90/10 R/NR split MSGBG

BuzzH

BuzzH

Long Time Member
Messages
6,374
Just so the Residents are up to speed that post on this board, there will be a 90/10 bill introduced for sheep, moose, goat, bison, and grizzly (when we get a season). Meaning Residents will get 90 percent of the tags available for those species and 10 percent with go to NR's.

After some thought, this will be a good bill for Residents who have waited a long time to draw tags for those species.

It would be a good idea to start thinking about contacting your particular reps. regarding this issue.

There will be some argument regarding revenue loss, but keep in mind that the GF budget is in better shape than projected for a number of reasons.

If you're a Resident, and want better draw odds, time to give this some thought and let the decision makers know your thoughts.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 02:37PM (MST)[p]Almost every western state does just that. I think wyoming should move in that direction too. Most of the residents I talk to are for the 90/10 split. And I don't mind paying more.

I don't see residents in other western states pushing their law makers into giving NR more tags. Just look at what New Mexico did to NR.
 
Revenue loss will be less than $200k compared to 32 million in total license revenue. Shouldn't be much of an issue...
 
Lets say the 90/10 split is up and going right now,
How will they divide the extra tags to residents???

Does the extra tags go to residents with max points?
does it get divided up between all residents such as 0-5 points get a cut/ 6-10 points get a cut and so on AS an example?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 04:34PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 04:33?PM (MST)

nfh,

The draw system stays the same with 75% of the available tags going to the max point holders, 25 in the random. There will be more tags across the board for R and less for NR's.

The increases in tags going to the Residents come from limiting NR's to only 10% of the MSGBG quotas.

Will be a great deal for Residents, affording us all a better chance in the sheep, moose, goat, and bison and eventually grizzly bear permits.

In fact, the Residents should cycle through the point pools faster and be able to hunt 2-3 moose in their lifetimes, draw units with less points more often. Not to mention have more random tags available for Wyoming youth hunters and those in the lower point pools.

We're only talking moose, sheep, goat, bison, and grizzly with the current bill.

Cant imagine many Residents not wanting better draw odds, across the board, in both the Random and PP draw.

Oh, and jm77 is right, its a reduction of around 200K in license fees...about 1/3 of the $600,000+ that the super raffle brought in.
 
BuzzH,

What made you change your mind on this issue? I remember last year, you telling me I was one selfish SOB (I added the SOB part) for liking this idea. I have since had second thoughts on if this is really needed to make things more equitable. What made you re-think your position?
 
A couple things, the main one being that I see not a single Resident of any other State trying to do anything but "kick me in the nuts" as a NR hunter in their States(stole your line, sorry!).

Perfect example is how NR's, in particular of the DIY stripe, were asshandled by New Mexico Residents for all species. How quickly they kicked us in the teeth on sheep.

Colorado taking away the RFW option for NR's.

Oregon giving away their wildlife to outfitters.

Montana having an "up to 10%" quota on msgbpde, and never once meeting the 10% quota. Further, they tell you what units you can apply for sheep, moose, and goat...then after your application is submitted remove some of those units from NR's altogether.

Utah, well, you know taking a few hundred NR tags for the Expo.

I could go on all day.

I decided that WY Residents need to return the favor in kind and look out for Residents first. With my NR odds decreasing because of a lack of thought from the Residents in other states, I have no choice but to look out for Residents here.

All of that said, I don't fault the Residents of MT, ID, OR, CO, NM, AZ, Etc. etc. for looking out for themselves first. However, it shouldn't come as any surprise that Wyoming Residents have become tired of giving away our MSGB to NR's of other states.

Do I still think its selfish...yes I do. But, it is what it is.

It also wore me out taking grief from Residents that I gave a chit about NR's. They wore me down, and convinced me to change my mind.

Theres another reason, that you'll have to PM me about as I don't want it on the board, but its probably the main reason why I changed my mind.

Hope that clears it up.
 
I have sheep enough points I may have to lower my sights on what tag I draw . and it might take a couple years rather than next year.

But after that, you can shove it up your butt. no more buying points from me on any species you lower the quota on. you may lose more revenue than you think.
















Stay thirsty my friends
 
>I have sheep enough points I
>may have to lower my
>sights on what tag I
>draw . and it
>might take a couple years
>rather than next year.
>
>But after that, you can shove
>it up your butt.
>no more buying points from
>me on any species you
>lower the quota on.
> you may lose more
>revenue than you think.
>

I doubt it, considering the amount of money hunters spend in the western states applying for these same species and the fact Wyoming will still offer more tags and better odds than any other state.
 
Before Wyo residents get too terribly excited about elk and other species going to a 90/10 split they better think things through!

Colorado has dealt with this same issue on a yearly basis. Many of the small town communities in Western Colo have realized the financial impact nonres hunters have on their small town economies. The small towns pretty much won the battle on this issue...and thus the 60/40 split and OTC elk units still exist in Colorado. I'm sure guides and outfitters wallets will be a lot thinner with a 90/10 split in Wyo....but also small town businesses.

Nonres currently bring a pile of $ through license sales. I'm not too terribly up to speed on where the license $ goes to in Wyoming...it may not go directly to the WG&F but it ends up somewhere in Wyo? The $ generated by nonres in Wyo is staggering!
 
Well said buzz on what other states are/have been doing to NR. That is the main reason I want the 90/10 split in WY. How many New Mexico residents are now complaining about Wy wanting to go the 90/10 route. I still remember some of their attitudes on here when that originally went down.

Wyoming needs to take care of its residents.
 
jims,

We've already thought things through.

The moose, sheep, goat, and bison will only be a 200K loss in revenue to the GF on the license side. No big deal when considering the GF budget is $74,000,000. The difference was made up, plus another 400K with the super raffle.

As to the loss to outfitters, maybe they can lower the price of their hunts to attract more Resident hunters for guided hunts.

If not, I never promised outfitters a guaranteed living from MY PUBLIC WILDLIFE. Outfitters want a free market, I'll give them one.

As to the revenue to small towns, there will be no significant loss with a 90/10 split. A hotel and dinner at the local greasy spoon costs the same for a Resident as it does a NR.

You're wayyy over-playing your hand on the economic side...its not going to be significantly different with a 90-10 split.
 
I can understand how the GF can make up for the loss from moose, sheep, and mtn goat. Are you saying the same is true with a 90/10 split for elk, deer, and antelope?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 05:54PM (MST)[p]On type-1 elk there will be NO lost revenue to the WYGF or the local economies with a 90-10 split.

