tag, $75 for a pronghorn and deer, $600 for bison, $500 for sheep and moose...NR's maxed at 10 times more.

Beautiful...I'm IN.

 

[LostArra]

Even now, many Residents are leaving too much opportunity at tags on the table...wont happen again in my household. My wife and I will be getting our maximum number of elk, deer, and pronghorn tags each and every year from now on...30 total tags between the initial and leftover draw.

Just to be clear. You and your wife get a total of 30 big game tags a year in Wyoming but the non-residents are limiting your hunting opportunities within the state so a higher percentage of tags are necessary??




Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

 

[BuzzH]

Pretty good idea, actually.

It would be more tolerable if F&G depts would just tell us that they're raising prices and couldn't care less what NR think because we're going to buy them anyway. At least be honest and stop the "justifications."

Uh, they can't tell you they're raising fee's, because they don't have the authority to do so in Wyoming.

One of the big problems with these discussions is people just....don't...know...the facts.

They spout off a bunch of crap, blame the wrong people, and in general are clueless.

Trust me, the WGF would really like the ability to "tell us they're raising fees".

But they can't, because fee increases have to be done via legislation, meaning even the Department has no real idea when or if its even going to brought up each session. The Legislature is often times very antagonistic to the Department and will get a bug up their arse about something and won't even consider a fee increase for years at a time.

If you want to be outraged, then contact the State Legislature, blame the right people.

You're out of line blaming the Department on not "letting you know they're going to raise fee's"...way out of line.

 

[Scottyboy]

So, after 24 pages...am I screwed as NR that is booked with an outfitter for next year ? Historically the points I need to draw with them (according to the outfitter) I will have next year. I get the tag reduction sucks, nr sucks, I just want to hunt deer and antelope next year, is there a good way to gauge how outfitters might be affected by this? As far as I know I would be drawing from the NR pool

 

[Trial153]

Oh that would be sweet....lets see, about $110 for a resident elk tag, $75 for a pronghorn and deer, $600 for bison, $500 for sheep and moose...NR's maxed at 10 times more.

Beautiful...I'm IN.

You should have plenty of extra considering how long you been on dole line sucking up the subsidized wy tags all these years...

 

[BuzzH]

Just to be clear. You and your wife get a total of 30 big game tags a year in Wyoming but the non-residents are limiting your hunting opportunities within the state so a higher percentage of tags are necessary??




Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

Yes...Residents want a higher percentage of the best LQ tags in the state. The same as the Residents in AZ, UT, NM, OR, WA, ID, MT, ND, etc. get.

Pretty easy concept...and we're going to get it...not a matter of if, just when. It won't be tomorrow, but it will happen.

 

[BuzzH]

You should have plenty of extra considering how long you been on dole line sucking up the subsidized wy tags all these years...

I balance it out yearly by purchasing hunting licenses I never use in CO, NV, UT, ID, MT, AZ etc. where I'm not on the "dole line".

 

[Rob5589]

Uh, they can't tell you they're raising fee's, because they don't have the authority to do so in Wyoming.

One of the big problems with these discussions is people just....don't...know...the facts.

They spout off a bunch of crap, blame the wrong people, and in general are clueless.

Trust me, the WGF would really like the ability to "tell us they're raising fees".

But they can't, because fee increases have to be done via legislation, meaning even the Department has no real idea when or if its even going to brought up each session. The Legislature is often times very antagonistic to the Department and will get a bug up their arse about something and won't even consider a fee increase for years at a time.

If you want to be outraged, then contact the State Legislature, blame the right people.

You're out of line blaming the Department on not "letting you know they're going to raise fee's"...way out of line.

So the legislature raises fees all on their own, with no input from the F&G dept? Interesting.

 

[BuzzH]

So the legislature raises fees all on their own, with no input from the F&G dept? Interesting.

You got it...

Another fun fact, the GF Department is prohibited from testifying on legislation, including but not limited to, license fee increase legislation.

 

[cnelk]

You got it...

Another fun fact, the GF Department is prohibited from testifying on legislation, including but not limited to, license fee increase legislation.

^^^ This is not uncommon for game agencies

 

[BuzzH]

So, after 24 pages...am I screwed as NR that is booked with an outfitter for next year ? Historically the points I need to draw with them (according to the outfitter) I will have next year. I get the tag reduction sucks, nr sucks, I just want to hunt deer and antelope next year, is there a good way to gauge how outfitters might be affected by this? As far as I know I would be drawing from the NR pool

No...you're fine unless point creep get's you.

 

[slick]

You got it...

Another fun fact, the GF Department is prohibited from testifying on legislation, including but not limited to, license fee increase legislation.

Thank you for bringing light to that.

Edited.