Every state move to 80/20, let's make that push!

[schoolhousegrizz]

90/10 is a hot topic in the Wyoming Forum. Come on, let's go 80/20 every state. Decrease resident opportunity slightly while helping out the nonresidents greatly. I would be all for that. I did a survey on this on MM last year. I believe the majority of votes were in favor of this. I wonder if the agency's could cross the border and negotiate and reciprocate something like this. Maybe this is the answer instead of pushing to restrict NR hunting, were all Americans (mostly). What say you!

 

[El Gringo]

I’m in 100%

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

Maybe I will send this thread to a couple agency's, once it gets going.

 

[SS!]

You have a better chance of this idea than someone with max points partying with you in WY

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

You have a better chance of this idea than someone with max points partying with you in WY

I hope so!

 

[BrianID]

I would like the 80/20 split because I apply to every western state. Guys that only hunt their home state wouldn't like it and I understand that. The 80/20 split would be great for generating extra $$$ for game departments with the exception of Colorado. Colorado is without a doubt the most generous Western state in tag allocation to nonresidents. A 80/20 split would decrease nonresident deer and elk opportunity in Colorado and nonresident pronghorn opportunity in Wyoming.
Another thing to look at is the history of the USO lawsuit in AZ. That made it so tag allocation was temporally not affected by residency. I personally wouldn't be disappoint if that happened either.
I'm willing to accept a 90/10 split but will never accept stupid laws like the wilderness law in Wyoming, guide requirements for nonresidents in Alaska or outfitter welfare tags like they have in NM.

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

You have a better chance of this idea than someone with max points partying with you in WY

Did get a couple bites already though.

 

[coloradoman]

95/5 Colorado ?

 

[highfastflyer]

Colorado is without a doubt the most generous Western state in tag allocation to nonresidents.

Colorado is 90/10 on Bighorn Sheep, and goats, offers very little if any moose opportunity, has no bison and no grizzly bears so you might want to rethink those numbers. Wyoming in 2019 gave out 52% of all licenses to non-residents for antelope and 33% of all deer Licenses went to non-residents. At a minimum Wyoming should go to a reciprocal agreement with surrounding states.

 

[Bluehair]

90/10. Want better odds, move like some people did.

 

[SS!]

I dunno what’s crazier 80/20 or the thought anyone would care about what’s posted on a forum?

 

[SS!]

Colorado is 90/10 on Bighorn Sheep, and goats, offers very little if any moose opportunity, has no bison and no grizzly bears so you might want to rethink those numbers. Wyoming in 2019 gave out 52% of all licenses to non-residents for antelope and 33% of all deer Licenses went to non-residents. At a minimum Wyoming should go to a reciprocal agreement with surrounding states.View attachment 44093

You forgot to cite your sources again.

 

[highfastflyer]

You forgot to cite your sources again.

It‘s apparent to all but the Gormless but you can google that one.

 

[tracker12]

States generate more $$$$ from NR app fees than they do tag fees. No incentive to lower the odds. Trend is going the other way.

 

[roadrunner]

Most non residents apply abroad to increase their chance to hunt because they rarely draw their own home state.

90/10.

 

[highfastflyer]

Most non residents apply abroad to increase their chance to hunt because they rarely draw their own home state.

90/10.

When I apply for a broad I prefer these type.

 

[RookieWYhntr]

Nice shotgun!

 

[RookieWYhntr]

I agree with 80/20. I am willing to pay more for tags.

 

[Soj51hopeful]

I like that the states are all different in their processes and what they have to offer.

 

[Vanilla]

I don’t think all states should do it the same. For a state like Wyoming that has a relatively small population but a high number of tags, giving out more non-resident tags to help with revenue makes sense. More populated states with less tags to give have a different dynamic they are dealing with. Every state is different in what they have to offer, so aligning them to all look the same really doesn’t make a ton of sense.

 

[mevertsen]

Nevada would end up reducing resident tags by about 12 percent and doubling non resident tags to get to an 80/20 split. We already have limited tags and too many people to apply for them.

I say no. Leave it be and let each state determine how to allocate tags.

 

[hossblur]

As long as every other western state creates regulations that require Wyoming residents who draw tags in LE units to hire a guide, I'm good either way. We all need to protect our guides/outfitters the same as Wyoming.

But 90/10 seems fair. The small amount of guys who apply out of state, shouldn't force their home state to take from R to give to NR in order to increase NR chances in other states.

The 90/10 should be adjusted to reflect value however. Access to a ton of doe antelope tags in Wyoming as part of the NR percentage shouldn't be the same as access to Henries deer tags to get our NR percentage.

Also, states that do not offer NR hunting should be banned from the draws for the same species they don't allow.

 

[SS!]

there’s some trades on the job site that you can’t drug test because they all would fail.

 

[highfastflyer]

As long as every other western state creates regulations that require Wyoming residents who draw tags in LE units to hire a guide, I'm good either way. We all need to protect our guides/outfitters the same as Wyoming.

But 90/10 seems fair. The small amount of guys who apply out of state, shouldn't force their home state to take from R to give to NR in order to increase NR chances in other states.

The 90/10 should be adjusted to reflect value however. Access to a ton of doe antelope tags in Wyoming as part of the NR percentage shouldn't be the same as access to Henries deer tags to get our NR percentage.

