License fee increase for nonresidents introduced in House

Looks like the NR for elk is just for the regular? I thought the special was going up?
Screenshot_20230122-204935_Chrome.jpg
 
Price increases are good. the more money the state stands to lose the less likely allocation cuts are.
Maybe, or this more easily allows that to occur financially.

When is enough enough though? Only the rich will be able to hunt out of state soon.
 
I am still not in support of this bill. It is not ok at all to hand any government agency a big fat check with no expectation on how or where it should be spent.

This is not ok. I am all for increasing funding if we know where the money is going to be spent. If there are significant budgetary holes to fill etc. but this is not about specific programs. It is not about budget short falls, and it is not about specific programs or more men in field or…

It is about separating the winners from the losers… The right from the poor. This is about making an elite pool of licenses that favors one group over the other…

Either way, I am not ok with the idea that we can just randomly raise any lic prices without need or cause.
 
I understand states wanting to monetize as much as possible, especially regarding NonResident hunters. Its a choice that anyone who really wants to hunt can still afford. If you can't manage to save a couple thousand for a Wyoming elk hunt, then go spend $3k on beer and golf while you complain about it.

Soon, only the determined will choose to hunt out of state and that is fine with me. ------SS
 
Maybe, or this more easily allows that to occur financially.

When is enough enough though? Only the rich will be able to hunt out of state soon.

Not rich by any means, but I will pay to get another Wyoming elk tag. Tell me where to send the check

Wyoming has been good to me and I will take what I can get. The older I get the more the price really does not matter, I just want to hunt while I am able.
 
I am still not in support of this bill. It is not ok at all to hand any government agency a big fat check with no expectation on how or where it should be spent.

This is not ok. I am all for increasing funding if we know where the money is going to be spent. If there are significant budgetary holes to fill etc. but this is not about specific programs. It is not about budget short falls, and it is not about specific programs or more men in field or…

It is about separating the winners from the losers… The right from the poor. This is about making an elite pool of licenses that favors one group over the other…

Either way, I am not ok with the idea that we can just randomly raise any lic prices without need or cause.
Tend to agree...but nobody feels sorry for me when I apply for $1200 elk tags in Nevada, etc.

We can't randomly raise license fees, it has to be approved by the legislature.
 
Without doing the math, if they went to 90/10 would this increase bring it back close to numbers as what is currently brought in? Elk going from 16 to 10 percent anyway with this increase would still bring in some serious cash. This should help the odds for the special license some, but not sure it will stop those who already are paying $1300. What it will increase are the random odds, more people will just buy points or try the regular fee until they know they can draw in the special rather than fork over 2k for a chance.
 
My guess is that doubling nonres prices will backfire for 90/10 ever happening for d/e/a. Currently nonres support over 70% of the WG&F license revenue budget. With these increases nonres would support closer to 95% of the budget. Why would Wyo cut off the arms of those that feed them by cutting nonres opportunity? Doubling nonres prices and then cutting tag opportunity in 1/2 with 90/10 makes no sense.

Outfitter’s clients would be cut in about 1/2. I’m sure outfitters aren’t going to sit around and let that happen. It’s also obvious that 90/5/5 isn’t going to happen!
 
My guess is that doubling nonres prices will backfire for 90/10 ever happening for d/e/a. Currently nonres support over 70% of the WG&F license revenue budget. With these increases nonres would support closer to 95% of the budget. Why would Wyo cut off the arms of those that feed them by cutting nonres opportunity? Doubling nonres prices and then cutting tag opportunity in 1/2 with 90/10 makes no sense.

Outfitter’s clients would be cut in about 1/2. I’m sure outfitters aren’t going to sit around and let that happen. It’s also obvious that 90/5/5 isn’t going to happen!

People will still pay to play look at all the other states non res stats!
 
My guess is that doubling nonres prices will backfire for 90/10 ever happening for d/e/a. Currently nonres support over 70% of the WG&F license revenue budget. With these increases nonres would support closer to 95% of the budget. Why would Wyo cut off the arms of those that feed them by cutting nonres opportunity? Doubling nonres prices and then cutting tag opportunity in 1/2 with 90/10 makes no sense.

Outfitter’s clients would be cut in about 1/2. I’m sure outfitters aren’t going to sit around and let that happen. It’s also obvious that 90/5/5 isn’t going to happen!
I totally disagree...it will make 90-10 easier to pass.

Scarcity in supply and increased demand will drive NR tag prices even higher.

Even at $2k a pop, every single special priced NR full priced elk tag will sell.

Meaning when, not if, Wyoming goes 90-10 for deer, elk, and pronghorn we can generate/squeeze MORE income from NRs issuing them less tags.

NRs will grumble as they cut bigger checks to hunt here.

Oh and Sebastian as you make more and more resident "friends" in Wyoming it makes it easier and easier for them to cut a deal for 90-5-5.

Keep yapping you're doing great!
 
Raising prices is the easiest and most effective way to reduce demand. We can complain about draw odds and point creep but this is how you slow it down.

I honestly believe they owe it to the animals to maximize their value. I'm sure they have done some statistical analysis (at least I hope) and are slowly working towards that optimal point.

It was brought up on another thread but over 2000 NR bought sheep points for the first time, they aren't paying attention or are big fans of the proposed BP legislation. Either way, it is 300k towards wyoming wildlife. If they raised it to 200 dollars a point and only 1800 new people bought points, they are still up 60k.

I disagree with Buzz's opinion on this issue, but he is right that Wyoming doesn't owe NR anything and the benefit of having NR hunt there needs to outweigh the benefits to Wyoming resident having more tags. So yes NR fees make up 70% of the license funding, and because of that funding Wyoming gives NR X% of tags. NRs can't vote in Wyoming so there is no need for any representative or senator to consider our opinions, thoughts, or displeasure with any law they are going to pass.

Bottom line, Wyoming makes the rules, you can decide if you want to play.
 
Raising prices is the easiest and most effective way to reduce demand. We can complain about draw odds and point creep but this is how you slow it down.

I honestly believe they owe it to the animals to maximize their value. I'm sure they have done some statistical analysis (at least I hope) and are slowly working towards that optimal point.

It was brought up on another thread but over 2000 NR bought sheep points for the first time, they aren't paying attention or are big fans of the proposed BP legislation. Either way, it is 300k towards wyoming wildlife. If they raised it to 200 dollars a point and only 1800 new people bought points, they are still up 60k.

