Wyoming Nonresident Proposed Changes

[unclericco]

Well maybe you can explain it to us, rather than talking down to us lowly peons that didn’t have the good fortune to end up living in Wyoming.

I’m all ears to why this isn’t f$cking over my 2021 plans. To my little non resident pea brain it certainly looks like higher costs, more point creep, and more outfitter welfare.

His post is condescending and not helpful at all, but I think most here do understand that it’s ultimately going to cost more money.

 

[NDGuy]

What a kick in the crotch

 

[BuzzH]

BuzzH really looking for some guidance here.

My understanding is this will techniquilly boost state income as quotas would decrease in LE units but the rest would still fall into the general unit draw (elk) , resulting in the same tags sold but at a higher average price (elk).

Also all tags going up on all species will help other species profitability.

Can you shed any light on the odds of this passing as is? Odds of outfitter quota being stripped?

Concerning to say the least as a non resident. I totally see residents desire to have more tags in LE zones. Will that have the driving force to get this passed?

In general terms, there will be NO significant loss of D, E, A tags for NR's in regard to 90-10 split.

It is a fact that in Statute, NR's are assured 7,250 full price elk tags...meaning the 6% decrease in LQ tags to NR's would be made up for with more general tags. So, that's a wash. The same with LQ cow/calf tags, what residents don't draw right now, are headed to the leftover draw, so NR's wouldn't see any significant decrease there.

A vast majority of the NR deer tags are region wide tags, those are 100% going to NR's. There will be a decrease in the remaining LQ deer tags to NR's, no question of that, you're losing 10% of those tags and no way to off-set unless areas are undersubscribed by Residents (those fall to the NR initial draw).

Pronghorn is going to see a shift. No question the harder to draw areas would be tougher for NR's to draw, you're losing 10% of your quota. But, there will also be tags available in mid-tier units where Residents wont now draw tags due to the 10% increase in Resident tags being drawn in different unit. Currently, NR's draw more than 50% of the pronghorn tags in Wyoming, that wont change with a 90-10 split. Its going to be more of a shift in where NR tags are more available, than a loss in total NR pronghorn tags.

Sheep, moose, goat, bison...you're again flat losing those tags by 10-15% depending on the species.

Where this bill sucks, and why it will fail, is the 30% outfitter allocation. The 90-10 split will shift things more than reduce NR opportunity at tags. But, the 30% allocation to outfitters will be the biggest blow to NR's.

So, I first heard of this bill about 3-4 months ago and talked to the guy that is pushing it. In the conversation myself and a friend had with him, we told him flat out to stick with the 90-10 split. We also told him that if he was at all serious that the bill had to be revenue neutral to the GF budget. Our recommendation was to increase Resident fees to offset any potential revenue loss going to 90-10. Further, he brought up the outfitter allocation, and we told him flat out that would likely kill his idea and the legislation. Residents are not keen on giving another hand-out to outfitters and IMO, sets a pretty dangerous precedent.

That brings us to a meeting a few weeks back that a bunch of groups had with the GF. In that discussion, the WOGA brought up this bill and asked the groups in attendance to oppose it. They also said that it was likely to have an outfitter set aside (again they said they oppose that).

But, all that being said, the outfitters are currently being pretty quiet and are taking some heat over it right now. For a group that said they don't support this bill, they sure haven't gone out of their way to come out opposing it yet either.

If I had to venture a guess, Jeff Smith and Sy Gillaland are probably crunching numbers and seeing if there is an over-all benefit to outfitters. I would also guess that there are some outfitters that would support this big-time and some that would oppose it big-time.

I'll be in full opposition mode, strictly over the fact that once again, NR's are taking it on the chin by having to pay for something that largely benefits Residents. My opinion, if Residents want a 90-10 split, than Residents should have to pay more for to make up the difference. Further, I oppose the outfitter set-aside no matter where its proposed, in any state. The draw should be open to ALL non residents and just because someone has the cash to throw around, they shouldn't get better odds by buying/applying/booking through an outfitter.