There will still be 7250 type 1 elk tags issued to NR's as per statute, just less LQ tags and more general tags.

Read my post on the 90/10 split for elk...its all there.
 
At $100 a whack for sheep points how many people are dumb enough to play that game if the quota get a major cut unless they're at the top of the point pool? sure , a few. but not a lot. and I hate to tell you, but WY has small sheep why do you think your auction tags are cheap? you might be overplaying your hand.

The wolves are eating your moose, who's going to dump $75 a point for a slim chance at a dropping number of moose? once again ,unless you're at the top of the pool.

I don't know why us NR hunters get involved in these circle jerks we're just being baited for the entertainment some selfish residents. they don't give a FF about our opinion they just want to grind us with the fact it doesn't count.

Do what you will . I can take my money elsewhere if I think I should once you're done.

If there is one positive thing about this for me, the hate I have for wolves and what they're doing in WY is softened by the fact it's all your loss once you run me off.














Stay thirsty my friends
 
Wyoming will still have the most tags issued for msgb, percentage wise than any other Western State. Plus it will still be a guaranteed number of tags versus an "up to" situation like most all the other states.

Even with a reduction to 10% of the quota, the random odds for sheep and moose are also way better than other states.

Yep, we have small sheep, and hardly any moose...another good reason to keep them for Residents that will appreciate the increased opportunity.

If you can find better hunts and odds elsewhere, go for it.
 
It's fairly evident that if the WG&F switches to a 90/10 split for sheep, moose, and goat the next thing on the agenda will be elk, deer, and antelope. You still haven't answered my question in regard to the economic impacts. If all species are switched to a 90/10 split would you agree that there would be economic impacts that significantly effect the WG&F, the state of Wyoming, and small town economies? Please don't beat around the bush and answer my question yes or no!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 07:10PM (MST)[p]For elk, moose, sheep, goat, bison, and grizzly bears...absolutely nothing significant. About 200K a year on a 74,000,000 budget.

Its already been mitigated with the super raffle.

BTW, you're still confused, the WYGF wont change the allocation, the Legislature will.
 
Just answered it...for type-1 elk, moose, sheep, goat, bison, and grizzly bears there will be a net loss in tag money to the GF of $200,000.

The local economies wont suffer a bit.

So, yes $200,000 in lost tag fees, nothing more.
 
>At $100 a whack for sheep
>points how many people are
>dumb enough to play that
>game if the quota get
>a major cut unless they're
>at the top of the
>point pool? sure
>, a few. but
>not a lot. and
>I hate to tell you,
> but WY has small
>sheep why do you think
>your auction tags are cheap?
> you might be
>overplaying your hand.
>
>The wolves are eating your moose,
>who's going to dump $75
>a point for a slim
>chance at a dropping number
>of moose? once again
>,unless you're at the top
>of the pool.
>
>I don't know why us NR
>hunters get involved in these
>circle jerks we're just being
>baited for the entertainment some
>selfish residents. they don't give
>a FF about our opinion
>they just want to grind
>us with the fact it
>doesn't count.
>
>Do what you will .
>I can take my money
>elsewhere if I think I
>should once you're done.
>
>If there is one positive thing
>about this for me,
>the hate I have for
>wolves and what they're doing
>in WY is softened by
>the fact it's all your
>loss once you run me
>off.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Stay thirsty my friends
+1
 
Feel free to move to Wyoming if you want to enjoy more of our wildlife.

Only takes a year living here to gain residency.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 07:33PM (MST)[p]

Another +1 here Walt and I hope jims doesn't hold his breath for Buzzy to answer his question! We're still waiting for his apology on the bull thread that will never come either!

PS: I also now know what that bull scored and Buzzy was only 25" low on his expert guess, LOL!
 
Buzz you might want to check your math. how can you put a number on lost preference point revenues until you see how many hunters drop out?

I will promise you when the odds take a huge hit hunters will start dropping out. how many I have no better idea than you do ,but my guess is quite a few.

As far as the economic loss from NR hunters to businesses I have to assume you guys don't give a FF. I guess they're just collateral damage if they get between you and what you want.





Stay thirsty my friends
 
>Feel free to move to Wyoming
>if you want to enjoy
>more of our wildlife.
>
>Only takes a year living here
>to gain residency.
Why move their?I see what people with your attitude have done to our state.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 08:03PM (MST)[p]And I'm still waiting for you to go away to the Michigan forum. Your opinion and argumentative behavior over the years has gotten old.

When other states cut NR sheep tags do you think the odds changed because people stopped applying? Of course not, it's just as hard to draw a tag in those states as before the cut. People pay thousands of dollars to hunt sheep/moose/goats so why would they think twice about buying a 100 dollars pp? What to bet the odds don't change much because people drop out if wyoming goes the 90/10 route? It will be just as hard to draw those types of tags in wyoming as in the past. AND there will not be a shortage of people buying 100 dollar pp. When one person drops out another will step in. I bet montana doesn't have an issue with people buying sheep pp, and they are not NR friendly when it comes to sheep tags.
 
WoW you were sure preaching on the NM forum about being fair.Telling residents to grow nuts.So does this mean your jumping ship?Or getting castrated?
 
440,

The economic impacts to the local businesses would be ZERO for type-1 elk as there would still be a total of 7250 tags issued.

Very little, if any impact on moose, sheep, goat, and bison as most residents have to travel to where those species are found. A guy drawing a unit 1 sheep tag and living in Laramie is going to spend as much, if not more in the local economy than a NR. Many Residents also hire outfitters.

I think Wyoming taxidermists will benefit as well, since many NR hunters take their animals to their taxi's back home.

Pretty thin argument saying that the local economies will take a hit, they simply wont.
 
Buzz, take another look at my question. I'm tempted to move back to Wyo when I retire...with luck maybe I'll be Buzz's next-door-neighbor so we can swap stories and share beers across the fence!
 
I'm doing what the NM Residents didnt have the stones to do...think about it for 2 seconds, if you dare, and get back to me.

I'm not going to spoon feed you your mush.
 
I answered your question, maybe you need to take another look at my answer.

BTW, the lot to the North of my double-wide is open, lot to the south is occupied by the UW mens head basketball coach.
 
crazymaez,

Thanks for pointing out how consistent I am...that's a great example.

Nicely done.
 
Copied and pasted from my other post: If all species are switched to a 90/10 split would you agree that there would be economic impacts that significantly effect the WG&F, the state of Wyoming, and small town economies? Please don't beat around the bush and answer my question yes or no!