I disagree with Buzz's opinion on this issue, but he is right that Wyoming doesn't owe NR anything and the benefit of having NR hunt there needs to outweigh the benefits to Wyoming resident having more tags. So yes NR fees make up 70% of the license funding, and because of that funding Wyoming gives NR X% of tags. NRs can't vote in Wyoming so there is no need for any representative or senator to consider our opinions, thoughts, or displeasure with any law they are going to pass.

Bottom line, Wyoming makes the rules, you can decide if you want to play.
You can only go so far and then the cash cow will do something else with their money. 90/10 or 90/5/5 with increased prices and demand will decrease. How much, no one knows and that is the issue at hand. You can only guess. How many non-residents apply in Oregon vs. Wyoming? If Wyoming gave out 1% of tags to non-res and an antelope license was $2,000, would people continue to buy points and apply? There is 100% a limit.
 
True, there is a limit as to how far they can go. But the laws of supply and demand say they aren't close yet.

Another way to look at it- if they opened up NR license for bid, what do you think the average elk license would go for? I'll bet north of $2K.

I'm not suggesting that, of course. Just illustrating a point.
 
You can only go so far and then the cash cow will do something else with their money. 90/10 or 90/5/5 with increased prices and demand will decrease. How much, no one knows and that is the issue at hand. You can only guess. How many non-residents apply in Oregon vs. Wyoming? If Wyoming gave out 1% of tags to non-res and an antelope license was $2,000, would people continue to buy points and apply? There is 100% a limit.
I agree there is a limit, but we're nowhere close to it.

I find it hard to listen to the whining on tag prices when I see truck after NR truck pulling $40K worth of ATV's with $75K trucks that are fueling them with $5/gallon diesel.

Then when they get here shooting pronghorn they found with $3k worth of glass, and $5k rifle "systems".

For those reasons, I can confirm we aren't close to the limit most will pay for a NR license.
 
I agree there is a limit, but we're nowhere close to it.

I find it hard to listen to the whining on tag prices when I see truck after NR truck pulling $40K worth of ATV's with $75K trucks that are fueling them with $5/gallon diesel.

Then when they get here shooting pronghorn they found with $3k worth of glass, and $5k rifle "systems".

For those reasons, I can confirm we aren't close to the limit most will pay for a NR license.
And then adding spread credit to said pronghorn. Don't forget that
 
What I can not believe is that Wyoming residents are not paying more.
In my state fees for residents are as follows.
$54 License
$36 First Deer tag
$44 Second Deer tag
$512 Elk
$172 Antelope
$469 Bighorn Sheep
 
....why so abrasive buzzh? of course someone who is behind me on pts would say i wont be missed... but the application fee and tag fee would by the WGF (that's the goal right... increase rev from NR's?) have you been instructed by the WGFD council to promote their approval rankings on internet forums? Are you the guy who tries to change the rules halfway through monopoly just because you read a book on a new strategy halfway through the game? Just to be clear no one likes that guy......

Residents have it so good in Wyoming already, its comical to think otherwise. Hunters are getting fed up with states getting greedy.
 
I agree there is a limit, but we're nowhere close to it.

I find it hard to listen to the whining on tag prices when I see truck after NR truck pulling $40K worth of ATV's with $75K trucks that are fueling them with $5/gallon diesel.

Then when they get here shooting pronghorn they found with $3k worth of glass, and $5k rifle "systems".

For those reasons, I can confirm we aren't close to the limit most will pay for a NR license.
Yes I am also hard pressed to feel we are any where close to a “market price”… I really hope we never take that approach to hunting. While it would be a huge cash cow, it would also be a hung mistake politically. It would give a lot of weight to anti hunters if the only people hunting were the wealthy…

I also agree it is hard to see guys driving $50,000 rig, with $30,000 side by, and a $20,000 trailer etc. in almost all cases the license cost is the cheapest aspect of the whole ordeal…

I hope this bill fails and in the coming year(s) we can look at the funding structure, the budget and create a path forward with money going to meet specific objective and budget concerns…
 
Hunters are getting fed up with states getting greedy.
If this is true, hunters have an odd way of showing that frustration. Wyo NR application numbers increase every year. We throw license cost increases, PP fee increases, lower tag allocations, hold on to their money for months on end, make them pay the CC transaction fees, etc at them and they keep lining up in greater and greater numbers.
 
....why so abrasive buzzh? of course someone who is behind me on pts would say i wont be missed... but the application fee and tag fee would by the WGF (that's the goal right... increase rev from NR's?) have you been instructed by the WGFD council to promote their approval rankings on internet forums? Are you the guy who tries to change the rules halfway through monopoly just because you read a book on a new strategy halfway through the game? Just to be clear no one likes that guy......

Residents have it so good in Wyoming already, its comical to think otherwise. Hunters are getting fed up with states getting greedy.
I want Residents to enjoy the same tag percentages as the surrounding states.

Montana, Utah, New Mexico, Oregon, Arizona all limit NR's to 10% or less of their tags.

Why do you feel its inappropriate for Wyoming Residents to want the same thing?

For the record, the Department does not care if you, your neighbor, or some dude in the other 48 states that you don't live in draw the tag. They collect the same amount of revenue, they charge every NR the same prices.

If you ever believed that point systems, tag allocations, and tag fees weren't going to change, well, you haven't been paying attention.
 
If this is true, hunters have an odd way of showing that frustration. Wyo NR application numbers increase every year. We throw license cost increases, PP fee increases, lower tag allocations, hold on to their money for months on end, make them pay the CC transaction fees, etc at them and they keep lining up in greater and greater numbers.

yep
 
Have money, will travel.

No money? The wise thing would be to stay home and make that truck, car, house, country club, UTV, CC, utilities payments!

This applies to every State in which a guy is a nonresident. Wyoming doesn't have the corner on the "pricey" tag market.

I don't like spending more for the same thing but like others have said, no one cares if we fall out since there are a thousand guys and gals (and whatever gender you want to fabricate) ready to take our place.

By the way, I feel like I'm starting to identify as a Wyo Res!!!!!

Zeke
 
"Even at $2k a pop, every single special priced NR full priced elk tag will sell."

I totally agree with Buzz on this one. Every one of these Special tags will still sell and the state will continue to make more money off the NR. This will NOT reduce demand. Maybe the demand will reduce for the special tags but in return the demand will go up in the regular draw. The number of total applicants will continue to rise.

I also think the outfitters will support this increase in the price of the Special tags. After all, the average guided hunter is likely to be a little wealthier and the few extra dollars for the increased cost of the special tag are minuscule compared to what they would be spending on the guided hunt. In fact this would actually help the outfitters to possibly cut out some of the competition of hunters who can't "afford" much extra costs on their hunts and their clients would be able to draw more frequently.

