Wyoming price increase

huntwest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
106
Location
ND
I just read that the proposed price increase failed the legislature. One comment was they were worried about the price increase making hunting a rich mans sport. I now wonder how they will make up the budget shortfall.
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
One of the things I think they should do is separate out the archery season and rifle season. They do already have some archery only tags but I think it should be done across the board. Allow a person to purchase both a draw archery and a draw rifle tag or an archery general and rifle general. . Also give a slight discount on the archery tags. This would bring in more "pre-draw" revenue for interest and investment. Based on some analysis I did it would increase revenue by 30% without doing much to the mortality rate. It would also benefit some of those people holding on to points trying for an area. They could use their points on an archery or a rifle hunt but not both.
 

WyoBowhunter21

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,605
Location
Casper, Wyoming
One of the things I think they should do is separate out the archery season and rifle season. They do already have some archery only tags but I think it should be done across the board. Allow a person to purchase both a draw archery and a draw rifle tag or an archery general and rifle general. . Also give a slight discount on the archery tags. This would bring in more "pre-draw" revenue for interest and investment. Based on some analysis I did it would increase revenue by 30% without doing much to the mortality rate. It would also benefit some of those people holding on to points trying for an area. They could use their points on an archery or a rifle hunt but not both.

I 100% agree with you. I really wish that we could have a regionalized system for licenses. A separate archery permit for the coveted areas would be really nice as well! Also, a preference point system for residents would be way nice. We are a nonresident state. I am curious to see if they will change any of the regulations.
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
I sent data analysis of the proposed changes along with financial projections to Scot Talbott. He is the director of game fish. I think it would do alot to promote hunting in the state by allowing people only interested archery or file to do apply for the areas. It would be beneficial for non-res in that aspect as well.
 

HvyBeams

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
111
Location
WY
One of the things I think they should do is separate out the archery season and rifle season. They do already have some archery only tags but I think it should be done across the board. Allow a person to purchase both a draw archery and a draw rifle tag or an archery general and rifle general. . Also give a slight discount on the archery tags. This would bring in more "pre-draw" revenue for interest and investment. Based on some analysis I did it would increase revenue by 30% without doing much to the mortality rate. It would also benefit some of those people holding on to points trying for an area. They could use their points on an archery or a rifle hunt but not both.

Affirmative Action for archery hunters??? You can already hunt during the archery season off a limited quota or general season license.
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
No not AAA. I am talking about opening up more income potential for WY. Making Archery only and Rifle only tags. Yes there are some type 9s but I am saying put a Type 9 and Type 1 in each area. And you can only rifle hunt with a Type 1 Meaning if you don't want to rifle hunt you apply for the archery tag. If you don't want to archery hunt you apply for the rifle tag. This would increase revenue because I know I would apply for both. that is 104 instead of 52 from just me. I am sure there are others like that. It would also open up some hunting opportunities because I am sure there are probably a lot non-res that use guides that only hunt with one or the other. The only reason I say to reduce the archery tag is encourage people do that.
 

jmez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
6,174
Location
Piedmont, SD
If they were really concerned about making it a rich mans sport they wouldn't force non residents to hire a guide/outfitter to hunt wilderness areas. That is far more expensive than the license.
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
You don't need a guide or outfitter to hunt wilderness. You just need to make nice with some of us residents. :cool: I like Turkey hunting and mule deer hunting. I could be a wilderness area wh0re for a good hunt. :cool:
 

HvyBeams

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
111
Location
WY
No not AAA. I am talking about opening up more income potential for WY. Making Archery only and Rifle only tags. Yes there are some type 9s but I am saying put a Type 9 and Type 1 in each area. And you can only rifle hunt with a Type 1 Meaning if you don't want to rifle hunt you apply for the archery tag. If you don't want to archery hunt you apply for the rifle tag. This would increase revenue because I know I would apply for both. that is 104 instead of 52 from just me. I am sure there are others like that. It would also open up some hunting opportunities because I am sure there are probably a lot non-res that use guides that only hunt with one or the other. The only reason I say to reduce the archery tag is encourage people do that.

