Very Active Member
Time will tell. We can revisit this in the future, but I just don't see how in the world there would not be a significant decrease in revenue. To say no revenue lost is just and blatant lie. Maybe it is $1 million, maybe more.How would pronghorn licenses decrease? They wouldnt...all it would be is a shift in WHERE residents and non residents would hunt.
That means no revenue lost.
Hasn't resident demand for pronghorn tags been increasing? You used to be able to get decent tags as a 2nd choice, not anymore for non-residents. I just don't see how if you cut 50% of the non-resident tags in units that take points to draw that you don't lose a significant amount of revenue. Residents want good units as well, I doubt as many are like you that are taking any unit they can get as a 2nd choice which in your scenario is a trade with non-residents for the better units. There will be a loss of revenue between $1-$5 million, it just is what it is. Maybe not a big deal and worth it. Everyone is drinking the kool-aid if you think by cutting non-resident tags in half that revenue is neutral. If so, why not just cut it to 0%? Non-res can only get general elk, general deer and 2nd choice antelope. Is revenue still the same?