I agree with what many have stated already. The state of Wyoming can do whatever it wants and us NR's really have no say other than to play along or not play along. There are many options out there where NR's can spend their money.

On a side note as food for thought, Wyoming's Special tags are already some of the most expensive tags for E/D/A. I did a real quick spread sheet looking at 8 different states including WY. In my comparison, I compared the cost of each states tag along with all the "other" costs required to apply for the tag (base hunting license, application fees, credit card fees, etc). In this comparison, I assumed that if someone was to apply for all three species and split the cost of any prerequisite licenses among the three species. I also assumed the cost of the the most expensive tags in each state (New Mexico's Q/HD tags, WY special tags, etc). In this comparison WY is the most expensive for Elk and the most expensive for antelope! Wyoming's special deer tag is the third most expensive. When looking at costs to "apply" and costs to "build a point", Wyoming's special elk is the most expensive, the special deer is second most expensive and the special antelope is 4th most expensive. Overall the cost of applying and building points for all three species together puts Wyoming at #2.

Obviously the proposed increase would put WY way out in the lead in all four categories by a significant margin. If this happens we can see other states jumping on the bandwagon and raising their prices.

I will try to upload a copy of the spreadsheet.
 

Attachments

  • Application Costs.pdf
    55.3 KB · Views: 147
Ok, lets say tag prices double for nonres. Like everyone on Earth agrees.....every tag will be sold. Doubling the nonres tags means the WG&F's license sales revenue for managing wildlife and habitat improvement projects will close to double.

Do you really think that if the WG&F revenue is doubled that it will be a simple process to cut that revenue in 1/2 with 90/10?

We should take a poll on how many nonres would drop out of applying in Wyo if it takes twice as long for nonres to draw tags with 90/10 plus 2x the price of tags both added into the equation.

Lets take it to the next level and go 90/5/5! How many nonres will drop out with 90/5/5 plus double the price of tags? I don't see this ever happening!

I'm certain a lot of nonres will continue to apply with the increase in tag prices but will drop out with both 90/10 plus paying double the license fees. How many nonres sons won't apply their kids for tags if this happens? Over time this will be significant revenue loss to the WG&F.

Big question....are Wyo res willing to flip the bill for revenue losses?
 
You just answered your own question. How easy will it be to keep the same revenue. Pretty easy I'd say
 
Big question....are Wyo res willing to flip the bill for revenue losses?
If they want the licenses to go to Res, then the answer will be Yes. I don't think the revenue loss will be much if any, but whatever it is they would handle.

For NRs, let's hope they stay generous for years to come on E/D/A allocations.
 
I also agree it is hard to see guys driving $50,000 rig, with $30,000 side by, and a $20,000 trailer etc. in almost all cases the license cost is the cheapest aspect of the whole ordeal…
that generalization doesn’t fit a great many visitors to your state. Some, yes, most, probably not. There are thousands of regular guys just like you who appreciate the great Wyoming landscape and hunting as you do and not everyone can live there nor would you want them to. They aren’t all entitled whiners though of course there are some. Bet you have some home-grown folks fitting that bill . no need to paint such broad strokes to do it, if only not to chuck everyone under the same bus.

(edited a bit, I originally accidentally attributed quote to Buzz!)
 
Last edited:
that generalization doesn’t fit a great many visitors to your state. Some, yes, most, probably not. There are thousands of regular guys just like you who appreciate the great Wyoming landscape and hunting as you do and not everyone can live there nor would you want them to. They aren’t all entitled whiners though of course there are some. Bet you have some home-grown folks fitting that bill . no need to paint such broad strokes to do it, if only not to chuck everyone under the same bus.

(edited a bit, I originally accidentally attributed quote to Buzz!)
So show me on person who comes here to hunt that the license is not one of the cheapest aspects of the hunt? Even at regular prices the lic is one of the cheapest aspects of the hunt. Given fuel is up, etc. it is still one of the cheapest aspects of hunting WY.
 
So show me on person who comes here to hunt that the license is not one of the cheapest aspects of the hunt? Even at regular prices the lic is one of the cheapest aspects of the hunt. Given fuel is up, etc. it is still one of the cheapest aspects of hunting WY.
Talkin DIY, the NR licence can be one of the most significant parts. More than food, more than my bow or gun, more than my ammo or arrows, more than my backpack or tent. Collectively, no, of course not, but its a silly comparison. Some of those things last season after season and are used on many hunts.

Comparing the licence cost to my vehicle, is also silly. I use that 365 days a year for work, getting groceries, hauling kids, etc. So of course I use it for hunting too.

Why would I compare an elk tag to the cost of gas? Are they indexed to oil in literally any way?

Look, NR tags are tremendously expensive these days already, to say otherwise is foolish. But they are not a necessity per se. Even call it a “luxury” if you want to lay it on thick (my hunts are nooooo luxury, trust me). So a person who spends his last survival dollar on a tag would be foolish. But just about as foolish as someone saying one owes more money (arbitrarily) on product B because they already spent a bunch of money on product A.

Would it be any more sensible to ask Wyoming for a personal break if I hadn’t spent other money anywhere, I’m already in deep elsewhere and kinda strapped this season? No.

Tag prices should reflect 1) the contributory cost to manage and provide the resource and 2) a component of supply/demand 3) but keep space for recognition that market pricing to whatever the top payer could bear may not reflect the social contract between hunters and State / society generally.

Maybe they do all of the above and this currently is the equlibrium point. The zone of tension. Etc. I’m fine if it is. If NR were singing and dancing, the price is too low. But I don’t personally hear much of that. Desperation, resignation, a little defiance, well yeah. But maybe thats because class warfare seemingly wins in the end and the rich shall inherit the earth (that indeed is pretty much whats happening I yield). Feels weird to have those R hunters championing that, at the literal expense of their erstwhile bretheren.

#3 in that list was also likely the hardest to establish in tandem with the N.A. model, doing something different than the King’s deer and all, and seems like once its lost a whole LOT of bad things might happen to hunting as we know it, and support for hunting generally. Finally, as NR goes, so too one day will R. You may find you are no more than the money someone can squeeze YOU for. Better make sure your left pocket is empty or they may just be morally “justified” in taking whats in your right. People (and government) don’t change. Thats a fact.

So give thanks to the middlingly “rich” NR. After all, You WANT us on that wall. You NEED us on that wall! When we are knocked off that wall and in pieces, good luck putting us back together again. LOL
 
I agree, raise the price and tags will still sale, for now.

I know so few kids that are getting into hunting, 30 years from now it will be a different story, but that is way, way way in the future. Loss of hunting will be legislated by the majority, as so few people will actually hunt. Hard to say that someone is hunting to feed their family at $2,000 for a tag.
 
