Wyoming propose to eliminate cap on general nonresident elk tags!

[fullthrottle]

Wyoming proposes to eliminate cap on general elk licenses and force nonresidents to apply for certain general elk region. I think this is a great idea, and a win for the residents & nonresidents alike. Good job Wyoming.

 

[HikeHunt61]

Where can one read the proposal? Thx...

 

[fullthrottle]

Wyoming fish Game website https://wgfd.wyo.gov/Get-Involved/T...AP&utm_content=TASKFORCEELKCAP_PUB_120722game website.

 

[Bookhead]

Wyoming fish Game website https://wgfd.wyo.gov/Get-Involved/T...AP&utm_content=TASKFORCEELKCAP_PUB_120722game website.

How's it a win win they aren't reducing pressure anywhere for anyone. Will be the same as it is now

 

[Bookhead]

I don't think you'll be singing the same tune when it takes as many points to draw certain general regions as a non resident as some of the limited quota areas cause that's about to happen if they decide to go through with it

 

[HikeHunt61]

Ya- it might cause some regions to be harder to draw than before, some easier.

I've kinda always wondered how they manage local populations with the broad general tags. Of course, that is a bigger issue with residents than nonresidents- so this change doesn't address that. Wonder exactly what it is trying to address?

 

[DaveD]

Wyoming proposes to eliminate cap on general elk licenses and force nonresidents to apply for certain general elk region. I think this is a great idea, and a win for the residents & nonresidents alike. Good job Wyoming.

Keep in mind, this is also a removal of the guaranteed number of tags issued. In other words WG&F will have the ability to issue fewer than 7250 elk tags if they see a need in the future. As bookhead points out above, they are essentially going to an all LQ elk system for non-residents. Expect points to go up in many areas.

 

[DaveD]

Ya- it might cause some regions to be harder to draw than before, some easier.

I've kinda always wondered how they manage local populations with the broad general tags. Of course, that is a bigger issue with residents than nonresidents- so this change doesn't address that. Wonder exactly what it is trying to address?

What I have heard is they are hoping to spread out pressure and place more hunters in areas where they need more harvest. The problem is more hunters seldom equates to more dead elk. I also think the end game is to remove the 7250 cap/minimum so they are free to issue the numbers they want on a year to year basis.

 

[HikeHunt61]

Got the second- but the first is more of a resident issue than nonresident considering the number of hunters. Hmmm...

 

[BuzzH]

If the cap is removed, Residents are getting 90-10 for LQ elk...no 2 ways about it.

I think the cap is going to stay in place, read the comments. Not many in favor of removing the cap.

 

[fullthrottle]

Personally, I like it.

The entire state is already limited quota for nonresidents, so that doesn't change anything.

I like that it gives more visibility as to where hunters are hunting, potentially could help with management. Although as stated resident hunters still have run of the state, so...

Some areas may get more difficult to draw while other's most likely get easier, or at least won't stay on the crazy trend upward.

Removing the cap could go both ways, increase or decrease depending on herd numbers. My guess is it would increase... we all know money talks.

Some residents may have an issue with it. Many are likely afraid the fish and game could see the benefit of doing so, and attempt pull a fast one on the residents. Eventually making them choose a region.

Nah... that would never happen. They'll cut off nonresidents paying $2K for an elk tag long before they ever touch the resident regs.

 

[Bookhead]

Personally, I like it.

The entire state is already limited quota for nonresidents, so that doesn't change anything.

I like that it gives more visibility as to where hunters are hunting, potentially could help with management. Although as stated resident hunters still have run of the state, so...

Some areas may get more difficult to draw while other's most likely get easier, or at least won't stay on the crazy trend upward.

Removing the cap could go both ways, increase or decrease depending on herd numbers. My guess is it would increase... we all know money talks.

Some residents may have an issue with it. Many are likely afraid the fish and game could see the benefit of doing so, and attempt pull a fast one on the residents. Eventually making them choose a region.

Nah... that would never happen. They'll cut off nonresidents paying $2K for an elk tag long before they ever touch the resident regs.

Look at the proposal you posted. They have hunter numbers in each region and proposed tags for each region. it stays the same or slight increase in tags. As for the last part of your comment you're right their a long ways from cutting resident tags their moving the other direction they can make up the difference in revenue allot of different ways and if you think they can't charge 2500$ for a nr elk tag and sell every one of them you're wrong

 

[fullthrottle]

I don't disagree.

Numbers only slightly increased in the proposal. But, could it be because if they showed the actual numbers they want increased, the residents taking the survey would come unhinged, and the proposal wouldn't stand a chance of passing. I would say that is likely the case. I would also say it is very likely those numbers for non residents will increase dramatically in the future. Why else remove the cap? Think about it. Elk numbers are on the rise in Wyoming, even with being fairly aggressive with harvests. Obviously a sneaky way of eventually giving more tags to nonresidents. The dollars, outfitters, and landowners in your state aren't stupid.

