- Banned
- #1
This is a slippery slope to privatizing wildlife. Works well for landowners and those with a higher than average income. For the rest of us I fail to find a benefit.
The benefit is you still have the same opportunities and opportunity at one of these tags if your willing to spend the money, same argument Buzz uses for why everyone should move to WY, it isn’t closed off to anyone but you have to be able to afford it. If it would be a reduction in the current available tags then no way.This is a slippery slope to privatizing wildlife. Works well for landowners and those with a higher than average income. For the rest of us I fail to find a benefit.
Aren’t these tags already out there, can’t landowners get a set amount of tags annually depending on acres owned and what wildlife resides in their area?From what I gather. It is to be used as a bargaing chip to get private land access. I dont think the trade off is worth it for the average guy. We are trading a percentage of all tags moving forward for access to private land that is year to year. I am against them.
Ugh, that probably is it.LOL. I'm sure that group with the guide association is drooling thinking about this. Wonder if it's a trade-off for support of changing nonresident ratios.?
Yes, there are WY landowner tags. However, these are not currently transferable outside of family.Aren’t these tags already out there, can’t landowners get a set amount of tags annually depending on acres owned and what wildlife resides in their area?
Yeah so the tags aren’t coming out of any currently available to the general public.Yes, there are WY landowner tags. However, these are not currently transferable outside of family.
Incorrect - WY landowner tags currently are first taken from the entire unit quota and then the remainder goes into the draw.Yeah so the tags aren’t coming out of any currently available to the general public.
Ahh, then yeah I’m a no.Incorrect - WY landowner tags currently are first taken from the entire unit quota and then the remainder goes into the draw.
Making these transferable would have more landowners applying so they could sell them and would further limit the quota in the general application period. It's the further commercialization of wildlife resources.
I would disagree. Once landowners have a new revenue stream they close access to the public...to protect the new revenue. Knock on a ranch door in New Mexico and ask if you can hunt elk without buyingtheir tag....The benefit is you still have the same opportunities and opportunity at one of these tags if your willing to spend the money, same argument Buzz uses for why everyone should move to WY, it isn’t closed off to anyone but you have to be able to afford it. If it would be a reduction in the current available tags then no way.
All you have to do is require any transfer to allow access to your land for the person that gets the tag, doubt it would effect access to private much, private isn’t that open to public access overall.I would disagree. Once landowners have a new revenue stream they close access to the public...to protect the new revenue. Knock on a ranch door in New Mexico and ask if you can hunt elk without buyingtheir tag....
I wonder who is really pushing this. Probably special interest groups (ie outfitters and landowners) who will profiting like crazy. Im all for people making money but when it's at the expense of everyone else Im a hard no. I wonder what percentage of landowners who would normally turn hunters away will be selling off every tag they can get their hands on.Incorrect - WY landowner tags currently are first taken from the entire unit quota and then the remainder goes into the draw.
Making these transferable would have more landowners applying so they could sell them and would further limit the quota in the general application period. It's the further commercialization of wildlife resources.
If thats true I dont see it staying that way for long. Once harvest numbers start going up theyre going to cut allocations somewhere. I doubt the landowners are going to give up their new golden willy wonka tickets without a fight.Actually with the push to reduce NR LQ tags this would give us NR’s another possible opportunity, it wouldn’t reduce NR tags for general elk as they are set at 7250 and I doubt they get decreased because of their value to WY. So the more I think about it the more I like this possibility especially with the current push to keep reducing NR opportunities.
Yeah but I also doubt they reduce NR cash cows to WYFG, yes they‘ll reduce our opportunities at LQ units but not our overall tag allocations, we spend too much money there or if they did they would have to increase resident fees substantia to make up for one lost NR license fee. There aren’t that many NR tags as it is.I wonder who is really pushing this. Probably special interest groups (ie outfitters and landowners) who will profiting like crazy. Im all for people making money but when it's at the expense of everyone else Im a hard no. I wonder what percentage of landowners who would normally turn hunters away will be selling off every tag they can get their hands on.
If thats true I dont see it staying that way for long. Once harvest numbers start going up theyre going to cut allocations somewhere. I doubt the landowners are going to give up their new golden willy wonka tickets without a fight.
The benefit is you still have the same opportunities and opportunity at one of these tags if your willing to spend the money, same argument Buzz uses for why everyone should move to WY, it isn’t closed off to anyone but you have to be able to afford it. If it would be a reduction in the current available tags then no way.