Talkin DIY, the NR licence can be one of the most significant parts. More than food, more than my bow or gun, more than my ammo or arrows, more than my backpack or tent. Collectively, no, of course not, but its a silly comparison. Some of those things last season after season and are used on many hunts.

Comparing the licence cost to my vehicle, is also silly. I use that 365 days a year for work, getting groceries, hauling kids, etc. So of course I use it for hunting too.

Why would I compare an elk tag to the cost of gas? Are they indexed to oil in literally any way?

Look, NR tags are tremendously expensive these days already, to say otherwise is foolish. But they are not a necessity per se. Even call it a “luxury” if you want to lay it on thick (my hunts are nooooo luxury, trust me). So a person who spends his last survival dollar on a tag would be foolish. But just about as foolish as someone saying one owes more money (arbitrarily) on product B because they already spent a bunch of money on product A.

Would it be any more sensible to ask Wyoming for a personal break if I hadn’t spent other money anywhere, I’m already in deep elsewhere and kinda strapped this season? No.

Tag prices should reflect 1) the contributory cost to manage and provide the resource and 2) a component of supply/demand 3) but keep space for recognition that market pricing to whatever the top payer could bear may not reflect the social contract between hunters and State / society generally.

Maybe they do all of the above and this currently is the equlibrium point. The zone of tension. Etc. I’m fine if it is. If NR were singing and dancing, the price is too low. But I don’t personally hear much of that. Desperation, resignation, a little defiance, well yeah. But maybe thats because class warfare seemingly wins in the end and the rich shall inherit the earth (that indeed is pretty much whats happening I yield). Feels weird to have those R hunters championing that, at the literal expense of their erstwhile bretheren.

#3 in that list was also likely the hardest to establish in tandem with the N.A. model, doing something different than the King’s deer and all, and seems like once its lost a whole LOT of bad things might happen to hunting as we know it, and support for hunting generally. Finally, as NR goes, so too one day will R. You may find you are no more than the money someone can squeeze YOU for. Better make sure your left pocket is empty or they may just be morally “justified” in taking whats in your right. People (and government) don’t change. Thats a fact.

So give thanks to the middlingly “rich” NR. After all, You WANT us on that wall. You NEED us on that wall! When we are knocked off that wall and in pieces, good luck putting us back together again. LOL
Lots of stuff in there I agree with, but let's just be honest the average NR doesn't give a chit about anything in Wyoming unless it's a year they draw a tag.

It's the residents that do the heavy lifting...and that's true of every state.

Non Residents are not going to save hunting in Wyoming, nor will it all come tumbling down if we keep more tags for residents and raise NR fees.
 
I agree, raise the price and tags will still sale, for now.

I know so few kids that are getting into hunting, 30 years from now it will be a different story, but that is way, way way in the future. Loss of hunting will be legislated by the majority, as so few people will actually hunt. Hard to say that someone is hunting to feed their family at $2,000 for a tag.
That's been true for my entire life in regard to NR hunting. You're not hunting out of state to put food on the table.

Honestly it's tough to justify it with resident prices.
 
If the special elk tags sell out in the crap units the suckers who bought them deserve to get hosed. Wyoming's got some good units I'd gladly pay 2k to hunt every year, and here are a lot I wouldn't pay $200 to ever hunt.

I'm glad I've already played most of these games and won I feel sorry for the guys who're half way to a moving goal post .
 
If the special elk tags sell out in the crap units the suckers who bought them deserve to get hosed. Wyoming's got some good units I'd gladly pay 2k to hunt every year, and here are a lot I wouldn't pay $200 to ever hunt.
This fee increase could cause a lot of areas to have a much higher % of regular price tags. Maybe your "$200" areas will be 100% regular price. No one is talking about that.
 
So show me on person who comes here to hunt that the license is not one of the cheapest aspects of the hunt? Even at regular prices the lic is one of the cheapest aspects of the hunt. Given fuel is up, etc. it is still one of the cheapest aspects of hunting WY.
Here is my list, this is about average over 20+ years of taking one trip annually from the east coast to a western state. I can say that the tag makes up about 25% of my total costs usually. I use much of the same gear, including clothing that I used decades ago. There is no doubt, western states have priced out many non-residents, I know a bunch of them. I use to get OTC elk tags on top of mulie tags in Colorado, but no longer do that. Have added cow elk tags to Wyoming tags often, but usually don't do that anymore either. Will it price out me, perhaps it will and I will decide to spend my money on other things closer to home, time will tell.

Cost% of Total
License Cost
$500​
22%​
Flight
$400​
17%​
*use airline miles annually
Lodging
$250​
11%​
*cabin split amongst others
Rental Car
$250​
11%​
*split amongst others
Gas
$250​
11%​
*split amongst others
Food
$250​
11%​
Butchering
$200​
9%​
Annual Gear Budget
$200​
9%​
*using the same rifle/scope/spotter over 20 years
Total
$2,300​
100%​
 
Lots of stuff in there I agree with, but let's just be honest the average NR doesn't give a chit about anything in Wyoming unless it's a year they draw a tag.

It's the residents that do the heavy lifting...and that's true of every state.

Non Residents are not going to save hunting in Wyoming, nor will it all come tumbling down if we keep more tags for residents and raise NR fees.
A very middle of the road assessment, probably where more people should dwell. Nothing super special about NR as a monolith. Made up of individuals. Some better, some worse. But not the enemy, and not saying you ever said they were but some people make it seem almost so. Basically, we’d all be better off if hunting on balance stays more rather than less affordable to “average” American and if R and NR maintain basic respect for each other’s differences while joining forces on mutual interests which are overwhelming. The biggest impediment, it seems, is that tag availability for either group is likely to tighten with every passing year and many individuals of either residency persuasion simply will fight to the last, rather than everyone take a shrug and accept the the pie probably gets cut into slightly smaller individual peices no matter what scenario is contemplated. Maybe on different timelines for R vs NR but still. Population growth alone probably does it. All the focus on tag prices and ability to pay, yada yada, won’t turn out to be any kind of solution in the long run except to 1st push tags to the richest non residents before even those numbers get cut, then pushing to the richest residents. So the focus on maintaining affordability as a paradigm
is or should be a mutual lifelong struggle. Doesn’t mean that my chances annually draw an affordable tag need to stay high or go up. I accept that part of the equation will worsen over time but wish it to happen fairly and not a a result of wealth.
 
Ok, lets say tag prices double for nonres. Like everyone on Earth agrees.....every tag will be sold. Doubling the nonres tags means the WG&F's license sales revenue for managing wildlife and habitat improvement projects will close to double.