I appreciate you are trying to think out of the box. However, I have to disagree with your proposal. I find it interesting you make your post with the pending legislation that 10% of limited quota tags be set aside for archery hunters. Are you a BOW member?
 

jmez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
6,174
Location
Piedmont, SD
Head to the Black Hills this spring, I'll put you on a turkey!

I have people that will take me in WY if I want. The majority of people don't however, and that makes it unaffordable to many.
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
No. I didn't know that legislation was out there. This idea was refined at during some long nights at 10,000 feet in a tent during some bad weather. I came home and started doing some data analysis and modeling. Yea I am an IT Geek. :D This would increase

In my example lets use area that has 100 limited Type 1 currently.

Current Type 1: 100

Future:
Type 1 : 100
Type 9: 65

Assumptions:
Using 2012 numbers from Wyoming Game and Fish Site
30% of the hunters that apply for a rifle tag would also apply for archery tag.
The harvest rate of elk during archery season is around 15% . By giving out the increased number of tags, will not harm the elk herd.
The quota for Archery tags would be around 65% of the rifle quota.
The rifle quotas would remain the same.

Summary:
Make Type 1 tags rifle only
Introduce a Type 9 (archery only) for all areas
Allow hunters to apply for both, or only one
No changes to type 4 or other special tags.

If you could see my spreadsheet you would see that this would provide approximately a 30% increase for investment revenue, a 65% increase in actual tag revenue, and a 30% increase in processing fees collected. All this while using very conservative numbers regarding the number of permits and applicants.

I appreciate you are trying to think out of the box. However, I have to disagree with your proposal. I find it interesting you make your post with the pending legislation that 10% of limited quota tags be set aside for archery hunters. Are you a BOW member?
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
I understand. I am from Kentucky originally and hunted in Colorado once and that was very very expensive.
Head to the Black Hills this spring, I'll put you on a turkey!

I have people that will take me in WY if I want. The majority of people don't however, and that makes it unaffordable to many.
 

WyoBowhunter21

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,605
Location
Casper, Wyoming
Crumy- I again agree with your statistical analysis. Good work. I have talked with my old boss in rock springs about the exact same thing. Relatively close to the same numbers you got. I look at it like this. If we make it, like you stated, but with regions. So you put in just like a non resident does and then apply for areas within such regions. Whether it be general areas or limited quota. Now within each area is a archery only or rifle. Thus, the end result would be more revenue, I.e. from licenses from each category as well as a better management of our game. Lets take elk for example. In our current situation one can go hunt general elk by Pinedale then travel across the state and hunt by Laramie, then say he still doesn't get his elk, head back over and hunt Louis lake. Okay now that same hunter has amazing chance of getting an elk but I would rather have a archery tag almost every year, say in the red desert for elk, rather than driving all across the state like I currently do.
 

HvyBeams

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
111
Location
WY
You are adding tags to the equation. That's why your proposal looks like it does. Also, success rates depends on the area you are hunting.

The proposed legislation takes 10% from limited quota for both non-residents and residents. Example: 100 tags: there would be 10 set aside for archery only leaving 90 for rifle/archery hunters.

I don't think you answered by question. Are you a member of Bow Hunter of Wyoming (BOW)?
 
Last edited:

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
I did but I guess I didn't clarify. The "No". in my reply was meant as an answer to your question about BOW. I just started bow hunting out here last year. Used to use a stick an and string back in Kentucy/Ohio. But stopped about 7 years ago when I moved out west due to other commitments. Just now getting back into it and didn't even know there was such an organization here.

There are some assumptions around success and number of applicants but that is why I stated them. I don't wan to remove tags from rifle. I don't think that is the solution. It does not increase revenue. And that is what we are after right? Increased revenue. I don't want to see the tags go up for non-res or resident. I have quite a bit of money tied up in tags for 3 people. Can't imagine the cost if they went up. I think raising the fees or reducing the number of rifle tags will do nothing to promote getting people in the woods.








You are adding tags to the equation. That's way your proposal looks like it does. Also, success rates depends on the area you are hunting.

The proposed legislation takes 10% from limited quota for both non-residents and residents. Example: 100 tags: there would be 10 set aside for archery only leaving 90 for rifle/archery hunters.

