Wyoming residents want first chance at leftover big game tags

[cgasner1]

Looks like they should of cut tags way sooner to me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BuzzH]

Looks like they should of cut tags way sooner to me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably, but perhaps not changing quota's for 3 year stretches wasn't such a good idea, considering the weather in Montana rarely stays consistent for 3 years straight.

The Montana FWP lost huge numbers of pronghorn to weather and kept tag numbers the same...real smart.

Recovery takes forever once populations are so low...and when you continue to milk every last bit of "opportunity" from the resource.

Reactive and schizophrenic management is a perfect description for the FWP.

 

[Thomas11]

I’m not a pronghorn junkie and what little I know is it’s relatively easy to pick up a tag in WY. Aren’t there thousands of leftover buck tags in the leftover draw available for both R and NR? But if I’m understanding correctly, R are upset because they aren’t able to draw a tag on their second or third choice because NR scooped them up on their first choice because not enough R applied for X unit using their first choice?? Or are NR drawing these tags on their second/third choice?

 

[tdhanses]

I’m not a pronghorn junkie and what little I know is it’s relatively easy to pick up a tag in WY. Aren’t there thousands of leftover buck tags in the leftover draw available for both R and NR? But if I’m understanding correctly, R are upset because they aren’t able to draw a tag on their second or third choice because NR scooped them up on their first choice because not enough R applied for X unit using their first choice?? Or are NR drawing these tags on their second/third choice?

It’s because out of 3 chances they aren’t selecting these tags, so if they don’t draw in their top 3 choices they want to have another 3 chances before NR draw them.

 

[BuzzH]

I’m not a pronghorn junkie and what little I know is it’s relatively easy to pick up a tag in WY. Aren’t there thousands of leftover buck tags in the leftover draw available for both R and NR? But if I’m understanding correctly, R are upset because they aren’t able to draw a tag on their second or third choice because NR scooped them up on their first choice because not enough R applied for X unit using their first choice?? Or are NR drawing these tags on their second/third choice?

Here is the simple reason...some Wyoming residents want 2 chances at drawing the 80% of the quota reserved for them by statute/regulation before those tags drop to nr's.

This has nothing to do with nr's allocations.

It's a totally reasonable request.

I also believe that residents want either a second shot at drawing our alloted allocations or they're going to ask for 90-10.

The main push of the task force is to look for ways to increase resident opportunities.

 

[tdhanses]

Here is the simple reason...some Wyoming residents want 2 chances at drawing the 80% of the quota reserved for them by statute/regulation before those tags drop to nr's.

This has nothing to do with nr's allocations.

It's a totally reasonable request.

I also believe that residents want either a second shot at drawing our alloted allocations or they're going to ask for 90-10.

The main push of the task force is to look for ways to increase resident opportunities.

90/10 is coming just maybe not for a few years, pretty easy to see the writing on the wall. So don’t sell it as hey if we do this we’ll stay away from 90/10.

Thing is though even if it was 90/10, same issue would happen as residents don’t want the crap tags NR flock to or I should say residents don’t want to put these units on their apps as choices till they don’t draw what they want.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Here is the simple reason...some Wyoming residents want 2 chances at drawing the 80% of the quota reserved for them by statute/regulation before those tags drop to nr's.

This has nothing to do with nr's allocations.

It's a totally reasonable request.

I also believe that residents want either a second shot at drawing our alloted allocations or they're going to ask for 90-10.

The main push of the task force is to look for ways to increase resident opportunities.

I think I am following the logic, WY residents want 2 chances to draw their 80%. But don’t they get 3 choices in the draw? Some would interpret those 3 choices to be “3 chances”, which would be more than 2.

It feels like this TF might go on forever looking for ways to expand resident opportunity, “As long as 1 WY resident hunter is unhappy with his/her hunting opportunities and 1 non resident tag remains we will continue our crusade!”

 

[Thomas11]

Here is the simple reason...some Wyoming residents want 2 chances at drawing the 80% of the quota reserved for them by statute/regulation before those tags drop to nr's.

This has nothing to do with nr's allocations.

It's a totally reasonable request.

I also believe that residents want either a second shot at drawing our alloted allocations or they're going to ask for 90-10.

The main push of the task force is to look for ways to increase resident opportunities.

Yes I understand the NR allocations and the 80 % R allocations. I’m just trying to understand the draw part of this. I wasn’t aware that R allocations dropped into the NR in the initial draw if there wasn’t enough R demand. But all I mainly keep up w is elk so not relative there really. But my question is I understand R wanting their 80% allocations, but why aren’t they able to draw these tags as second choice or third if the NR are able? Is it because the NR are listing these tags as their first choice and then the R can’t draw as a second/third choice essentially making the R second/third choices worthless? Or are the NRs drawing these as their second/third?

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I agree that this is probably a reasonable request, no major issues. Let the res have a crack at the leftovers first. At the end of the day you are really splitting hairs over tags that many hunters don’t want. However, I am a bit skeptical of the logic that if res get this it will somehow delay going after 90/10 for elk deer antelope. Some folks just hate seeing a single out of state plate when hunting…..

Here is the simple reason...some Wyoming residents want 2 chances at drawing the 80% of the quota reserved for them by statute/regulation before those tags drop to nr's.

This has nothing to do with nr's allocations.

It's a totally reasonable request.

I also believe that residents want either a second shot at drawing our alloted allocations or they're going to ask for 90-10.