Do you really think that if the WG&F revenue is doubled that it will be a simple process to cut that revenue in 1/2 with 90/10?

We should take a poll on how many nonres would drop out of applying in Wyo if it takes twice as long for nonres to draw tags with 90/10 plus 2x the price of tags both added into the equation.

Lets take it to the next level and go 90/5/5! How many nonres will drop out with 90/5/5 plus double the price of tags? I don't see this ever happening!

I'm certain a lot of nonres will continue to apply with the increase in tag prices but will drop out with both 90/10 plus paying double the license fees. How many nonres sons won't apply their kids for tags if this happens? Over time this will be significant revenue loss to the WG&F.

Big question....are Wyo res willing to flip the bill for revenue losses?
If they switch to 90/10 or 90/5/5 I think a lot of people will burn their points and drop out. It isn't about the price of the tag but the cost of acquiring points and the slim odds of ever getting a tag. For me personally at 57 years old I would burn my points and quit. With the current ratios of 84/16 and 80/20 it is taking about 10+ years to draw an above average unit. If the available tags are cut in half or more then the points to draw will increase exponentially. I would never realistically draw a tag again in my lifetime. Also, many units may not even have a tag available. Also, at a yearly cost to apply and purchase a point at $99/elk, $73/deer, and $62/antelope I don't think it is financially reasonable for guys over 40 to apply as they would likely never be guaranteed to draw with points in an above average unit.
 
A very middle of the road assessment, probably where more people should dwell. Nothing super special about NR as a monolith. Made up of individuals. Some better, some worse. But not the enemy, and not saying you ever said they were but some people make it seem almost so. Basically, we’d all be better off if hunting on balance stays more rather than less affordable to “average” American and if R and NR maintain basic respect for each other’s differences while joining forces on mutual interests which are overwhelming. The biggest impediment, it seems, is that tag availability for either group is likely to tighten with every passing year and many individuals of either residency persuasion simply will fight to the last, rather than everyone take a shrug and accept the the pie probably gets cut into slightly smaller individual peices no matter what scenario is contemplated. Maybe on different timelines for R vs NR but still. Population growth alone probably does it. All the focus on tag prices and ability to pay, yada yada, won’t turn out to be any kind of solution in the long run except to 1st push tags to the richest non residents before even those numbers get cut, then pushing to the richest residents. So the focus on maintaining affordability as a paradigm
is or should be a mutual lifelong struggle. Doesn’t mean that my chances annually draw an affordable tag need to stay high or go up. I accept that part of the equation will worsen over time but wish it to happen fairly and not a a result of wealth.
If NR hunting gets too expensive for me I'll concentrate on hunting the state I live in. What I won't do is whine about it.

I've never understood the way NR hunters b itch and complain about tag prices.

Don't like it, hunt your own state more where it's dirt cheap.

If you look back over time, current NR tag prices, are not out of line when considering inflation. Yet the whining is non stop.

Skiing costs more, movies cost more, homes cost more, rifles, clothing, yada yada...why is there an unrealistic expectation that a NR license should remain at 1970 pricing?
 
When the average person can no longer afford to hunt all hunting will be lost at the ballet box within a generation.
“When the average (resident) person can no longer afford….”

There I fixed it for you. If you’ve got the money to run around to a dozen other states you can afford higher tag fees. It’s never been a “right” to hunt in any other state than your own, it’s a privilege. The 90/10 switch and increased fees is to increase resident opportunity. This will lead to INCREASED amounts of new hunters in each state that it occurs as the hunters going out of state are very likely existing hunters and not new ones.
 
I don't think everyone is whining and complaining. I think we are just discussing the topic at hand because we are bored after the big game seasons have closed and before the drawing season gets here and we need something to talk about. It happens every year - LOL
 
I don't think everyone is whining and complaining. I think we are just discussing the topic at hand because we are bored after the big game seasons have closed and before the drawing season gets here and we need something to talk about. It happens every year - LOL
Maybe time to whine about another State's tag fees, license allocations, etc. which never even remotely reaches the pitch of NR complaining about WY.

I wonder why any NR would hunt here.
 
"Even at $2k a pop, every single special priced NR full priced elk tag will sell."

I totally agree with Buzz on this one. Every one of these Special tags will still sell and the state will continue to make more money off the NR. This will NOT reduce demand. Maybe the demand will reduce for the special tags but in return the demand will go up in the regular draw. The number of total applicants will continue to rise.

I also think the outfitters will support this increase in the price of the Special tags. After all, the average guided hunter is likely to be a little wealthier and the few extra dollars for the increased cost of the special tag are minuscule compared to what they would be spending on the guided hunt. In fact this would actually help the outfitters to possibly cut out some of the competition of hunters who can't "afford" much extra costs on their hunts and their clients would be able to draw more frequently.

I agree with what many have stated already. The state of Wyoming can do whatever it wants and us NR's really have no say other than to play along or not play along. There are many options out there where NR's can spend their money.

On a side note as food for thought, Wyoming's Special tags are already some of the most expensive tags for E/D/A. I did a real quick spread sheet looking at 8 different states including WY. In my comparison, I compared the cost of each states tag along with all the "other" costs required to apply for the tag (base hunting license, application fees, credit card fees, etc). In this comparison, I assumed that if someone was to apply for all three species and split the cost of any prerequisite licenses among the three species. I also assumed the cost of the the most expensive tags in each state (New Mexico's Q/HD tags, WY special tags, etc). In this comparison WY is the most expensive for Elk and the most expensive for antelope! Wyoming's special deer tag is the third most expensive. When looking at costs to "apply" and costs to "build a point", Wyoming's special elk is the most expensive, the special deer is second most expensive and the special antelope is 4th most expensive. Overall the cost of applying and building points for all three species together puts Wyoming at #2.

Obviously the proposed increase would put WY way out in the lead in all four categories by a significant margin. If this happens we can see other states jumping on the bandwagon and raising their prices.

I will try to upload a copy of the spreadsheet.
Nice spreadsheet. Need to add the big 3 and money out for the draw.
 
Maybe time to whine about another State's tag fees, license allocations, etc. which never even remotely reaches the pitch of NR complaining about WY.

I wonder why any NR would hunt here.
Like I said, I don't think many of us are "whining". Just discussing an issue. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Why do people discussing an issue automatically mean we are whining/complaining? The AZ forum was flooded with discussion when they changed their tag allocation a few years back. the NM forum was flooded with discussion back when they changed their tag allocations a few years back as well. It's not just a WY thing.