I don't think you answered by question. Are you a member of Bow Hunter of Wyoming (BOW)?
 

DWarcher

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2012
Messages
570
Location
Flathead Valley
The harvest rate of elk during archery season is around 15% . By giving out the increased number of tags, will not harm the elk herd.


I would think that you wold see that 15% go up since your Type 9 guys would be a whole lot more committed to killing one with their bow knowing they don't have their rifle as a backup plan. This of course would force a reduction in overall tags.

Have you seen numbers on how many Archery Permits are purchased by Type 1 guys?
 

crumy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Laramie, WY
You are probably correct about the harvest rate. Maybe start lower and increase based on success or lack of. I have not seen any numbers about people who archery hunt on Type 1 tags. I would think those would have to come from surveys they send out or they can just take the number of archery permits purchased and do some calculations.

I would think that you wold see that 15% go up since your Type 9 guys would be a whole lot more committed to killing one with their bow knowing they don't have their rifle as a backup plan. This of course would force a reduction in overall tags.

Have you seen numbers on how many Archery Permits are purchased by Type 1 guys?
 

squeekieslayer

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
1,240
Location
Great Falls, MT
I am very happy that this site has INTELLIGENT conversation. Most forums get into passionate pissing matches that dont really benefit anyone. Crumy.... I really like your way of thinking. As a wyoming resident my entire life I was trying to figure out how I was ever going to get on some of the prime areas... Now I live in montana and I am building points in wyoming... My odds each year are much lower, but I know that at some point I WILL get to hunt them with persistence.

As for the issue at hand, I think that forward thinking guys like crumy and wyobow21 are headed the right direction. You HAVE to do something to increase revenue and simply raising the prices is NOT going to help. If you want to continue to enjoy hunting in wyoming as it is, you need to think of ways to keepit that way. I guarantee that just NOT doing anything will kill you in the long run. The idea of splitting archery and rifle tags for nonresident and limited areas is, in my opinion, one of the best ideas i have heard. MOST wyomingites hunt general tags, and nothing would really change there. BUT it would allow a TON more nonresident tags (with a high price on each) and very minimal impact on the harvest. It would also allow a guy to that ONLY wants to archery hunt (resident) a chance out at the dsert or green mountain, without having to beat 4% odds.

HVYbeam.... what point are you trying to make? adding tags as archery only is not a big deal. 1 tag (type 1) now is essentially having 2 tags, one for archery and one for rifle. You would simply be giving those to two different people... doubling the revenue. What idea do you propose besides just "dissagreeing." I agree that with more dedicated bow hunters and more dedicated rifle hunters.... success rates would likely go up. OF course this is the case, so simply doubling the tags like i said above would not likely work... but as has been mentioned, you can start slow and see how it works. NOTHING will change if you dont start somewhere, Crumy is not proposing a done and set in stone piece of legislation... he is proposing a working model to brainstorm and modify to work towards a change.

JOe
 

ScottR_EHJ

Senior Member
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
1,420
Location
Wyoming
The only way that revenue is doubled by adding an archery only tag is if a person can buy both the general archery, and the general rifle once archery closes. Personally i would buy both, but that's because I believe in the system, even with bureaucratic nonsense that wastes money.

I don't mind the type 9 model that plays out in the bighorns already. First two weeks of September are special season, second two it opens up for a general hunt as well as the special tags. We would see the rifle cow tags get sold quicker to the Archery hunters who don't get their bull either, at least that is what I saw in the Bighorns.

The biggest reason a price increase wasn't going to work is because people would have been trying to cash in this year on their preference points. Threads have been posted on just about every forum out there talking about "cashing in" on Wyoming this year because of it. Get out of the system before it got too expensive.

Coming up with some new tags is a good thing. I.E. Whether I hunt a wolf or not, I would buy the tag. I currently don't live in the trophy zone, so why should I buy it. Especially when a wolf was killed less than 3 miles as the crow flies from my house?

White Tail only tag, I would buy one. They aren't a heavy population here, yet. It's one or the other as it stands now, but again if there is a general season on them I will have a tag in my pocket.

Come up with a tag for coyotes, and you can see where I am going.
 
Top