Notice that I mentioned "ALL" species....this includes elk, deer, antelope, moose, sheep, and goats. A yes or no answer please?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-14 AT 08:45PM (MST)[p]jims,

Your question is irrelevant to this discussion and off topic.

This topic is about Moose, sheep, goat, bison and potentially Gbears if they come off the list. Its about reducing the NR allocation to 10% and increasing the R quota to 90% for those species. Period.

Its not even about type-1 elk, why I started a separate topic about that.

I answered the question as it pertains to this topic.
 
Buzz, I started another post and am waiting for your yes or no response.

You may not believe this but pushing for a 90/10 split for moose and sheep is 1 way of getting your foot in the door to make a giant push to change elk, deer, and antelope to a 90/10 split. Me and others actually believe my original question is very revelent...especially when looking at the whole picture and it's effects on nonresident average Joe Hunters you have always supported in the past, the WG&F, and small town economies.

So is your answer yes or no?
 
A NR hunter spends more money than a resident when they hold the same tag. 99% of the time.


Do you have any estimates of how many hunters would drop out of the PP buying game if all these cuts are inacted? " not many " is a pretty poor estimate. my poor estmate is " quite a few ". I think I'm correct.

I know the changes are going to happen but I'm somewhat amused by how many of you are in denial of the economic impact. all you have for figures to work with is what you figure .

You guys remind me of women on a shopping spree, you're going to get what you want now and figure out how to pay for it later. you, as I would be, are willing to pay more if that's what it takes. but I bet the majority of WY hunters will chit kittens when they get the bill. I guess we'll see won't we.








Stay thirsty my friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14 AT 10:18AM (MST)[p]For the moose, sheep, goat, bison, and gbear tags, you're wayyy over-playing the impacts to the economy.

Very few residents live right next to sheep, moose, goat, and bison areas.

The largest population centers in Wyoming are Casper, Cheyenne/Laramie, Rock Springs/Green River, and Gillette.

Not many sheep, moose, goat, and bison near those areas.

Meaning that most will have to travel as far, or in some cases more than some NR's. Many R's will also book sheep and moose hunts with outfitters. Most of the bison hunters will stay in Jackson, hire tag and drag, etc. Residents will make several scouting trips, dropping hundreds of dollars in the economy that most of the NR's wont do. Residents will all use local taxidermists for their mounts as well.

Perfect example is my Dads moose permit he drew as a NR a couple years ago. He drove a shorter distance than I did when we met for his hunt. Stayed in his wall tent. brought all his own groceries from MT. He bought lunch at a greasy spoon in Big Piney and one tank of gas.

I bought 3 tanks of gas just getting there and back, all in Wyoming. I also scouted 3 days prior, which cost me a few hundred. If it would have been my tag, I would have made 3-4 more scouting trips throughout the summer.

There will be no loss to local economies with the 90/10 split for moose, sheep, goat, bison, and gbears.

I also forgot to add that it will increase the number of random tags available for Resident youth hunters, and those R's that are just starting to apply for m,s,g,b...and hopefully grizzlies here soon.
 
OK I've spent about an hour reading through the two or three threads on this topic.

As a resident that would love to someday draw a M S G B, I really like the idea of the 90/10 split. I don't know if I will ever be able to draw, even if it is changed. I have a doubt that residents will be able to hunt twice or three times per species.

As far as the elk and deer, I don't think it is a good idea to have the 90/10 split. Not because the state will lose money or residents/non-residents are getting screwed, but because I don't like the increased pressure on general areas. If we could find a way to decrease the pressure, I may change my mind on this.

Antelope tags don't really matter as everything is draw anyways. Correct me if I'm wrong, but leftover tags get put into the NR draw anyways?

I don't want to screw anyone (or kick anyone's nutts), there should be some option for NR to get refunds, or some compensation for years without having the rug pulled out. Do I know what that option should be? Sadly no. But would like to hear positive suggestions not just people being azzhats.

One thing that I hope all of you look at also, this could lead to the Money Tags, down the road. I know there has been talk about the G&F being funded until 2019, and its being taken care of by the Raffle, but they WILL be in a buget shortfall again.

We all know the WYGF is so money hungery that they will pretty much sell their souls. So be warned. You will want to read every word of this law to see what stupid crap will be included also.

People wanted to boycott Colorado for thier gun laws, but we all saw how many actually did it.

For those NR that say they won't hunt here anymore. OK, sorry you don't want to hunt here anymore. There will be someone to take your place. Just like the Colorado boycott.

py
 
I agree with 440...

The following sheep table was posted by ColoradoOak last year when this same issue was being discussed. I am assuming 2016 NR quotas would be similar for a 90/10 split;

3220image.jpg


Since WY currently makes a NR pay $2,216 upfront to be entered into the random draw I agree that a lot of NR's who entered the preference point draw for the remote chance of drawing on the random will reconsider applying if there are only two tags available and if WY continues to require the tag fee upfront. Now if they eliminated fronting the tag fee and you could get in the random draw for a $15 application fee it might be a different story as a lot of people like to play the lottery.

I do know that if this passes I will no longer buy my son who has 10 preference points a $100 preference any longer nor will I front $2,216 to apply him for a chance at 2 random tags. Just doesn't make economical sense to me.

As for myself, a 55 year old NR with 15 points, I am not sure what I will do. I have been playing the game in WY by the rules for a long time so it is hard to quit now but if logic would win out over my emotions and desire to sheep hunt I should probably quit applying. Only time will tell...

Horniac
 
Since I do not believe quotas are area specific in Wyoming the chart is not correct at 16 tags. It would be 21
 
Py, yes you are right, if I don't hunt in WY there will be somebody to take my place gauranteed. but will there be somebody to replace the $670 my wife and I pay WY just for preference points if we quit? we will stop moose on both of us and sheep for her for sure, I'm not sure about the rest at this point. that alone is $250 + $30 application fees on 3 applications. points fees are big money to your game dept, I bet I paid WY far more to not hunt this year than your family paid WY to hunt , am I right? this is my point.

Don't get me wrong WY has been good to me as have the resident hunters I've run into as well. if I'm sounding like a jack azz I don't intent to. but I do feel like after 17 years of paying my dues I'm getting kicked in the nuts by people who are just a bit greedy.