The main push of the task force is to look for ways to increase resident opportunities

 

[BuzzH]

I agree that this probably a reasonable request, no major issues. Let the res have a crack at the leftovers first. At the end of the day you are really splitting hairs overs tags that many hunters don’t want. However, I am a bit skeptical of the logic that if res get this it will somehow delay going after 90/10 for elk deer antelope. Some folks just hate seeing a single out of state plate when hunting…..

All I can do is report to you what I hear...and that's what I'm hearing from a lot of Residents.

IMO, and from what I'm hearing, I believe that it will delay the Resident push for 90-10 for deer/elk/pronghorn.

I can also report to you why the task force was convened in the first place, to increase Resident opportunity. Only so many ways to accomplish that.

Not interested in arguing about it.

 

[BuzzH]

Yes I understand the NR allocations and the 80 % R allocations. I’m just trying to understand the draw part of this. I wasn’t aware that R allocations dropped into the NR in the initial draw if there wasn’t enough R demand. But all I mainly keep up w is elk so not relative there really. But my question is I understand R wanting their 80% allocations, but why aren’t they able to draw these tags as second choice or third if the NR are able? Is it because the NR are listing these tags as their first choice and then the R can’t draw as a second/third choice essentially making the R second/third choices worthless? Or are the NRs drawing these as their second/third?

Go back and read some of the earlier posts, its all explained there.

 

[Wyobohunter]

Your new here you should understand a lot of us do really appreciate the buzz fights like he does but we also get very sick of this I’m better than you because I love here stuff. Few years ago he posted pictures up of all his left over tags that he bought so non residents could buy them that he was going to use for paper to start his fires at home to stay warm. Then you get the well if you don’t like it move here which a bunch of people did. Now with decreasing antelope numbers you can’t get tags. The increase in population from all the preaching probably didn’t help this draw odds. If you can’t figure out how to pull a tag that’s been a left over with 3 choices I’d be happy to help since apparently numbers are hard. If it comes down to needing something to start a fire those days are probably over I’d recommend a new paper. End of the day your state wants the money from those tags and the tags filled. It goes back to that management thing they aren’t issuing them because it’s socially cool


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When you make hyperbolic statements you should expect in kind replies. I want to see NR tags severely limited, you don’t have to agree. If you’ve been on this forum since day one that’s cool; it doesn’t make your opinion more valid than mine.

Chill out.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

All I can do is report to you what I hear...and that's what I'm hearing from a lot of Residents.

IMO, and from what I'm hearing, I believe that it will delay the Resident push for 90-10 for deer/elk/pronghorn.

I can also report to you why the task force was convened in the first place, to increase Resident opportunity. Only so many ways to accomplish that.

Not interested in arguing about it.

Yep, thanks for the insight into what’s happening there. There is another way to increase resident opportunity (and non resident opportunity), look for ways to increase herd numbers and herd health. Much more interested in that discussion and how to help.

 

[CamoPirate]

Skimming this, wouldn't a simpler change just be:

Resident 1-3 Choices
NR Choices
_______ Initial drawing, then:

Leftover Tags given preference to residents
After a cut off date, any tags not claimed then just move to NR pool and it becomes free for all?

I mean people will still complain but that'd kind of make it obvious they didn't want the tags.

 

[BuzzH]

Yep, thanks for the insight into what’s happening there. There is another way to increase resident opportunity (and non resident opportunity), look for ways to increase herd numbers and herd health. Much more interested in that discussion and how to help.

That's always the top of the agenda.

 

[LostArra]

That's always the top of the agenda.

As I said earlier, I'm in favor of the residents getting every one of their 80% allocation. I'm sure Wyoming can figure out the method and how to make up any shortfall from selling the leftovers to residents at 1/10th the price of a non resident tag.

But if all of this discussion is about increasing resident antelope hunting opportunities while the herd numbers are down, why is there no talk of reducing the maximum number of tags a single hunter can purchase? Just a change from 6 to 4 would increase opportunities for more resident hunters within that 80%? And probably with better tags than the leftovers no one really wants.

 

[wapitibob]

The limit is 3 in the initial draw (1 any and 2 doe) for both res and nr. Limiting the total might give those unsuccessful 1st draw residents better odds in the 2nd res draw if they went that route.

 

[BuzzH]

As I said earlier, I'm in favor of the residents getting every one of their 80% allocation. I'm sure Wyoming can figure out the method and how to make up any shortfall from selling the leftovers to residents at 1/10th the price of a non resident tag.

But if all of this discussion is about increasing resident antelope hunting opportunities while the herd numbers are down, why is there no talk of reducing the maximum number of tags a single hunter can purchase? Just a change from 6 to 4 would increase opportunities for more resident hunters within that 80%? And probably with better tags than the leftovers no one really wants.

Commission would have to change regulation, go through the public process, and would likely take a year minimum.

 

[jmez]

Just give the residents 80%. Leftovers are just that, they get sold or not issued.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

 

[manitou1]

I’m not a pronghorn junkie and what little I know is it’s relatively easy to pick up a tag in WY. Aren’t there thousands of leftover buck tags in the leftover draw available for both R and NR? But if I’m understanding correctly, R are upset because they aren’t able to draw a tag on their second or third choice because NR scooped them up on their first choice because not enough R applied for X unit using their first choice?? Or are NR drawing these tags on their second/third choice?

Leftover licenses are a thing of the past. Times have changed and hunting pressure has changed. There haven't been leftover tags for a few years now. At least all areas I am aware of.