Also, states that do not offer NR hunting should be banned from the draws for the same species they don't allow.

In Wyoming, we only require non-residents to hire a guide when there is a chance they might get lost or eaten by a grizzly bear. LMAO.

 

[hossblur]

In Wyoming, we only require non-residents to hire a guide when there is a chance they might get lost or eaten by a grizzly bear. LMAO.

We are concerned about rattlesnakes in Utah. Our friends to the N.E. hearing is damaged from the constant 40mph wind, they don't hear the buzzing. This the need for guides

 

[Padfoot]

Lmao
Never gonna happen. If anything it will go the way of Oregon where only 3-5% of the tags go to NRs. the ODFW did this over time due to resident pressure.

Additionally, it’s too easy for a ballot measure to dictate wildlife policy and hunting regulations. That’s how jurisdiction over mountain lion hunting was taken away from the fish and game in California.

When a state’s residents decide they aren’t getting enough tags, a sportsman’s group in that state could float a ballot measure that dictates NR hunting levels. If it passes well there goes the NR opportunity. Or the ballot measure will scare the politicians into reducing NR access as they pander to constituents for votes to get elected.

be careful what you ask for.

 

[jdoches]

I would agree with the 80/20 split if they did away with the point system and just charged the out of state hunters the price it cost for the special tag. I am Wy. resident and have only drawn one elk tag in over 20 years of applying so my chances will decrease more but at least the state can bring in more money.

 

[osu92]

Lmao
Never gonna happen. If anything it will go the way of Oregon where only 3-5% of the tags go to NRs. the ODFW did this over time due to resident pressure.

No state should follow anything ODFW does. Ever.

 

[easy_money]

I would agree with the 80/20 split if they did away with the point system and just charged the out of state hunters the price it cost for the special tag. I am Wy. resident and have only drawn one elk tag in over 20 years of applying so my chances will decrease more but at least the state can bring in more money.

Are you saying you've only hunted elk once in Wyoming in 20 years as a resident?


Leave each state to manage their own numbers. I didn't think guys on this site liked socialism. Why don't we make it like the states back east?

 

[jdoches]

Are you saying you've only hunted elk once in Wyoming in 20 years as a resident?


Leave each state to manage their own numbers. I didn't think guys on this site liked socialism. Why don't we make it like the states back east?

Yep why would I want to hunt in an overcrowded area where people use scopes of their guns as binoculars and you call in every bowhunter within a mile of you?

 

[Padfoot]

I’d rather hunt than sit at home for twenty years waiting for a tag. If I hunted elk every twenty years I’d forget how to hunt them. Besides I haven’t called in another bow hunter since I stopped hunting Oregon LOL.

 

[tracker12]

You can't compare Eastern Sates to Western States. For the most part there are more deer turkey and bear to go around for everyone to hunt.

And talking about over crowding. Have you looked around Denver, Salt Lake City and Boise lately. West is getting worse every year. Going to get worse when all those Californians move in and start voting lol

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

In Wyoming, we only require non-residents to hire a guide when there is a chance they might get lost or eaten by a grizzly bear. LMAO.

But they can go fishing and hiking and recreating all they want in those areas. Put a gun in their hand and now they need a guide. What a freaking joke.

 

[HornyMan]

Wyoming should consider land owner tags if they are going to go with a 90/10.

 

[highfastflyer]

Wyoming should consider land owner tags if they are going to go with a 90/10.

You support giving away wildlife to rich landowners? Just what they need, more Welfare for ranchers and landowners as if govt. subsidized grazing wasn’t enough. A carefully crafted and highly managed CWMU program with a State appointed Czar-Monitor overseeing it might be a solution but avoiding all the pitfalls and mistakes of the poorly managed Utah and Colorado programs.

 

[highfastflyer]

But they can go fishing and hiking and recreating all they want in those areas. Put a gun in their hand and now they need a guide. What a freaking joke.

The bears become smart when the shooting starts, it’s like ringing the dinner bell. Here chicky, chicky, come eat my elk gut pile.

 

[BrianID]

Colorado is 90/10 on Bighorn Sheep, and goats, offers very little if any moose opportunity, has no bison and no grizzly bears so you might want to rethink those numbers. Wyoming in 2019 gave out 52% of all licenses to non-residents for antelope and 33% of all deer Licenses went to non-residents. At a minimum Wyoming should go to a reciprocal agreement with surrounding states.View attachment 44093

You are correct that Wyoming is also very generous to nonresidents and arguably just as generous or more generous than Colorado. Wyoming has a more generous % for moose, goat and sheep for nonresidents than Colorado. For deer, pronghorn and elk, both Colorado and Wyoming are very generous to nonresidents. I would argue that Colorado gives more quality deer tags to nonresident than Wyoming does but that is just my opinion on what a quality deer tag is.

 

[BrianID]

In Wyoming, we only require non-residents to hire a guide when there is a chance they might get lost or eaten by a grizzly bear. LMAO.

That wilderness law is bogus and you know it. It is just a form of outfitter welfare.

 

[BrianID]

Wyoming should consider land owner tags if they are going to go with a 90/10.

Landowner tags are not a path you want any state to go down. It sets up a welfare system. I would have no problem with the landowner tags if they were only good for the landowners property but not when they are good for public land.