Buzz I would agree the sheep and moose dollars will be less dramatic. but we both know deer elk and antelope are next , probably with a provision to cut NR sheep and moose to 5% on the same bill since it didn't break the state to cut it to 10% . that's how these things always go.

Sure I'm guessing , but we all are.







Stay thirsty my friends
 
I thought it would be interesting to look at sheep draw stats....that are set in stone on the WG&F website. To make things a little simpler I'll use the random sheep draw as an example. With the 90/10 increase there will likely be 2 more sheep tags available to Wyo res in the random draw. In 2014 there were 4844 res applicants for 30 random tags issued. The overall draw odds for a Wyo resident was 0.6% of drawing a sheep tag. If 2 additional random sheep tags are taken from nonres the draw odds would increase to a whopping 0.7%.

Will it really be worth the trouble, loss of nonres opportunity, and revenue changing to a 90/10 split? I can guarantee this is only the first step in converting all species in Wyoming to a 90/10 split....not just sheep, moose, mtn goat, and bison!
 
I bet the 2 additional residents, that get to hunt a sheep they drew with a random tag thanks to the 90/10 split, are going to be happy campers. The additional tags issued in the preference point side will also find some happy residents.

I reckon the additional moose, goat, and bison tags will also result in some really happy Resident hunters.
 
>
>
>Py, yes you are right,
>if I don't hunt in
>WY there will be somebody
>to take my place gauranteed.
> but will there be
>somebody to replace the $670
>my wife and I pay
>WY just for preference points
>if we quit?
>we will stop moose
>on both of us and
>sheep for her for sure,
> I'm not sure about
>the rest at this point.
> that alone is $250
>+ $30 application fees on
>3 applications. points fees
>are big money to your
>game dept, I bet I
>paid WY far more
>to not hunt this year
>than your family paid WY
>to hunt , am I
>right? this is my
>point.
>
>Don't get me wrong WY has
>been good to me as
>have the resident hunters I've
>run into as well.
>if I'm sounding like a
>jack azz I don't intent
>to. but I do
>feel like after 17 years
>of paying my dues I'm
>getting kicked in the nuts
>by people who are just
>a bit greedy.
>
>
>Buzz I would agree the sheep
>and moose dollars will be
>less dramatic. but we both
>know deer elk and
>antelope are next ,
>probably with a provision to
>cut NR sheep and moose
>to 5% on the same
>bill since it didn't break
>the state to cut it
>to 10% .
>that's how these things always
>go.
>
>Sure I'm guessing , but we
>all are.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Stay thirsty my friends

I understand where youre coming from. But think about residents who put in for years and never draw a tag, or who draw once in a 15 year period. This will help the residents a bit. Of course if residents had a pp system that would fix that. Better stay on topic though.
 
Buzz,

You always seemed to have been a strong supporter of the NR hunter. Why the 180* change? You didn't just stop advocating for the NR hunter you did a 180* and are advocating for less opportunity for the NR's.

If you said above I missed it.

Thank You,

Kevin
 
There would be 2 nonres that would be out of luck hunting sheep with a 90/10 split that have paid $100/year for pref pts for many years. The additional tags issued in the pref pt side will also find some nonres very unhappy that they have paid $100/year for pref pts and have fewer chances to draw than they did in years past.

In addition, the 90/10 split in moose tags will result in some very unhappy nonres that pay $75/year applying and would have fewer tags offered.
 
Not necessarily, a first year applicant could draw a random tag and would get his point fee refunded.

Those that have been buying points, were not promised anything but a point. They got what they payed for.

As to the rest of your post, jimmy crack corn................
 
Kevin, check your pm's...don't want the mm gals coming unglued...plus trying to explain things with flopgun interrupting every two seconds is about impossible.
 
That is funny Buzz, I think that is a unique situation.

I was just on a moose hunt in Wyoming with 3 persons for 10 days (bought one moose tag, 2 cow elk tags and 1 doe antelope tag), flew into Jackson, rented a car, rented a cabin, used an outfitter for moose, went to the local grocery store, went to the local eateries, had the game processed in Wyoming....

Tags: $1500 + $250 + $250 + $40 = $2040
Car Rental: $500
Gas: $250
Cabin: $750
Groceries: $500
Eating Out: $500
Game Processing: $500
Souvenirs for family: $500

Being conservative, I think we are up to over $5500 not including the outfitter cost! I think we are realistically approaching 10K.

I think you are out of your mind if you think there is not an economic impact, you are just feeding a bunch of BS to make your point.

I would respect your opinion more if you just stated that the residents of Wyoming understand there will be an economic impact, but we are okay with losing that revenue to the state because more tags will go to residents.

So please just say that or all of us non-residents will not stop calling you out and your asinine remarks that there is not an economic loss to the state.

I have been stopped by 3 different game wardens in the past 5 years on elk hunts in Wyoming and every one of them said the same exact thing after checking my $500 non-resident elk license: thank you for supporting WY G&F...it in turns helps to pay out salaries.

Maybe they were all wrong, but they thought that was the case.

Nino
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14 AT 02:38PM (MST)[p]Buzz,

How can you be serious when you say that we got what we paid for?

I have 14 moose points and 14 bighorn sheep points. I believe the new system is in its 9th year. If so, then I have paid the following:

9 X $100 + 5 X $7 = $935 for Bighorn Sheep points
9 x $75 + 5 X $7 = $710 for Moose points.

That is $1645 for points.

If you all feel that a 90/10 split is warranted, I seriously would like a refund, especially on my nearly $1000 Bighorn Sheep points that will be more or less worthless. Sitting at 14 points with a 90/10 split, I likely will not draw until I am an old man and likely not able to hunt sheep. I would never have invested if I knew my odds were going to change so drastically.

If you want the 90/10 split, then I would like a refund.

Any chance for a refund?

Nino
 
>Not necessarily, a first year applicant
>could draw a random tag
>and would get his point
>fee refunded.
>
>Those that have been buying points,
>were not promised anything but
>a point. They got what
>they payed for.
>
>As to the rest of your
>post, jimmy crack corn................
That's a smarta## comment, you have not one anything here on these post's, but you could win a cabbage patch kid lookalike contest hands down.
 
I am not a lawyer, but I believe based on what is posted on the game and fish website about the draw and preference points that I should be allotted a refund for my Bighorn Sheep points if the system is changed and I so choose to request a refund versus staying in the draw.

Here is my basis for that statement:

1. According to Wyoming statute (W.S. 23-1-703), 75% of Wyoming bighorn sheep hunting licenses must be issued to
residents and 25% to nonresidents.