I have been on 3 elk hunts, 2 deer hunts, and one antelope hunt in WY. Passed on some good bulls/bucks and ate my tag on a couple of those hunts holding out for a trophy but had a GREAT time in some beautiful country on every one of those hunts - that is why I hunt there! I have also met a few great WY residents that have been extremely helpful with information on those hunts.
 
Didn’t think I was whining Buzz. Even if ppl were, why are you always so angry? You do good stuff and ppl thank you, including me, and I have forva long time whether you know it or not. Have messages from your old self printed out 13 years later where you were super nice and helpful. but now always seem so angry. Lay off the coffee, life is good!
 
Didn’t think I was whining Buzz. Even if ppl were, why are you always so angry? You do good stuff and ppl thank you, including me, and I have forva long time whether you know it or not. Have messages from your old self printed out 13 years later where you were super nice and helpful. but now always seem so angry. Lay off the coffee, life is good!
Maybe its because in the past, NR's were actually happy to have the opportunity to apply and maybe draw a tag in Wyoming.

Somewhere along the way it turned to NR entitlement when it comes to Wyoming, more so than ANY other state. What I hear from NR's is we're going to sue, we're getting screwed, Residents have it too good, etc. etc. that's what NR's now talk about.

Gets old...

For the record, I'm still going to oppose this bill for a few reasons:

1. The Department is not strapped financially.
2. Its an outfitter bill to make odds better for their clients.
3. It's inconsistent with the NAM.

That said, when a specific need arises for more funding to the department, it has to be made up somewhere.

If anyone is going to be priced out, I won't apologize to anyone that it's going to be NR's. It's important for EVERY state to keep hunting affordable to their Residents for recruitment, tradition, etc.

NR hunting is a luxury and luxury items should cost more.
 
Last edited:
Add up the costs for what nonres pay if they want to just apply for sheep + moose + elk + deer + antelope pref pts. The fees nonres pay each and every year just for pref pts (and don’t even hunt) is as much or more than what Wyo res pay for their actual hunting licenses.

Currently it’s $390/year + app charges for nonres to apply for pref pts for all of these species. $390 x 10 years and that’s almost $4,000 tossed to the wind just to apply every 10 years! Wyo res pay $14/year x10 years = $140.

You can quickly see where every nonres that is lost paying for pref pts is a major loss in easy revenue to the WG&F. The combination of an increase in nonres fees plus 90/10 for E/D/A is an even bigger long-term loser!


Now let’s add on the price of the actual nonres license once tags are drawn. And while you are at it why not double the current nonresident price for tags. Oh, and that’s not it….let’s cut nonres opportunity in 1/2 with 90/10…or even further with 90-5-5……. seriously?

How about adding up the total amount of $ revenue that has been donated to the WG&F over the past 20+ years in nonresident pref pt fees for elk + deer + antelope. It’s pretty revealing who is supporting Wyoming big game management.

How much in the form of E/D/A pref pts revenue have Wyo residents contributed over the past 20 years…..not a dime!

It isn’t a matter of entitlement it’s a matter of respect to those that support 70%+ of the WG&F license and pref pt budget!

I also don’t think it’s whining, it’s the concern over where hunting is headed in Wyoming! Is Wyo headed towards a scenario where only the wealthy nonres can hunt?

Heck yes, nonres…especially OYO/DIY hunters have all the reason in the world to be concerned and ask a few tough questions on where the future of hunting is headed in Wyoming!
 
Last edited:
Add up the costs for what nonres pay if they want to just apply for sheep + moose + elk + deer + antelope pref pts. The fees nonres pay each and every year just for pref pts (and don’t even hunt) is as much or more than what Wyo res pay for their actual hunting licenses.

Currently it’s $390/year + app charges for nonres to apply for pref pts for all of these species. $390 x 10 years and that’s almost $4,000 tossed to the wind just to apply every 10 years! Wyo res pay $14/year x10 years = $140.

You can quickly see where every nonres that is lost paying for pref pts is a major loss in easy revenue to the WG&F. The combination of an increase in nonres fees plus 90/10 for E/D/A is an even bigger long-term loser!


Now let’s add on the price of the actual nonres license once tags are drawn. And while you are at it why not double the current nonresident price for tags. Oh, and that’s not it….let’s cut nonres opportunity in 1/2 with 90/10…or even further with 90-5-5……. seriously?

How about adding up the total amount of $ revenue that has been donated to the WG&F over the past 20+ years in nonresident pref pt fees for elk + deer + antelope. It’s pretty revealing who is supporting Wyoming big game management.

How much in the form of E/D/A pref pts revenue have Wyo residents contributed over the past 20 years…..not a dime!

It isn’t a matter of entitlement it’s a matter of respect to those that support 70%+ of the WG&F license and pref pt budget!

I also don’t think it’s whining, it’s the concern over where hunting is headed in Wyoming! Is Wyo headed towards a scenario where only the wealthy nonres can hunt?

Heck yes, nonres…especially OYO/DIY hunters have all the reason in the world to be concerned and ask a few tough questions on where the future of hunting is headed in Wyoming!

If you can afford to invest $4000-$7000 over 10-20 years for the opportunity to hunt Wyoming you should be able to afford $1258 for a elk license or $3000 for a sheep tag. If you can't then maybe you should reconsider your personal finance situation and decision making.
 
If you can afford to invest $4000-$7000 over 10-20 years for the opportunity to hunt Wyoming you should be able to afford $1258 for a elk license or $3000 for a sheep tag. If you can't then maybe you should reconsider your personal finance situation and decision making.
Other than the fact that these economic insults are beginning to come across as “whining” and not just a little bit envious of the economic prowess of apparently every nonresident in your view, one problem with your logic is that in addition to paying for those “opportunities” over 10 to 20 years (!!!) Wyoming isn’t making the saved up for $3000 sheep tag available for most NR who waited. And was lately considering making the elk tags disappear too. You don’t see the issue? Steal the money if you are cool with that but don’t be surprised it’s not appreciated that you do. Finally, maybe its the Wyoming residents, or maybe just you that need to seek financial advice. NR seem to be doing just fine by your logic.
 
Last edited:
Wyoming isn’t making the saved up for $3000 sheep tag available for most NR who waited.
Super debatable Katoom. The changes will actually give a chance to most NRs who waited, who never had a chance in the PP system. There are about 200 people who can legitimately say they are harmed by the change. That's the total pool of harmed folks. The other 12,000 NRs who apply for sheep are benefited.
 
Add up the costs for what nonres pay if they want to just apply for sheep + moose + elk + deer + antelope pref pts. The fees nonres pay each and every year just for pref pts (and don’t even hunt) is as much or more than what Wyo res pay for their actual hunting licenses.