This bill is going nowhere, its a budget session and needs 2/3 vote to pass. I don't see it coming out of committee and IME, even with amendments, it will die. The quickest way to see a bill fail in committee is to start making a bunch of amendments. The session is only 24 days long and they don't have the time to go back and forth with the amendments. Plus, with revenue issues in Wyoming over-all, this is not a high priority bill in a budget session.

But, make no mistake that 90-10 is not going away. Wyoming Residents are feeling the pinch when they apply in surrounding states and therefor want more opportunity at tags here.

There is a right way to get a 90-10 bill passed...and this isn't it.

 

[reaper]

Woha ...rich peoples again.

Envoyé de mon Pixel 2 en utilisant Tapatalk

 

[brsnow]

Hunting just isn’t the same as when our forefathers were out enjoying the sport. It’s been heading down this rich persons path for a while now, like it or not. Honestly and I might get flamed for saying it, I’d rather pay double the price and have less hunters in my unit.

I think many of us agree.

 

[Dos Perros]

The animals belong to the people. And not just the rich people.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

That should’ve been your first post Buzz.

Regardless thank you for explaining.

 

[sasquatch]

Tagged


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[robtattoo]

Thanks for the breakdown Buzz.
I hate my own personal loss of opportunity, if it goes to a 90/10 split, but I won't complain as hard IF residents are footing the bill. Loss of opportunity plus a cost increase would make me seriously reconsider my ongoing love affair with your state.
As low as the chances are, if I were ever in a position to be looking at a guided elk hunt, even now, Wyoming wouldn't even get a look in. The WOGA get enough help without my funding.

 

[BuzzH]

That should’ve been your first post Buzz.

Regardless thank you for explaining.

I disagree...people need to start doing some thinking and research on their own. Hunters and Fishermen have a real knack for thinking that buying a license is all they need to do. They think wildlife issues are only important for the time of the year they can be out running a hook or bullet through something. I'm here to say, if people don't start understanding what's going on and supporting each other and groups that fight on their behalf...its all over. Nobody should be relying on the same old group of people to do their bidding for them. For wayyyyy too long, wayyyyy too few have fought the good fight for the complacent majority.

Its that whole teaching a person to fish, rather than giving them a fish...thing.

So, my first post was to hopefully get a few to start digging around and trying to research on their own how these things impact them.

I don't mind clarifying and offering up my advice, opinions, etc. to help when I can. But, we need a more diverse and bigger group of people engaging in these issues or we're going to have a real problem in the near future.

 

[NoWiser]

The sad part about this is that every time I see proposals like this, it makes me realize that my son, who was born last year, likely will not have nearly the opportunities to hunt as I have had. The writing is on the wall. At least I should have some good stories to tell him.

 

[willfrye027]

I disagree...people need to start doing some thinking and research on their own. Hunters and Fishermen have a real knack for thinking that buying a license is all they need to do. They think wildlife issues are only important for the time of the year they can be out running a hook or bullet through something. I'm here to say, if people don't start understanding what's going on and supporting each other and groups that fight on their behalf...its all over. Nobody should be relying on the same old group of people to do their bidding for them. For wayyyyy too long, wayyyyy too few have fought the good fight for the complacent majority.

Its that whole teaching a person to fish, rather than giving them a fish...thing.

So, my first post was to hopefully get a few to digging around and trying to research on their own how these things impact them.

I don't mind clarifying and offering up my advice, opinions to help when I can. But, we need a more diverse and bigger group of people engaging in these issues or we're going to have a real problem in the near future.

Thanks for offering your insight. I’ve done plenty of digging around and still don’t quite see how this will not drastically affect NR quota for the general deer zones. Are you saying that, for instance, tag quota in region __ would not drop from 400 to 200? I didn’t read anything in the bill that was specific to LE deer tags...but I could be misunderstanding the NR general unit quotas. Thanks in advance

 

[BuzzH]

The animals belong to the people. And not just the rich people.

The animals belong (actually held in trust for) to "the people" of the state they reside in.

As a NR you are only allowed access to our wildlife if we choose to let you have that access to them. If we feel like it, we can always allow you a 100-0 split of our wildlife resources.

 

[BuzzH]

Thanks for offering your insight. I’ve done plenty of digging around and still don’t quite see how this will not drastically affect NR quota for the general deer zones. Are you saying that, for instance, tag quota in region __ would not drop from 400 to 200? I didn’t read anything in the bill that was specific to LE deer tags...but I could be misunderstanding the NR general unit quotas. Thanks in advance

Sure, the quotas in general region areas move up and down on the recommendations of biologists. But that doesn't have anything to do with a 90-10 split. NR's region tags are 100% going to NR hunters. In other words if the quota is 400 right now, all 400 tags go to NR's. If the biologist recommend increasing region tags to 500, all 500 go to NR's. If biologist recommend a cut to 300 tags, NR's still get all 300. Residents can hunt all the region wide nr areas on a general tag, we don't compete at all with your pool of region wide NR tags.

Where it will be an impact is if 30% of those region tags go to outfitter sponsored pool.

 

[NoWiser]

I disagree...people need to start doing some thinking and research on their own. Hunters and Fishermen have a real knack for thinking that buying a license is all they need to do. They think wildlife issues are only important for the time of the year they can be out running a hook or bullet through something. I'm here to say, if people don't start understanding what's going on and supporting each other and groups that fight on their behalf...its all over. Nobody should be relying on the same old group of people to do their bidding for them. For wayyyyy too long, wayyyyy too few have fought the good fight for the complacent majority.

Its that whole teaching a person to fish, rather than giving them a fish...thing.

So, my first post was to hopefully get a few to start digging around and trying to research on their own how these things impact them.

I don't mind clarifying and offering up my advice, opinions, etc. to help when I can. But, we need a more diverse and bigger group of people engaging in these issues or we're going to have a real problem in the near future.

Buzz, what can we do, as NR hunters, to help? Over the last few years I've sent countless emails to Wyoming law makers and the Game Commission. I'm lucky if 5% of them reply, and even then I feel as though I'm getting brushed off as a NR.

I'm happy to pull my weight, just not in constant circles.

FWIW, NR hunters aren't the only ones who don't understand the draw. I ran into resident hunters the last time I was in Wyoming who were 100% sure that Game and Fish decided how many preference points it should take to draw a unit. They were pissed that the agency kept raising how many points it should take their NR buddy to draw. I thought about trying to explain it, but ended up just nodding my head in agreement rather than looking like a know-it-all smartass nonresident.

Thank you for explaining this from your point of view. It's easy to get bad info on forums. I know I'm getting solid info when you post.

 

[idahohikker]

Buzz, the grumpy bear. Thanks for the information you provided here. On this and most other topics, you are a wealth of knowledge. I was just starting the research for it and understood things after reading the statute itself and it's all fairly easy to work through the implications but your confirmation is always appreciated.

 

[String&stick]

I want to thank you Buzz for explaining and for you hard work and efforts around this . As a non resident what are some things that can be done to get more involved and more in the loop?

In an honest question how can more of us be involved in WY in the future to have conversations on where non resident hunting goes from here?

 

[BuzzH]

The sad part about this is that every time I see proposals like this, it makes me realize that my son, who was born last year, likely will not have nearly the opportunities to hunt as I have had. The writing is on the wall. At least I should have some good stories to tell him.

IMO, the thing to keep in mind is that this whole NR hunting thing is a recent deal. I started hunting with a tag in my pocket in 1979. I hunted the State I lived in (Montana) and didn't hunt as a NR in any other state until 1995.

Also, when I started hunting there was no youth only season deer season in Montana that gave youth a 2-day head start. There was no shooting doe deer and cow elk all season long. There were very few b-tags for deer, no b-tags for elk. I hunted the same seasons as the rest of the hunters in Montana.

So, just because little johnnie doesn't get to hunt 5 states a year, I'm not seeing the doom and gloom. NR hunting is a pure luxury for all of us and IMO, too much emphasis is put on what you CANT do, than what you CAN do.

Lots of bird hunting, small game, and resident opportunity to get kids in the field...concentrate on those.

 

[Bobbyboe]

In general terms, there will be NO significant loss of D, E, A tags for NR's in regard to 90-10 split.

It is a fact that in Statute, NR's are assured 7,250 full price elk tags...meaning the 6% decrease in LQ tags to NR's would be made up for with more general tags. So, that's a wash. The same with LQ cow/calf tags, what residents don't draw right now, are headed to the leftover draw, so NR's wouldn't see any significant decrease there.

A vast majority of the NR deer tags are region wide tags, those are 100% going to NR's. There will be a decrease in the remaining LQ deer tags to NR's, no question of that, you're losing 10% of those tags and no way to off-set unless areas are undersubscribed by Residents (those fall to the NR initial draw).

Pronghorn is going to see a shift. No question the harder to draw areas would be tougher for NR's to draw, you're losing 10% of your quota. But, there will also be tags available in mid-tier units where Residents wont now draw tags due to the 10% increase in Resident tags being drawn in different unit. Currently, NR's draw more than 50% of the pronghorn tags in Wyoming, that wont change with a 90-10 split. Its going to be more of a shift in where NR tags are more available, than a loss in total NR pronghorn tags.

Sheep, moose, goat, bison...you're again flat losing those tags by 10-15% depending on the species.

Where this bill sucks, and why it will fail, is the 30% outfitter allocation. The 90-10 split will shift things more than reduce NR opportunity at tags. But, the 30% allocation to outfitters will be the biggest blow to NR's.

So, I first heard of this bill about 3-4 months ago and talked to the guy that is pushing it. In the conversation myself and a friend had with him, we told him flat out to stick with the 90-10 split. We also told him that if he was at all serious that the bill had to be revenue neutral to the GF budget. Our recommendation was to increase Resident fees to offset any potential revenue loss going to 90-10. Further, he brought up the outfitter allocation, and we told him flat out that would likely kill his idea and the legislation. Residents are not keen on giving another hand-out to outfitters and IMO, sets a pretty dangerous precedent.

That brings us to a meeting a few weeks back that a bunch of groups had with the GF. In that discussion, the WOGA brought up this bill and asked the groups in attendance to oppose it. They also said that it was likely to have an outfitter set aside (again they said they oppose that).

But, all that being said, the outfitters are currently being pretty quiet and are taking some heat over it right now. For a group that said they don't support this bill, they sure haven't gone out of their way to come out opposing it yet either.

If I had to venture a guess, Jeff Smith and Sy Gillaland are probably crunching numbers and seeing if there is an over-all benefit to outfitters. I would also guess that there are some outfitters that would support this big-time and some that would oppose it big-time.

I'll be in full opposition mode, strictly over the fact that once again, NR's are taking it on the chin by having to pay for something that largely benefits Residents. My opinion, if Residents want a 90-10 split, than Residents should have to pay more for to make up the difference. Further, I oppose the outfitter set-aside no matter where its proposed, in any state. The draw should be open to ALL non residents and just because someone has the cash to throw around, they shouldn't get better odds by buying/applying/booking through an outfitter.

This bill is going nowhere, its a budget session and needs 2/3 vote to pass. I don't see it coming out of committee and IME, even with amendments, it will die. The quickest way to see a bill fail in committee is to start making a bunch of amendments. The session is only 24 days long and they don't have the time to go back and forth with the amendments. Plus, with revenue issues in Wyoming over-all, this is not a high priority bill in a budget session.

But, make no mistake that 90-10 is not going away. Wyoming Residents are feeling the pinch when they apply in surrounding states and therefor want more opportunity at tags here.

There is a right way to get a 90-10 bill passed...and this isn't it.

Good summary of the situation. Thanks. Side question, since there is statute for elk tag allotment, why isn't there any for deer and antelope?

Thank you for standing with NR regarding footing a majority of the bill. I don’t mind paying a larger percentage, but I do have an issue with being taken advantage of too.

 

[BuzzH]

Good summary of the situation. Thanks. Side question, since there is statute for elk tag allotment, why isn't there any for deer and antelope?

Thank you for standing with NR regarding footing a majority of the bill. I don’t mind paying a larger percentage, but I do have an issue with being taken advantage of too.

Because NR's have the region wide deer tags and NR's already get over 50% of the total pronghorn tags...no reason to have statute that isn't needed.

In general, I shy away from wildlife management via legislation and ballot box.