2. The preference point system is designed to improve an applicant's odds of eventually drawing a license in a hard-to draw hunt area.

3. full price big horn sheep ($100) preference point fees

The only thing it says about Risk is the following:

4. Each applicant assumes AN inherent risk when applying for a license to be used in the future. License fees are generally
nonrefundable once a license has been issued and licenses are nontransferable. Please consider THE risk when
applying.

If my reading comprehension is correct, THE singular risk (AN inherent risk) being talked about here is the risk that the license is nonrefundable and nontransferable, that is sandwiched right between AN RISK and THE RISK. There is nothing about the risk that your points will be worthless because the system has been changed, quite the opposite when they say "The preference point system is designed to improve an applicant's odds of eventually drawing a license in a hard-to draw hunt area."

http://gf.state.wy.us/web2011/Departments/Hunting/pdfs/WGFDAPP13_APPLYSHEEPLIC0003372.pdf

If the system gets changed, I am going to request my $1000 in preference point fees back. Anyone want to join me in this request? Perhaps we could become a class.
 
Welcome to the club, Nino. I have lived in Wyo for 40 years and am still waiting for my sheep tag.

I'm 63. Will I draw this year? I'm not very lucky, so probably not. Sure would be nice to draw before I'm an old man...;)
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14 AT 03:09PM (MST)[p]Nripepi makes a great point. I wonder how many other nonres have max or close to max pref pts for sheep and moose. At $935 a pop for sheep and $710 for moose ($1,645 for both species) that's a heck of a lot of cash the WG&F owes those that have invested years and $ for tags. I can see a giant law suit brewing.

Buzz, you are showing your true colors! The truth is...Jimmy Crack corn and I do care!
 
Heck...I already have plans in place to move within a couple years...of course if 1000 other people do too resident draw odds will probably be worse than they are today
I feel a need for a group hug ...
 
Your points will not be worthless if allocation changes. Don't know where you are coming up with that statement?
 
>PP totals for M/S going to
>2015:
>
>http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Hunting/pdfs/TOTAL_PREF_POINTS_MS_140006261.pdf
>
>Don't think you have much of
>an argument for a refund.
>You still have points
>and still have an advantage
>over those with less.
>
>The NR side of the AZ
>draw is changing in 2015
>so this isn't an isolated
>incident.

WB---Just because it's not an isolated incident doesn't make it right! I also see that even though I didn't make a post all day a "certain person" still has to inject my name into things and with his "jimmy cracked corn" baloney I see it's still the same old BS like he always put out to anyone disagreeing with him!
 
jims,nripie, your math is not correct, the higher priced NR PP fees started just a few years ago...before that they were $7 each.

If you want to file a lawsuit or cry about your higher priced preference point fees...please contact WYOGA, they pushed for it.

Points are a buyer beware deal...nobody is promising you anything but another point each year. You got 100% of what you paid for, still have it, and nobody is going to take your points away.

You can keep applying, throw your sucker in the dirt, file a lawsuit...I really couldn't care less.

Good luck with your choice.
 
I hate the trend of every state jacking the non residents. This is a bad trend for hunting. I wish every state would give at least 20% of total tags to non residents. Overall this would give more opportunities for hunters. Yeah you will have to wait longer to draw in your home state but you will draw out of state tags much more frequently and more money would be generated for each states wildlife agency. Hunters need to quit it with this your state screwed me so we are going to screw you attitude.
 
Buzz,

I think they started in 2006, but I could be wrong. 2006 is 9 years ago!

My bighorn points will pretty much be worthless. I went from a likely tag in 2030 to 2050 or later! I am serious when I say I want a refund. I will have little chance to catch up and I spent $1000 before the rules were changed.

Where does it say, buyer beware?
 
"If the system gets changed, I am going to request my $1000 in preference point fees back."

Just for the record (assuming my records are correct) the $100 sheep preference point was implemented in 2006. From 2000 to 2003 I paid $10 to apply and receive a preference point and in 2004 & 05 it cost me $12 to apply and receive a preference point.

With that said, based on the roughly 18 NR tags projected under the new 90/10 it will take approximately 19 years just to clear the 16 to 20 point NR pool assuming the NR quota is not reduced in the future (i.e to 5%) and the overall number of sheep tags do not get reduced.

With approximately 8,000 NR sportsmen with 15 or less sheep points, if just half of these NR's see the light and drop out of the points game that would be a loss of $400,000 in NR preference point revenue just for sheep alone. I know there has been a $200,000 revenue loss number being used for all species (sheep, moose, goat, bison) but I haven't looked at the back-up to see how this figure was derived. Maybe some revenue was offset by auction tags or increased resident revenue...

Horniac
 
Where does it say the percentages were always going to stay the same?

I've had point systems change on me in Arizona, Colorado, and Montana...since I started applying as a NR.

I don't want a refund in any of those states. There is assumed risk when you buy anything.

You were not promised a tag, only a better chance than those with less points, which you would still have with a lower percentage of available tags. You still have all your points, you still have a better chance at a tag than those with fewer points.

You got 100% of what you paid for, no question about it.
 
What about Resident hunters that don't apply for any other States?

Why should their draw odds suffer because you feel entitled to 20% of THEIR tags?
 
Well if they are after trophy caliber animals then they should be putting in for out of state hnuts in addition to thier home state and if they are not then there are more than enough tags they can purchase in thier home state many of which are over the counter.
 
Really?

Didn't know there were OTC sheep, moose, goat, and bison tags in Wyoming.

Must be nice to assume that everyone is in a financial position to put in for multiple states for those species.

Lowering the NR allocation to 10% for msgb is not unreasonable.
 
Horniac your estimates are correct, or real close to it. but save your time the people who are pushing this won't accept logical arguments to get in the way of what's " theirs " .

As much as I'd like support a plan to sue for a refund I'm sure it's throwing good money after bad. Buzz is full of crap saying we got what we paid for, we got a bait and switch no question . but he's right trying to get a refund is hopeless against a government agency.

There are many valid arguements against this hose job we're going to get but nobody in WY gives a FF what we have to say least of all their brown nosing miminum wage politicians. that is, until they understand how much of our money they've lost and they're asked to make it up.

Just lay back and let them bleed a few years and see if they sweeten the pot. that's about all you can do.










Stay thirsty my friends
 
For the species you mentioned someone really needs to put in for multiple states if they are serious about every drawing those tags. The difference in one's home state allocating 10% versus 20% of the tags to non residents is going to have minimal effect on residents drawing but enormous effect on non residents.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14 AT 07:06PM (MST)[p]
I'm not saying it's right to change the game. I think these particular species should have been 10% from the start. As we can see, reducing the quota isn't going to be painless and the discussion hasn't even gotten started.
In the case of AZ they are forced to make changes because the 10% nr cap is getting hit in more hunts each year. In the not too distant future nr will be drawing nothing but late elk hunts unless they are in the max pool and those pools are creeping up.

>>PP totals for M/S going to
>>2015:
>>
>>http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Hunting/pdfs/TOTAL_PREF_POINTS_MS_140006261.pdf
>>
>>Don't think you have much of
>>an argument for a refund.
>>You still have points
>>and still have an advantage
>>over those with less.
>>
>>The NR side of the AZ
>>draw is changing in 2015
>>so this isn't an isolated
>>incident.
>
>WB---Just because it's not an isolated
>incident doesn't make it right!
> I also see that
>even though I didn't make
>a post all day a
>"certain person" still has to
>inject my name into things
>and with his "jimmy cracked
>corn" baloney I see it's
>still the same old BS
>like he always put out
>to anyone disagreeing with him!
>
 
All,
I wade into this mess with trepidation, but here goes. When New Mexico changed their draw mid-application period, I was furious at them as I just wasted money in a drawing in which I had zero chance of drawing.

But I fully support part of the New Mexico law changes, if they would have just waited until the draw was over, or they refunded all the money and made everyone reapply with knowledge of what had transpired. I still hate the outfitter welfare, but hey, it is your state, not mine. And yes, we have it too in Wyland.

Anyway, I support reciprocity. With computer systems, it is very simple for G&F to administer. It goes something like this:
If X state issues 10% of its tags to NR, then applicants to WY from that state get in the drawing for up to 10% of the available tags. If a state puts a numerical limitation, like California does on NR license recipients, then Californians applying in WY would be subject to the exact same numerical restrictions that their state puts on NR's in their state: i.e.: Only one Californian would be eligible for an elk tag in Wyoming.

I agree, this points game has gotten out of control, it is a money maker for the state, but the bait and switch just ticks everyone off. Additionally, it is just plain bad, as a kid who is 6 year old right now, will never draw, via the max point draw system, a sheep tag in their conceivable lifetime (statistically speaking).

I love to hunt out of state, and welcome NR's to my state, but something has to give and we can't keep giving it to the NR, since we are all NR's in every state but the one we live in.

WyMo
 
Hunting seasons must be over with the mindless drivel being spouted on this thread. As much as I distrust politicians and government in general, I am much happier thinking that cooler heads will prevail in the legislature than relying on the hate mongers on this site to set the agenda.

Isn't it interesting how these days there is always another "special interest" thinking somebody else is getting "too much" of the pie. Screw this group, screw that group, get even for something another state did, life isn't fair (there's a news flash).... Cry me a river.

Whether it is hunting fees, license allocation, or any general societal issue (think of all the "protected classes" - race, age, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, poodle lovers, and those preferring to wear different color shoes, whatever...) we are quickly becoming a nation of whiners and victims instead of self reliant, rugged individuals. What a travesty....

Each state will make there own rules. Some have paid dearly for following the mindless proposals of special interests. (See Idaho). Others seem to have gotten away with poor policy, at least for the short term. There are many more factors to be considered in this type of decision than most posters on this thread want to admit. Instead the goal seems always to be "How can I game the system today?"

It is a sad commentary on our society....
Bill
 
>Hunting seasons must be over with
>the mindless drivel being spouted
>on this thread. As much
>as I distrust politicians and
>government in general, I am
>much happier thinking that cooler
>heads will prevail in the
>legislature than relying on the
>hate mongers on this site
>to set the agenda.
>
>Isn't it interesting how these days
>there is always another "special
>interest" thinking somebody else is
>getting "too much" of the
>pie. Screw this group, screw
>that group, get even for
>something another state did, life
>isn't fair (there's a news
>flash).... Cry me a river.
>
>
>Whether it is hunting fees, license
>allocation, or any general societal
>issue (think of all the
>"protected classes" - race, age,
>gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, poodle
>lovers, and those preferring to
>wear different color shoes, whatever...)
>we are quickly becoming a
>nation of whiners and victims
>instead of self reliant, rugged
>individuals. What a travesty....
>
>Each state will make there own
>rules. Some have paid dearly
>for following the mindless proposals
>of special interests. (See Idaho).
>Others seem to have gotten
>away with poor policy, at
>least for the short term.
>There are many more factors
>to be considered in this
>type of decision than most
>posters on this thread want
>to admit. Instead the goal
>seems always to be "How
>can I game the system
>today?"
>
>It is a sad commentary on
>our society....
>Bill


So tell me Bill; who's crying a river?
 
I actually think I have the same odds as a person with less points than me. If you don't have 16 points or more you have no chance at a preference point tag in my sheep lifetime. My only chance would be in the random and my odds would be the same as someone with zero points, correct? Prior to a change to 90/10, I had an advantage over someone with less points than me and could draw a tag in the next 20 years, but I think that is now gone. One thing Wyoming will have to change is the BS that you have to buy a point to apply for a sheep tag. Call it a fee, not a preference point, calling it a preference point is BS when it is not worth anything, unless you are in your 20s I guess.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14 AT 10:23PM (MST)[p]Thank you Horniac!

I asked Buzz three times in two different threads and I never received an answer on how much money will be lost in preference points to the WY G&F. I am sure he knew, he knows a lot, but wouldn't say! That says something to me right there.

I would assume that if the tags are reduced 60%, that you should see a 60% reduction in those buying preference points over time. Just to be on the safe side, 50% is a good number.

Going into next years draw, 8325 Non-residents have sheep points and 9773 have moose points.

(8325 x $100 + 9773 x $75)/2 = $782,738

If you add in the number Buzz has been spouting off, the magical 200K from license fees then we are well over $1 million a year.

Sure that might not sink the boat of the WY G&F, but it definitely is not as insignificant as he is leading all to believe.

So do you agree it will be closer to $1 million than to 200K Buzz? If you think this deserves its own thread, let me know and I will be sure to start one.
 
>A couple things, the main one
>being that I see not
>a single Resident of any
>other State trying to do
>anything but "kick me in
>the nuts" as a NR
>hunter in their States(stole your
>line, sorry!).
>
>Perfect example is how NR's, in
>particular of the DIY stripe,
>were asshandled by New Mexico
>Residents for all species. How
>quickly they kicked us in
>the teeth on sheep.
>
>Colorado taking away the RFW option
>for NR's.
>
>Oregon giving away their wildlife to
>outfitters.
>
>Montana having an "up to 10%"
>quota on msgbpde, and never
>once meeting the 10% quota.
>Further, they tell you what
>units you can apply for
>sheep, moose, and goat...then after
>your application is submitted remove
>some of those units from
>NR's altogether.
>
>Utah, well, you know taking a
>few hundred NR tags for
>the Expo.
>
>I could go on all day.
>
>
>I decided that WY Residents need
>to return the favor in
>kind and look out for
>Residents first. With my NR
>odds decreasing because of a
>lack of thought from the
>Residents in other states, I
>have no choice but to
>look out for Residents here.
>
>
>All of that said, I don't
>fault the Residents of MT,
>ID, OR, CO, NM, AZ,
>Etc. etc. for looking out
>for themselves first. However, it
>shouldn't come as any surprise
>that Wyoming Residents have become
>tired of giving away our
>MSGB to NR's of other
>states.
>
>Do I still think its selfish...yes
>I do. But, it is
>what it is.
>
>It also wore me out taking
>grief from Residents that I
>gave a chit about NR's.
>They wore me down, and
>convinced me to change my
>mind.
>
>Theres another reason, that you'll have
>to PM me about as
>I don't want it on
>the board, but its probably
>the main reason why I
>changed my mind.
>
>Hope that clears it up.


BuzzH,

Just to clarify, the state OD Colorado never took away the RFW for nonresidents! This is a flat out lie and shows that even you do not know ##### sometimes! Originally RFW, was a program that gave large land owners and their guides the ability to get tags only for the established property, the tags are valid from august until late December or even into January. The client purchases a tag then gets to hunt! As a nonresident or a resident you an chose to buy a tag and hunt.

I order for the residents to accept this unfair outfitter welfare program, it was setup so that residents could draw a tag and hunt the high quality private land with out having to pay the fee! It was never an option for a NR to draw the tag! Thus we never took ##### away from the NR!

Next get things straight!
 
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14
>AT 10:23?PM (MST)
>
>Thank you Horniac!
>
>I asked Buzz three times in
>two different threads and I
>never received an answer on
>how much money will be
>lost in preference points to
>the WY G&F. I
>am sure he knew, he
>knows a lot, but wouldn't
>say! That says something
>to me right there.
>
>I would assume that if the
>tags are reduced 60%, that
>you should see a 60%
>reduction in those buying preference
>points over time. Just
>to be on the safe
>side, 50% is a good
>number.
>
>Going into next years draw, 8325
>Non-residents have sheep points and
>9773 have moose points.
>
>(8325 x $100 + 9773 x
>$75)/2 = $782,738
>
>If you add in the number
>Buzz has been spouting off,
>the magical 200K from license
>fees then we are well
>over $1 million a year.
>
>
>Sure that might not sink the
>boat of the WY G&F,
>but it definitely is not
>as insignificant as he is
>leading all to believe.
>
>So do you agree it will
>be closer to $1 million
>than to 200K Buzz?
>If you think this deserves
>its own thread, let me
>know and I will be
>sure to start one.

So you think all NR will stop buying points? Not likely...
 
Really funny isn't it.

It might not be quite the same as what your boyfriend does to you , but this is what we consider getting screwed.













Stay thirsty my friends
 
440,

Its not funny at all, has nothing to do with funny.

It has to do with righting what was wrong with WY's distribution on sheep, moose, goat, and bison tags.

Should have never been as high as it was for NR's. In particular when taking into account the scarcity of the resource, the growing number or Residents interested in those species, and the percentages afforded NR's in surrounding states.

The State of Wyomiong has the absolute authority to distribute tags as they see fit, and also the right to discriminate against NR's when it comes to wildlife resources.

Its a fundamental right granted each state.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-23-14 AT 03:38PM (MST)[p]Who's sponsoring the legislation? I would assume that Sen. Hicks is a good bet. Nothing on legisweb about it yet. A quick check from last yrs numbers shows that it would transfer about 30 sheep tags from non-res to resident. I'm sure the outfitters will put up a big fight on this one, if introduced. At about 8-10 grand a pop for (mostly) non res sheep hunters, they won't go down without a fight.
 
I understand that.

What don't think is right, and borderline illegal is taking $100 a year for years for an increased chance at a commodity which arbitrarily will be cut in less than half without
justification.


If 10% is the right number that was your prerogative, but you should have decided that before you lifted our money . if tag numbers need to be cut due to biological reasons so be it those are the breaks, but the NR ratio has always stayed the same. to change the quota after after two decades of collecting point fees because you picked the wrong number 20 years ago is entirely a different matter.

I have concluded that even though I think this is all underhanded there is little the NR can do but take it in the butt and reevaluate his strategy in WY. if I thought otherwise I'd be willing to contribute generously to fight.


No it's not fair, but you will pull it off because the lack of government accountability has you covered. good for you.
















Stay thirsty my friends
 
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-14
>AT 10:23 PM (MST)
>
>Thank you Horniac!
>
>I asked Buzz three times in
>two different threads and I
>never received an answer on
>how much money will be
>lost in preference points to
>the WY G&F. I
>am sure he knew, he
>knows a lot, but wouldn't
>say! That says something
>to me right there.
>
>I would assume that if the
>tags are reduced 60%, that
>you should see a 60%
>reduction in those buying preference
>points over time. Just
>to be on the safe
>side, 50% is a good
>number.
>
>Going into next years draw, 8325
>Non-residents have sheep points and
>9773 have moose points.
>
>(8325 x $100 + 9773 x
>$75)/2 = $782,738
>
>If you add in the number
>Buzz has been spouting off,
>the magical 200K from license
>fees then we are well
>over $1 million a year.
>
>
>Sure that might not sink the
>boat of the WY G&F,
>but it definitely is not
>as insignificant as he is
>leading all to believe.
>
>So do you agree it will
>be closer to $1 million
>than to 200K Buzz?
>If you think this deserves
>its own thread, let me
>know and I will be
>sure to start one.

>So you think all NR will stop buying points? Not likely...

Jm77,

In my opinion I think 50% NR's not continuing to buy preference points for moose and sheep is a very reasonable assumption. 50% is is what Nripepi has used in his formula above where the result was divided in two...

Horniac
 
I don't think so, IMO. Even with the reductions to both sheep and moose, Wyoming at least guarantees NR tags.

Not to mention that the Random Draw odds for both WY sheep and moose are still wayyy better than most states.

The limited nature of moose, sheep, goat, and bison opportunities will keep a majority applying.

Exactly why I haven't dropped out of any state that offers a DIY opportunity at those species.

I realized what my odds were, but still appied.

Glad I don't listen statistics and the pessimistic hunters on here.

All had less than 5% draw odds, some less than 1%:

muskox%20094_1.JPG


buzzgoat2.JPG


buzzmoose2.JPG


IMG_0745.JPG


[iomg]http://photos.imageevent.com/buzzandpat/desertram/websize/IMG_0988.JPG[/img]

IMG_1523_1_.JPG


DSCN9427.JPG
 
At 10% Wyoming will still offer the most tags for these species.

Rest assured the NR will get 10%, G&F will make sure of that. Statute is not area specific, like most other states.
 
10% is equal to the most, but not the most. but 10% is not what I was bought points the last 17 years for . I think you understand what I'm saying you just don't give a FF, so enough of this.

There will be a sharp drop off in the number of NR points for moose and sheep you can count on that. once the bean counters see the results I hope you get an egg broke in your butt over it. that should take care of the deer elk and pronghorn tag grab you're planning next.













Stay thirsty my friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-23-14 AT 07:48PM (MST)[p]440, I do feel your pain as Montana changed the game on me. However, just like me you are buying points to have an advantage over those with less points. You bought 17 points and no one is taking what you bought away from you. Do you buy points in other states where your chance of drawing is 10% or less?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-23-14 AT 09:50PM (MST)[p]Yes I do, but I knew that going in.

Montana changed the price, just like WY has several times but the quota hasn't changed. you didn't hear my pitch a fit about your price increases , the price of everything goes up that's just life. a price increase actually increases my chance of drawing so while it stings a little it's not all bad. cutting the allotment is all bad. period.

I keep hearing nobody took anything fom me, that's pretty creative. if the allotment keeps me from drawing a tag before I'm either too old or dead that I would have reasonably drawn in the next 2 years am I not losing something? I have 17 points, with todays allotment I'm almost a sure thing to draw the units I want in the next couple years. I'm not after a top unit.

But now how long might it take? 5? 10? 15 years? I'm 52 I might not have that much time to hunt sheep country.
So yes I will still have my points, but their value just dropped a massive amount. if I don't draw in 2015 things just got one hell of a lot harder, and with this news even 2015 is going to be one hell of a lot harder as guys try to cash in bedfore the cuts.


Think of it like buying 17 raffle tickets from a pool of 100 for $100 each. then just before the drawing they tell you they sold 250 tickets. did you get screwed? you still have your tickets don't you? that's actually a poor analogy , my loss is much worse since I was gauranteed a win soon . but you get my drift.






Stay thirsty my friends
 
Completely understand where you're coming from. There are no real winners or losers in what's about to happen. I honestly hope you're able to draw your tag before the new 90/10 split takes affect. Merry Christmas.
 
I didnt expect to draw a single tag I've ever applied for.

I have about as many points (16) as a Resident and I don't expect to hunt sheep here. I'm sure not guaranteed a tag.

I may get to, I may not...things change over time, priorities change. If I were to ever draw a ram tag in say Montana, I may only apply for one particular unit the rest of my life. I may not be as physically able in another 5 years. Sheep quotas could change. Maybe the NR quota will increase. Who knows, theres too many variables to EVER assume you were entitled to a tag.

Its a gamble I take, we all take, every single time we apply.

Was it worth the investment applying every year in 8-10 states? Eh, I don't know, maybe. Some years it sure doesn't seem like it, when I have 15-20 large out there rolling around, 2k+ of which I never get back.

If sheep hunting is that important to you, and you don't like the risk involved with things changing in State draws, you should have hunted them already by simply paying for a hunt. The only sure way is to book a hunt that doesn't require a random draw.

My goal was to hunt one bighorn and one thin-horn in my lifetime...and I was going to do it one way or another. I paid for one, and lucked out in the draw on another.

But, I made it happen by just sticking with it, despite the poor odds, the changing draw systems, and the price of a guided hunt.

Dust yourself off and keep after it.
 
Buzz , as it is a tag in several units such as area 1, 4 and a few others WERE a sure thing for me this year. a few better units including area 3 and 5 had people in my point class of 16 drawing tags. so yes, I was within a year or two of a sure thing if not in 2015. with the changes coming could I be sure of even drawing area 1 in 2015? who knows.


I'm not sure telling someone to just cowboy up and buy a sheep hunt is a great comeback. I could afford to, many can't so what about them . and I'm only interested in rocky's, even here in OR that's all I apply for I don't want a California or any of the thin horns. so that leaves me with a governors tag or Alberta. again I could afford it but I don't want the kind of pressure spending a minimum of 40k would hang over my head as I'm hunting. I just don't roll that way.


I know you don't like PP but they do work. I have enough points in some states to chose the tag I want and start packing. I've drawn many great tags in the biggest loser game all over the west . the more you lose, the closer you are to winning. but this time you're pulling the rug out right at the finish line. so if I seem butthurt I'm justfied.

I'm pizzed but I imagine I'm in until I draw or croak. anyone who's not pretty young or has less than 15 points you're screwed. you'd be better off taking your donations to WY and buying lottery tickets , win it and buy one of those paid for hunts Buzz is talking about.








Stay thirsty my friends
 

Similar threads

LIK2HNT
Colorado - Units 2, 10, 11, 6, 161 Antelope
Replies
28
Views
1k
Jerry
J
woodruffhunter
Unit 100 Elk Hunt Report
Replies
52
Views
3k
Longun
Longun
elkassassin
SINCE I DON'T HUNT & DON'T EVER POST ANY PIC'S!!!
Replies
18
Views
1k
Bluehair
Bluehair

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_9050.jpeg
54EA1051-3813-4CC9-83CF-B97A999D1E51.png
IMG_1889.jpeg
IMG_20220924_074808788_HDR.jpg
buck me.jpg
IMG_1894.jpeg
FB7E602F-B63E-42EB-A309-647639325E3A.jpeg
2EBFC118-6C60-4BE1-A069-A0DF6FC656F9.jpeg
Nino.2016.Colorado (3).jpg
IMG_4045.jpg
IMG_5099.jpeg
AZ velvet2.jpeg

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