Currently it’s $390/year + app charges for nonres to apply for pref pts for all of these species. $390 x 10 years and that’s almost $4,000 tossed to the wind just to apply every 10 years! Wyo res pay $14/year x10 years = $140.

You can quickly see where every nonres that is lost paying for pref pts is a major loss in easy revenue to the WG&F. The combination of an increase in nonres fees plus 90/10 for E/D/A is an even bigger long-term loser!


Now let’s add on the price of the actual nonres license once tags are drawn. And while you are at it why not double the current nonresident price for tags. Oh, and that’s not it….let’s cut nonres opportunity in 1/2 with 90/10…or even further with 90-5-5……. seriously?

How about adding up the total amount of $ revenue that has been donated to the WG&F over the past 20+ years in nonresident pref pt fees for elk + deer + antelope. It’s pretty revealing who is supporting Wyoming big game management.

How much in the form of E/D/A pref pts revenue have Wyo residents contributed over the past 20 years…..not a dime!

It isn’t a matter of entitlement it’s a matter of respect to those that support 70%+ of the WG&F license and pref pt budget!

I also don’t think it’s whining, it’s the concern over where hunting is headed in Wyoming! Is Wyo headed towards a scenario where only the wealthy nonres can hunt?

Heck yes, nonres…especially OYO/DIY hunters have all the reason in the world to be concerned and ask a few tough questions on where the future of hunting is headed in Wyoming!
No, it's entitlement for sure. Every time you post your same broken record sob story, it makes it easier and easier for myself and other residents to move to higher NR fees and push 90-10.

Demand for Wyoming hunting is not going to decline, just a fact.

We could reduce NR allocation to 10%, double license fees and never miss a beat.

We could also continue to allow NRs to apply in the leftover draw and purchase anything left after that, like we do now, and significantly increase revenue.

Win-win-win.
 
Super debatable Katoom. The changes will actually give a chance to most NRs who waited, who never had a chance in the PP system. There are about 200 people who can legitimately say they are harmed by the change. That's the total pool of harmed folks. The other 12,000 NRs who apply for sheep are benefited.
How about all of the residents harmed?
 
No, it's entitlement for sure.
I agree. It is definitely an entitlement attitude, but it is 100% coming from both sides, resident and non-resident. They are the state's elk so you should be entitled to them, but the non-residents pay the majority of the bills so they also should be entitled to them. That's why there is 60/40 or 80/20 or 90/10 or 95/5 to begin with, it is just a discussion from all parties. Buzz you have said previously that you would fight for the non-residents as they are paying the bills and it would not be fair to them. I understand things change and opinions change, but moving to 90/10 changes residents odds slightly and it makes a huge difference for non-residents. States are welcome to change allocation, but it shouldn't be without a debate from all constituents. Why shouldn't the group that pays the majority have some sort of voice? You make it seem like non-residents are a 2nd class citizen or a nuisance.

I have said it before, but you and others won't answer. Why not just go 100/0 then?
 
I agree. It is definitely an entitlement attitude, but it is 100% coming from both sides, resident and non-resident. They are the state's elk so you should be entitled to them, but the non-residents pay the majority of the bills so they also should be entitled to them. That's why there is 60/40 or 80/20 or 90/10 or 95/5 to begin with, it is just a discussion from all parties. Buzz you have said previously that you would fight for the non-residents as they are paying the bills and it would not be fair to them. I understand things change and opinions change, but moving to 90/10 changes residents odds slightly and it makes a huge difference for non-residents. States are welcome to change allocation, but it shouldn't be without a debate from all constituents. Why shouldn't the group that pays the majority have some sort of voice? You make it seem like non-residents are a 2nd class citizen or a nuisance.

I have said it before, but you and others won't answer. Why not just go 100/0 then?
NR have every right to participate in public comment and you're foolish to claim otherwise.

As far as Buzz fighting for NR: Buzz led the effort to kill outfitter set-asides, just to name one time he's fought for you.
 
I agree. It is definitely an entitlement attitude, but it is 100% coming from both sides, resident and non-resident. They are the state's elk so you should be entitled to them, but the non-residents pay the majority of the bills so they also should be entitled to them. That's why there is 60/40 or 80/20 or 90/10 or 95/5 to begin with, it is just a discussion from all parties. Buzz you have said previously that you would fight for the non-residents as they are paying the bills and it would not be fair to them. I understand things change and opinions change, but moving to 90/10 changes residents odds slightly and it makes a huge difference for non-residents. States are welcome to change allocation, but it shouldn't be without a debate from all constituents. Why shouldn't the group that pays the majority have some sort of voice? You make it seem like non-residents are a 2nd class citizen or a nuisance.

I have said it before, but you and others won't answer. Why not just go 100/0 then?
Resident demand for quality tags is increasing, there's only way to fill that demand and that is keeping more of the tags for Residents.

The reason for NOT going 100-0 through my lens, is that 90% is an "industry standard" (for lack of a better word) across most of the West. I think its appropriate for Wyoming Residents to be treated the same.

There are specific cases where I would fully support 100-0 and that is for very high demand tags like the big-5. Think ND moose as an example.

But again, from just a fairness issue, and because MOST other states offer at least some of their more scarce tags to NR hunters. it makes sense to allow 10% of them for NR hunters.
 
NR have every right to participate in public comment and you're foolish to claim otherwise.

As far as Buzz fighting for NR: Buzz led the effort to kill outfitter set-asides, just to name one time he's fought for you.
I'm writing a WYBHA position statement on HB200 today to oppose it...but I hate NR's and do nothing for them.

It was also JM77 and I that pretty well swatted the 60-40 bills that the outfitters tried running 3 times.

I was approached by the outfitter lobby if I would be willing to go 50-50 special/regular....I said, "I'd be willing to go 20 special 80 regular".

Bill died.
 
I've seen a few of the same guys on this very site that are in favor of 90/10 and had every opportunity to make a deal this last year in order to get that 90% but the same fellas would not throw the diy nr under the bus for them to only get 5% to do it. I'd like to see that from any other western states resident hunters and the same guys only catch chit on here. If you nr's that live in other western states start doing the same I'll listen to your opinions a little closer
 
The favor is not being returned and the patients are wearing thin between the guys that actually give a chit
 
I have asked this before and have not been answered. Why do residents (in most states) not pay more for limited (premium) tags?
 
I have asked this before and have not been answered. Why do residents (in most states) not pay more for limited (premium) tags?
We don't?

Are you saying that, take Ut as an example, our LE elk tags are the same price as a spike tag??? Not so!

