WY TASK FORCE PODCAST

Horniac

Horniac

Very Active Member
Messages
1,322
Good podcast from Huntin’ Fool on the 90/10 and the other issues before the task force featuring some of the major players.

podcasts.apple.com

Built To Hunt by Huntin' Fool on Apple Podcasts

Sports · 2024
podcasts.apple.com


“The WY Wildlife Task Force is tackling some of the most contentious issues facing hunters in Wyoming. Learn more about the 90/10 split in Wyoming and other new regulations being proposed in the state that will affect all applicants. Make comments on the current initiatives at the WY Wildlife Task Force Website. Director Brian Nesvik - WGFD Director
Sy Gilliland - WYOGA President
Joshua W.D. Coursey - Muley Fanatic Foundation President”
 
jm77 said:
Oh boy, lots of goodies( and gimmies) in this podcast!
Click to expand...
If I understood Director Nesvik correctly, the Task Force has also asked the legislature to craft a bill to change Moose and Sheep preference points to squared bonus points for both Residents and Nonresidents and it could possibly be implemented next year?

Horniac
 
Horniac said:
If I understood Director Nesvik correctly, the Task Force has also asked the legislature to craft a bill to change Moose and Sheep preference points to squared bonus points for both Residents and Nonresidents and it could possibly be implemented next year?

Horniac
Click to expand...
That’s what it sounded like !
 
Horniac said:
If I understood Director Nesvik correctly, the Task Force has also asked the legislature to craft a bill to change Moose and Sheep preference points to squared bonus points for both Residents and Nonresidents and it could possibly be implemented next year?

Horniac
Click to expand...
He said it will be discussed during the interim meetings. That means they will be explaining (or trying to explain ) it to legislators in the joint TRW Committee, looking for some kind of draft bill.

That should be interesting.
 
Thanks for the clarification jm77.

I didn’t think the residents were in favor of making the change from preference points to bonus points?

I understand the reasoning on making the change on the NR side in hopes of trying to stop the possible revenue hemorrhage from the loss of preference point sales…

Horniac
 
marburg said:
Can't give up that sweet, sweet, preference point money. Selling an intangible object that costs nobody anything to make for hundreds is good business if you can get it
Click to expand...
Are you saying there’s no associated costs for having a points system?

You should stick to shooting high fenced whitetails
 
I agree that there was some good info there…. But was it just me, or did the conversation take a pretty drastic shift once Nesvik left the conversation? Outfitter agenda definitely seemed to steer the conversation from that point on. Honestly, a bit surprising their planned proposal hasn’t received more attention. Pretty concerning, in my opinion, but maybe I’m missing something?
 
Curious to see what percentage tags is proposed to go to the outfitter draw for deer and elk , I believe it comes right off the top of NR allocation
 
Yeah, same here. I’m a resident, and still not a fan of having a outfitter draw regardless of percentage coming off the top of NR allocation. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-outfitter, but not a fan of welfare, regardless of the beneficiary. I did notice that they conveniently forgot to mention the wilderness rule, when mentioning that WY doesn’t do anything to support the outfitter industry. Honestly, I guess it soured me a bit the way that they pitched their proposal, seemingly lacking complete transparency.
 
And considering and draw system similar to NV ? , squaring points ? Is that what I heard , for everything or just the big 5 ??? I’ll have to go back and listen closer , I’m a NR and I’m watching my chances of going on a good hunt dwindle , I’m all about conservation but they should tread lightly because almost 80 % of the license revenue comes from NR , if your giving people dang near zero for odds of hunting the great state of Wyoming, people could very well pull out , just my opinion , they make it clear that NR aren’t represented at these task force meeting , they basically state that our thoughts are highly considered ,gee thanks lol. No actual representation is what it sounded like to me,
 
KickrBuk said:
I’m a NR and I’m watching my chances of going on a good hunt dwindle , I’m all about conservation but they should tread lightly because almost 80 % of the license revenue comes from NR , if your giving people dang near zero for odds of hunting the great state of Wyoming, people could very well pull out , just my opinion ,
Click to expand...
How about that, somebody new saying the same old thing.:rolleyes:
 
Yes, the conversation took a drastic turn once WGFD representative, Mr. Nesvik left the conversation. Why didn’t Huntin Fool call out the outfitters about the Wilderness Law in Wyoming? They act concerned about non-resident opportunities but they don’t want to address the elephant in the room on the wilderness law? It was like listening to really bad biased news media and I found it strange, until I dug a little deeper…

Logan, the guy that conducted the podcast and is employed with Huntin Fool, is also a board member of the outfitter-driven wyoming range mule deer association thats main objective is to limit resident opportunity on the Wyoming range? No wonder why he didn’t mention the wilderness law.

Wait, there’s more, Logan is the landowner tag specialist for Huntin Fool? So his job is to connect hunters with landowners that provide tags for sale. Meanwhile, this task force is exploring implementing landowner tags in Wyoming

When you are part of an entity that is supposedly “about the welfare of the deer”, but your cash flow comes from guided hunts, and landowner tags…I’m pretty sure he knows what side his bread is buttered.