The battle isn't with the nonresidents, we have no say in what Wyoming does or doesn't do. The battle is with the landowners, outfitters, and the almighty dollar. Don't hate on the non- residents, just because it's a good deal for us.

I'm with you, and hope they're a long ways out from cutting resident tags. Once it gets to that point you know we're in deep.

No doubt, they could charge $3k and sell out. I'd pay it.

 

[Bookhead]

I don't disagree.

Numbers only slightly increased in the proposal. But, could it be because if they showed the actual numbers they want increased, the residents taking the survey would come unhinged, and the proposal wouldn't stand a chance of passing. I would say that is likely the case. I would also say it is very likely those numbers for non residents will increase dramatically in the future. Why else remove the cap? Think about it. Elk numbers are on the rise in Wyoming, even with being fairly aggressive with harvests. Obviously a sneaky way of eventually giving more tags to nonresidents. The dollars, outfitters, and landowners in your state aren't stupid.

The battle isn't with the nonresidents, we have no say in what Wyoming does or doesn't do. The battle is with the landowners, outfitters, and the almighty dollar. Don't hate on the non- residents, just because it's a good deal for us.

I'm with you, and hope they're a long ways out from cutting resident tags. Once it gets to that point you know we're in deep.

No doubt, they could charge $3k and sell out. I'd pay it.

I do not think this is going to favor nr diy guys like you think it will it's no secret where the better general elk hunting areas are points required will double in those regions and the estimates of how many hunters are hunting what regions are just that estimates the surveys are optional and that's the only way they can know how many hunters are hunting what areas as of rite now.

 

[SS!]

I do not think this is going to favor nr diy guys like you think it will it's no secret where the better general elk hunting areas are points required will double in those regions and the estimates of how many hunters are hunting what regions are just that estimates the surveys are optional and that's the only way they can know how many hunters are hunting what areas as of rite now.

Stop making sense.

 

[fullthrottle]

Agreed, the "better" area's will no doubt get harder to draw. Hopefully guys who only read the magazines and listen to the noise chase those "better" general area's. I'm fine hunting the "fair" ones. ?

 

[Bookhead]

Agreed, the "better" area's will no doubt get harder to draw. Hopefully guys who only read the magazines and listen to the noise chase those "better" general area's. I'm fine hunting the "fair" ones. ?

It'll end up just like regions for deer look at the points required for g compared to the rest of the regions. And that's totally up to each individual but I wouldn't burn for 4 or 5 points to hunt a fair general area but that's up to each person I guess

 

[jm77]

Let's get this straight so there is no misunderstanding. I get tired of hearing removing the cap is some cure-all to too many elk.

Managing over objective elk herds isn't accomplished by increasing or decreasing NR general region tags.

 

[BuzzH]

Personally, I like it.

The entire state is already limited quota for nonresidents, so that doesn't change anything.

I like that it gives more visibility as to where hunters are hunting, potentially could help with management. Although as stated resident hunters still have run of the state, so...

Some areas may get more difficult to draw while other's most likely get easier, or at least won't stay on the crazy trend upward.

Removing the cap could go both ways, increase or decrease depending on herd numbers. My guess is it would increase... we all know money talks.

Some residents may have an issue with it. Many are likely afraid the fish and game could see the benefit of doing so, and attempt pull a fast one on the residents. Eventually making them choose a region.

Nah... that would never happen. They'll cut off nonresidents paying $2K for an elk tag long before they ever touch the resident regs.

Residents will demand a cap on NR general tags, then move to 90-10 for LQ.

This isn't 1960, resident sportsmen pay attention to this crap.

 

[El Gringo]

Residents will demand a cap on NR general tags, then move to 90-10 for LQ.

This isn't 1960, resident sportsmen pay attention to this crap.

Is there anything else you contribute to the conversation around here, or just the same ‘ol broken record about the “Good ol days” that are surely ahead??

 

[BuzzH]

Is there anything else you contribute to the conversation around here, or just the same ‘ol broken record about the “Good ol days” that are surely ahead??

I'm telling you what's going to happen...so best to get out the notepad and pen.

 

[El Gringo]

Get those residents to “Demand” to pay Non res-Special license fees, and then you might have some case. Economics is still economics. Good luck

 

[wytex]

Get those residents to “Demand” to pay Non res-Special license fees, and then you might have some case. Economics is still economics. Good luck

Might want to read the comments submitted by residents, if you think they will not listen good luck.

 

[BigJohnson]

Let's get this straight so there is no misunderstanding. I get tired of hearing removing the cap is some cure-all to too many elk.

Managing over objective elk herds isn't accomplished by increasing or decreasing NR general region tags.

This☝.

 

[IDbullz]

Wyoming proposes to eliminate cap on general elk licenses and force nonresidents to apply for certain general elk region. I think this is a great idea, and a win for the residents & nonresidents alike. Good job Wyoming.

Sounds like a terrible idea for both R & NR. Increased pressure and harder to draw tags.