Zeke
 
If my understanding of the bill text and math is correct these would be the new NR tag prices upon passage of the bill;

694B0362-E96B-44E8-8A23-3FDB83DD5B26.jpeg
 
The R vs NR debate will always continue because as a resident in whatever state each of us lives in, that is really the only legislative group that will listen to us.

I apply in 10 different states as the majority of those on this website are probably in similar situations. We are NR's 90% of the time. So as each state continues to raise the disparity between R and NR pricing for application fees and tag prices, we all end up paying higher prices 9 out of 10 times. The more each of us individually pushes the cost to NR's for our OWN state the more each of us collectively pays as a whole.

Yes I'm sure there are a few on here that only hunt in their home state but I'm guessing that is the exception rather than the norm. After all, we probably found this website while researching other opportunities outside of our norm.
 
The R vs NR debate will always continue because as a resident in whatever state each of us lives in, that is really the only legislative group that will listen to us.

I apply in 10 different states as the majority of those on this website are probably in similar situations. We are NR's 90% of the time. So as each state continues to raise the disparity between R and NR pricing for application fees and tag prices, we all end up paying higher prices 9 out of 10 times. The more each of us individually pushes the cost to NR's for our OWN state the more each of us collectively pays as a whole.

Yes I'm sure there are a few on here that only hunt in their home state but I'm guessing that is the exception rather than the norm. After all, we probably found this website while researching other opportunities outside of our norm.
Hunting "out of State" is certainly the norm on this site (or at least applying to hunt out of State) but I'd bet the vast majority of hunters are content to hunt their home State and take what opportunities are present there.

This site is made up of relatively hard-core hunters.

Zeke
 
The R vs NR debate will always continue because as a resident in whatever state each of us lives in, that is really the only legislative group that will listen to us.

I apply in 10 different states as the majority of those on this website are probably in similar situations. We are NR's 90% of the time. So as each state continues to raise the disparity between R and NR pricing for application fees and tag prices, we all end up paying higher prices 9 out of 10 times. The more each of us individually pushes the cost to NR's for our OWN state the more each of us collectively pays as a whole.

Yes I'm sure there are a few on here that only hunt in their home state but I'm guessing that is the exception rather than the norm. After all, we probably found this website while researching other opportunities outside of our norm.
I fully expect to pay more as a NR...and never have had a problem with it.

I also agree with Zeke, I believe a vast majority of hunters only hunt the state they live in.

I never hunted outside Montana, my resident state, until 1995. My Dad never hunted outside Montana until 2002. My Grandfather NEVER hunted outside Montana (except when he hunted roe deer while busy liberating concentration camps in Europe during WWII, (the NR fees he paid were quite high) his entire life.

This multi-state application splashing is a rather new concept...and it should significantly higher priced.
 
I'm writing a WYBHA position statement on HB200 today to oppose it...but I hate NR's and do nothing for them.

It was also JM77 and I that pretty well swatted the 60-40 bills that the outfitters tried running 3 times.

I was approached by the outfitter lobby if I would be willing to go 50-50 special/regular....I said, "I'd be willing to go 20 special 80 regular".

Bill died.
And many non-residents thanked you all, me included. My point was DIY-NR have almost no voice, our only voice are people like you and to some extent outfitters, it is just a bit messed up that both groups easily could turn on Non-res diy and non-res diy do more to fund the G&F than any other group. We saw what happened in New Mexico and don't want Colorado and Wyoming to turn into that shitshow.
 
NR have every right to participate in public comment and you're foolish to claim otherwise.

As far as Buzz fighting for NR: Buzz led the effort to kill outfitter set-asides, just to name one time he's fought for you.
And I comment all the time. My point was we don't have any seat at any table, like the task forces. You would think there would be a seat and a voice from the people that pay the majority of the bills.

I have thanked him and others multiple times. Non-res are on a knifes edge, we have Buzz and outfitters looking out for us, just seems crazy to me.
 
And I comment all the time. My point was we don't have any seat at any table, like the task forces. You would think there would be a seat and a voice from the people that pay the majority of the bills.

I have thanked him and others multiple times. Non-res are on a knifes edge, we have Buzz and outfitters looking out for us, just seems crazy to me.
Not sure where you're from, but I doubt I have a seat or a voice with your legislature or GF Department on decision making.
 
Super debatable Katoom. The changes will actually give a chance to most NRs who waited, who never had a chance in the PP system. There are about 200 people who can legitimately say they are harmed by the change. That's the total pool of harmed folks. The other 12,000 NRs who apply for sheep are benefited.
Got me there. I really wasn't thinking about bonus vs preference in that, more the quota and whats personal to me is what "could" happen with e/d/a. I am already out permanently for big three and let my points there die a few years back. But I'd probably just say kill the points altogether for those species and just make whatever tags are available random. Points of any kind make almost no sense when so few tags are available to begin with.
 
To the residents opposing the increase for the right reasons, thank you. I personally have to plan and do a few side jobs to pay for hunts & tags but I don't mind that. I would pay double if I had to and just work a bit more/harder to make it happen. Fair market price is what it is but I would sure love to see the additional money really put to work to improve access, habitat, increased law enforcement or anything that would improve management in the state really.
 
Super debatable Katoom. The changes will actually give a chance to most NRs who waited, who never had a chance in the PP system. There are about 200 people who can legitimately say they are harmed by the change. That's the total pool of harmed folks. The other 12,000 NRs who apply for sheep are benefited.
Again, this isn't accurate Mike. Many non-resident hunters could have drawn if they applied for anything other than the best couple areas in the state. I am nowhere near max but have been within a 1/2 - 1 point of drawing in several of the last 10 years. I don't want a 38-1 bull moose tag... There are a lot more than 200 people potentially being hurt. Now maybe if I contribute a few more years I can draw that less desirable tag with BP? I plan to try.
 
Again, this isn't accurate Mike. Many non-resident hunters could have drawn if they applied for anything other than the best couple areas in the state. I am nowhere near max but have been within a 1/2 - 1 point of drawing in several of the last 10 years. I don't want a 38-1 bull moose tag... There are a lot more than 200 people potentially being hurt. Now maybe if I contribute a few more years I can draw that less desirable tag with BP? I plan to try.
I was responding to Katoom who stated sheep. So the comment was specific to sheep, and I promise it's accurate!

(Look at the sheep draws for NR- there is little difference between units)

Moose is less homogeneous to your point, so there are certainly a few hundred more folks who are harmed- I agree.
 
Hmm- can't see that on Legiscan unless it just barely happened?

The last status I see is a hearing tomorrow at 7AM...
 

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom