Wyoming proposal to slash Non-resident hunters

Dos Perros

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
2,204
Location
Lenexa, KS
We're going to make sure that no under-subscribed Resident antelope and deer tags roll to the initial NR draw. That doesn't take legislative approval we'll do that through the commission.

Time for residents to get their full 80% allotment of pronghorn and deer tags.

There will NOT be a significant economic impact.

Its been stated over and over again and nobody comprehends it.

NR's will STILL get 7,250 full priced elk tags in the initial draw...NO LOSS IN TAGS, NO LOSS IN ECONOMIC REVENUE.

NR's will still get every single one of their region wide deer tags, NO LOSS IN TAGS, NO LOSS IN ECONOMIC REVENUE.

NR's will still get over 50% of the pronghorn tags, NO LOSS IN TAGS, NO LOSS IN REVENUE.

Facts are simply being trumped by emotion...as per ALWAYS.

What are NR’s getting now that they won’t in the future?
 

CorbLand

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
1,976
If the states limit non resident tags to where they basically eliminate most non resident hunting in the prime areas then what is being accomplished by allowing the western states to manage the majority of the land which is owned by the Federal government?
Much of the very best hunting land in the western US is owned by the private sector and is managed way better than what the states do. Just spend some time in Colorado.
The states manage the wildlife not the land. Unless it’s state land

By limiting NR the states are accomplishing what they should. Providing their residents with what they want. You are owed nothing by a state you are not a resident of.

Private land is better because the land is managed better not the animals. Animals are still managed by the state.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
1,139
Location
Wyoming
Other states have less wildlife and more people. Not sure how 30 tags changes advocacy? In short, it doesn't.
There's no "have to"
Advocacy dollars would be amplified 15x with NR fees.
Might as well add a state income tax since that's what other states do. It'll help solidify your commitment to your state's well-being.
I just like a better experience with less pressure...and supporting the GF.
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,777
Am I the only one that thinks its funny that in threads like this there are always a few that think we should hand some or all of wildlife management to the Federal Government and/or private landowners?

Do people not realize why we told a specific country to pound sand, shot their asses back across an ocean and started our own country? Or was it just for religious freedom like we are taught?
I agree and that's my logic why the federal government should have little to no management of land, the states should. If the feds shouldn't manage game animals, why should they manage the land?
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,777
If the states limit non resident tags to where they basically eliminate most non resident hunting in the prime areas then what is being accomplished by allowing the western states to manage the majority of the land which is owned by the Federal government?
Much of the very best hunting land in the western US is owned by the private sector and is managed way better than what the states do. Just spend some time in Colorado.
The Western States don't manage or own much public land, the feds do. Right private land owners manage their land much better than the government ever could.
 

JFK

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
214
Not much...6% less LQ tags in elk and deer units, 15% less sheep tags, and 10% less moose, goat, and bison.
What about antelope? 20% currently to 10% under proposed law....all LQ tags for buck antelope. Plus no roll from resident to NR on surplus tags from the resident draw. Is my understanding correct that there will be half as many LQ buck antelope tags available to NR’s?
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,777
Shouting doesn't change the fact that trading Limited Quota tags for General is lost opportunity. Dude is off the rails on this one.
How's that? So are limited quota going to be reduced? If so by how much?
 

tdhanses

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
3,215
75% of the applicants could walk away (realistically I bet only 10-20% would) and they would still sell all the tags. The economic impact, in my opinion, isn't the battleground for this issue. They know they can sell the tags to someone else because they have the documented interest in the form of applications and preference point holders.

To me the real stance to fight would be the all the preference point money that was wasted by thousands of people who signed up for one set of rules only to have that changed to the point their investment can't ever pay off. That would be the real injustice if 90/10 passes. Beyond that, it's just whining.

I am a non-resident by the way and feel a 90/10 split is completely fair. I wouldn't like it, but I would deal with it.
Yeah but how many pref point holders will walk away, I know I am walking away from antelope if it goes through. I’ll hunt elk this year and will think hard about continuing on. I know 4 others that will not go back that hunt antelope every other year but are on a tight budget, $600 antelope tags open up other animals in other states now for them.
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,777
$1,100 for elk, $600 deer and pronghorn? 10% for non resident, down from 20%? Is this the gist of it? What are impacts to limited quota? Is Wyoming G hunt limited quota? How will this hunt be affected?
 

tdhanses

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
3,215
Not much...6% less LQ tags in elk and deer units, 15% less sheep tags, and 10% less moose, goat, and bison.
Really how is going down 6% in total tags only a 6% reduction in available NR tags, seems more like a 30%+ reduction in available tags to me. But hey we’ll get more tags where there is either little public, all wilderness or no animals.
 

Trial153

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
6,948
Location
NY
Really how is going down 6% in total tags only a 6% reduction in available NR tags, seems more like a 30%+ reduction in available tags to me. But hey we’ll get more tags where there is either little public, all wilderness or no animals.

the numbers i seen ran after adding all the MGS tags was 60% reduction. The numbers seemed sound however I didnt run them myself
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
1,139
Location
Wyoming
What about antelope? 20% currently to 10% under proposed law....all LQ tags for buck antelope. Plus no roll from resident to NR on surplus tags from the resident draw. Is my understanding correct that there will be half as many LQ buck antelope tags available to NR’s?
There would still be a roll of resident tags under the current 90-10 bill. Would likely be a "wash" or better described as a shift where non resident tags would become available from them drawing better pronghorn units and not drawing tags in the mid-tier units. Plus, NR's would still get the roll of all the undersubscribed resident tags in the initial draw.

Residents are wanting more opportunity. They're either going to get it through 90-10 or through a second resident only draw from the undersubscribed 80% allocation that exists after the initial draw.
 

CorbLand

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
1,976
I don’t agree with what Wyoming is wanting to do. 2 years ago I finally had it in my budget to start building points in another state. I looked at a lot of factors but it came down to proximity and cost. Guess which state met those, Wyoming. So this hurts me as a non resident. I will be reaching out to Wyoming and saying hey, this is how this affects me and how it affecting me will in turn affect your state.

What I won’t be doing is letting my emotions get the best of me and advocating to break down a system that works and has been proven it works so I can get a cheaper tag.

If Wyoming chooses to do this. Fine. They owe me nothing because I do not reside in that state. I don’t want California telling me what to do in the state I live. Why would I think I can tell Wyoming.

For those that wonder what can be done as a NR, go listen to the latest elk talk podcast. Randy spells it out really well. Skip to the 45 minute mark if you don’t have time to listen to it all.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
1,139
Location
Wyoming
$1,100 for elk, $600 deer and pronghorn? 10% for non resident, down from 20%? Is this the gist of it? What are impacts to limited quota? Is Wyoming G hunt limited quota? How will this hunt be affected?
No region G is not limited quota, its a region wide tag. Those are not under the 80-20 limited quota deer split now, and wouldnt be under the 90-10 split either.
 

Rob5589

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
3,016
Location
W Sac CA
Here is the email response I received from Wendy Shuler on the issue.


"Hello,
Thanks for your email. We are still taking testimony on this bill. I can certainly see both sides of the issue. I lean towards making sure that Wyoming residents, some of whom have put in for many years for a special license, have the opportunity to do so. I also understand that our non-resident hunters bring a fair amount of revenue into our state. I will continue to listen to both sides of the coin before I make a final decision. Thanks for your input.

Wendy Davis Schuler

Wyoming State Legislature
Senate District 15—Evanston

200 Liberty Avenue
307-679-6774"
A "fair amount of revenue?" Quite the understatement.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
1,139
Location
Wyoming
the numbers i seen ran after adding all the MGS tags was 60% reduction. The numbers seemed sound however I didnt run them myself

How is going from 20% to 10% for moose, goat, and bison a reduction of 60%? Not seeing that math...

Sheep, yes...that math pencils out.
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,777
Really? That's the whole debate.
Right, wanted to make sure. So the limited hunts would be reduced from 20 to 10% for non resident? Limited hunts reduced to 10% and prices raised is the debate?
"Shouting doesn't change the fact that trading Limited Quota tags for General is lost opportunity"
Do you mean non residents will get more opportunity for general tags in lieu of reduced opportunity for limited tags? How's that?
 
Last edited:

Matt mi

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
156
That's how it's done now, but Residents are asking for that change so that Residents have another shot at the Resident only allocation before they go out first come first serve.

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.
Sounds like great wildlife management to me
 
Top