I’m not anti non-resident. I wish they could hunt our wilderness without opening their wallet and holding hands. I’m not anti-outfitter, use an outfitter if you want, but don’t create laws that make me have to use one.
 
grosventrehunter said:
Totally against outfitter sponsored tags and totally against outfitters on public land. They give nothing so they should get nothing.
Click to expand...
Right there with you on outfitter sponsored tags. On the point about outfitters on public land, would you opinion change if they had to pay a royalty to on every hunt that took place on public land? Say 20% of hunt price?
 
mulecreek said:
Right there with you on outfitter sponsored tags. On the point about outfitters on public land, would you opinion change if they had to pay a royalty to on every hunt that took place on public land? Say 20% of hunt price?
Click to expand...
They probably just raise their prices.
 
jm77 said:
How about that, somebody new saying the same old thing.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I know what you mean , but it’s not like I’m stating some bogus BS , it pretty dang clear what the intentions are , and I’m not sure if it’s in the state of Wyoming’ s best intererest. I know broken record right, but all in all definitely interesting info being presented
 
BBB said:
Logan, the guy that conducted the podcast and is employed with Huntin Fool, is also a board member of the outfitter-driven wyoming range mule deer association thats main objective is to limit resident opportunity on the Wyoming range? No wonder why he didn’t mention the wilderness law.
Click to expand...
This "new" Wyoming Range group has one thing in mind: thinning out hunters in G & H. When the hard questions started flying, they ran for cover. @Tre heiner totally dodging questions now.

Prove me wrong...
 
Look at any of the magazines. 90 plus percent of their photos are of guided hunts. None of them are really for the DIY hunter.
If someone knows one that is, I would like to know.
 
jm77 said:
This "new" Wyoming Range group has one thing in mind: thinning out hunters in G & H. When the hard questions started flying, they ran for cover. @Tre heiner totally dodging questions now.

Prove me wrong...
Click to expand...
I emailed Brad my thoughts on the groups main issues along with a few questions over a month ago. Never received a response. Their latest presentation info only proves the point that resident regions would do little if anything to change hunter distribution.
 
SS! said:
What does that have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

Bucknut​

Member​

Yeah, same here. I’m a resident, and still not a fan of having a outfitter draw regardless of percentage coming off the top of NR allocation. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-outfitter, but not a fan of welfare, regardless of the beneficiary. I did notice that they conveniently forgot to mention the wilderness rule, when mentioning that WY doesn’t do anything to support the outfitter industry. Honestly, I guess it soured me a bit the way that they pitched their proposal, seemingly lacking complete transparency.
 
For my fellow residents, don’t view the wilderness rule as just outfitter welfare. It’s a pretty nice perk for the the diy resident hunter wanting to hunt wilderness areas. Get rid of it and there will be a lot more rigs at the trailheads.

We are not the only state that has special hunting privileges for residents.
 
ralphie said:
For my fellow residents, don’t view the wilderness rule as just outfitter welfare. It’s a pretty nice perk for the the diy resident hunter wanting to hunt wilderness areas. Get rid of it and there will be a lot more rigs at the trailheads.

We are not the only state that has special hunting privileges for residents.
Click to expand...
There may be more rigs at the wilderness area trailheads but there would be a corresponding reduction of rigs at the non-wilderness area trailheads.
 
mulecreek said:
There may be more rigs at the wilderness area trailheads but there would be a corresponding reduction of rigs at the non-wilderness area trailheads.
Click to expand...
Wait wait wait so you’re saying if we opened up wilderness areas to non residents this might spread people out? And possibly alleviate some of the crowding issues people complain about? And without reducing allocation?

SOMEONE GET THIS GUY A TASK FORCE
 
mulecreek said:
Right there with you on outfitter sponsored tags. On the point about outfitters on public land, would you opinion change if they had to pay a royalty to on every hunt that took place on public land? Say 20% of hunt price?
Click to expand...
They do have to pay to hunt on national forest
 
grosventrehunter said:
It's a minimal fee at best. Much like grazing allotments for ranchers.
Click to expand...
I work at a coal mine that operates on some public land. We pay a small rental fee to occupy the land but then we pay a far more substantial royalty fee for the actual removal and sale of coal. This money is used for a lot of beneficial things in the State and country, like building schools. I was thinking something along those lines but with a wildlife angle.
 
Hilarious that the answer to the outfitter draw was basically Wyoming owns the resource and so they should decide to use it to bring 6.5 times the economic value too…. Us the outfitters?. When does any state favor one resident over another resident with resources owned by ALL residents?
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

20231013_150940.jpg
IMG_8098.jpeg
Screenshot_20200715-220420_Facebook.jpg
IMG_5310.JPG
PXL_20201107_212932149.jpg
fullsizeoutput_3fb6.jpeg
unnamed (3).jpg
fullsizeoutput_3fb8.jpeg
3E047CC2-F7C6-4FAC-916F-568ED4AE6968.jpeg
IMG_6726.JPG
Trashy Buck
Buck.jpg

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