I crunched some numbers....

T

Tknez

Active Member
Messages
373
So I have read on here a lot how the non residents carry the load when it comes to funding for our G&F. I have always just accepted it as truth and went about my way.

On another post it was brought up about how tags are given out when not filled in the first draw. Again I kind of felt that why not give those that nobody wanted into the non res pool to make more money for the G&F.

Then I started reading how us residents had better watch what we wished for if we dare say we would like to go to 90-10 split rather then 80-20. We would be crying a river if we had to make up for that lost revenue!

These are the things that were being put out there.

Topgun says we will be paying 10 times the amount we now pay for tags.

Marburg says we would be paying $500 or more for deer tags!!!

Ha well I am no rocket scientist (as topgun said you didn't have to be to figure out the math) but I do understand simple math.

So here are some numbers that I crunched.

First off let me start by saying they may be a little off as I couldn't just find the answers I wanted so I went through and took each area for elk and added them all up.

So for this I used the adult price for all tags.

Residents bought 61,210 elk tags at $52

Non res bought 4,105 elk tags at $577
Non res bought 1,768 elk tags at $1057

So if my math and numbers are correct or at least close here is the breakdown in totals.

Resident $3,182,920
Non res $4,237,361

There is a difference there of $1,054,441

So first of all lets stop with all the talk how the non residents carry most of the burden money wise! For non residents to pay about 15% more then residents I would say that is far from caring more than your fair share for what this state has to offer to non residents.

So now lets get to if we were to cut it down to a 90-10 split. The state of Wyoming would loose about $2,118,680 in out of state elk sales. to make that up residents would have their fees go up to about $87 for elk! That is a far cry from what others would have you believe the prices would go up to.

It was said on the other post how the residents all cry about tags going up $10, so just wait till you see them go up 10x's. Well I for one have never cried about tag increases because I understand just how great we have it here and it takes money to manage our most precious resource! I also try to get people that are complaining about a increase to see it that way. Also in my experience with hundreds if not thousands of hunters I know in this state most understand tags increases are necessary. HAHA but what do I know I have only been a resident for 42 years surely those back east know Wyoming people and what is best for us far better than we know for ourselves. Hmmmm where have I heard that before?

So now back on topic. I would bet there would be a ton of support by our Wyoming hunters if we were told our tags were going to go up by about 65% but in return we were going to get 10% more tags. Great idea Topgun I am glad those crazy numbers that were being put out there by you and Marburg made me look all this up. It would be an uphill fight against the outfitters but a fight worth fighting for sure!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 03:59PM (MST)[p]You may be right on much, but you need to factor in the affect it has on businesses that rely on non-residents coming to Wyoming and spending money. Maybe they can do without visitors, but I know deer tag cuts in G affect outfitters a bit. Most anyway. A few less guides will have fall work this year.
Might be great for some, but not all.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com
on Facebook!
 
I would not argue with you on that point at all. I am sure that business would suffer some with less tags for non residents, but that in no way was brought up for reasons that the residents of Wyoming need the 80-20 split. only doom and gloom about how tags would be out of this world or G&F could never survive.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 04:29PM (MST)[p]Have at it. Convince WYOGA to side with you and you might stand a chance. Good luck, you will need it.
 
Thanks Tony, I appreciate it. We as residence need to speak up and get the ball rolling. I have always tried to help NR when I can, but issuing 20% of our tags is not ok. Especially when almost every state in the West is 10% for nr. Just look at when NR are able to draw (February) for elk. If cuts are made they come from the resident pool. Again catering to the outfitters/nr. I could care less if cutting nr tags hurt the outfitters. There are too many as it is. And all these nr looking out for the best interest of outfitters,business,etc is a jk. We all know you aren't buying your food/supplies anywhere near region G. Gas maybe, but thats about it. Raise my fees, but cut nr tags to 10% for all species. The outfitters only care about the nr dollar, nothing more. How's that wilderness law going for you NR? Gotta support those great outfitters...
 
I can't believe I over looked this the first time around.

So as far as elk goes. Leave the non resident tags the same for all general areas. Now this brings down the total amount that would be needed to be made up in lost funds to $610,912. That split up among resident tags for elk would be $9.98 per person. Ha go ahead and make it a cool $15 raise for elk so to help offset some of the cost for deer and antelope that would be a little higher do to no Gen for antelope. Now I am sure you wouldn't get hardly any of us crybaby residents that would resist say $15 increase for elk, and $10 for deer and antelope for 10% more tags given out to residents!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 04:50PM (MST)[p]Let's get this right. Currently, nonresidents get 16% of elk LQ tags. Total number of NR tags mandated by law, counting LQ and General, is 7250.

That means if LQ elk tags were changed to 90/10, there would still be 7250 mandated tags(the 6% would be made up by issuing more NR General tags) There would be NO shortfall of revenue and just as many NR would come to Wyoming and spend their money!
 
It sure is worth a try now isn't it Marburg! It is funny to me how just in the other post your "fake news" about me paying for a $500 plus deer tag and how the residents would never stand for such a thing has already shifted to the game and fish now being the ones to convince to go along with it.

Well I guess it is now on to the next group to try and convince. Do you have any great ideas why it would be impossible, your last bit of good advice got me thinking outside the box, and I believe came up with a idea that almost all hunters in Wyoming would get behind. Maybe you could get me thinking in the right direction again.
 
Thanks for the info Jeff. So it's not all doom and gloom as some want us to believe. Jeff, please tell me what happens if NR draw their tags in February and we happen to have large tag cuts when the quota is set in April. Do the cuts come out of the resident pool, or do they issue enough tags until the following year?
 
I appreciate those facts JM.

I was wondering why my numbers were not adding up to the 20 percent number although I did not figure in reduced price tags. Is that number 7250 just based on overall resident tags from the year before, or is that a number that doesn't change much?
 
Just out of curiosity I looked at the report on game and fish it shows the following for the 2016 season.

Resident tags followed by NR

Elk 58,607 and 12,687
Deer 58,418 and 24,775
Antelope 25,805 and 26,400

NR's actually got more of the tags allocated than residents for antelope which is surprising But I'll just leave that there.
 
What about deer and Antelope?

not sure on deer but on Antelope if my figures are correct
but without knowing the how many "special" were sold it is still a good visual

residents bought 20,805 licenses for $790,590
non-residents bought 26,400 for $7,550,400
total revenue 8,340,990


so...if we stick to the 90/10

42,484 res $1,614,411
4,720 non-resident $1,350,063
total revenue 2,964,474

that's a $5,376,516 difference

so to make up the revenue it would cost about $164.55 per resident tag.
 
What about deer and Antelope?
not sure on deer but on Antelope if my figures are correct
but without knowing the how many "special" were sold it is still a good visual

residents bought 20,805 licenses for $790,590
non-residents bought 26,400 for $7,550,400
total revenue 8,340,990

so...if we stick to the 90/10

42,484 res $1,614,411
4,720 non-resident $1,350,063
total revenue 2,964,474

that's a $5,376,516 difference

so to make up the revenue it would cost about $164.55 per resident tag.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 05:21PM (MST)[p]WYOGA is not Game and Fish champ. You obviously have a lot of research to do if you don't recognize the single most influential organization in Wyoming wildlife policy.

People much smarter than you and with much better reading comprehension are miles in front of you on this 90/10 road.

My first suggestion would be to join them because you don't have the knowledge to go it alone. You will only look foolish.

If you insist on starting your own movement, immediately enlist some more brain power for your mission. You have a lot of work to do. Better get started. Again, best wishes and good luck.

>It sure is worth a try
>now isn't it Marburg! It
>is funny to me how
>just in the other post
>your "fake news" about me
>paying for a $500 plus
>deer tag and how the
>residents would never stand for
>such a thing has already
>shifted to the game and
>fish now being the ones
>to convince to go along
>with it.
>
>Well I guess it is now
>on to the next group
>to try and convince.
>Do you have any great
>ideas why it would be
>impossible, your last bit of
>good advice got me thinking
>outside the box, and I
>believe came up with a
>idea that almost all hunters
>in Wyoming would get behind.
> Maybe you could get
>me thinking in the right
>direction again.
 
going off the above figures

58,418 res = 2,551,974
24,775 non = 8,076,650
total 10,628,624
difference 5,524,676

so 90/10
res 74,873 = 3,219,569
non 8,319 = 2,712,091
total 5,931,660

so to make up the difference of 4,696,964 res tags would be $106




How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait
 
Treed

Thank you! Funny this all got started from a complaint about antelope tags. Sure looks like F&G are making a lot of money off non resident tags and the surplus resident tags.

I will continue to support WY even with the 2018 price increase.
 
I did not look at antelope, but I will say this it blows my mind that there are so many residents that do not take advantage of our antelope hunting here!

yes that is a big difference then what elk looks like.
 
I agree the res hunters should be more in control of the tags and get a better break. but that is a big jump for deer and antelope.

to me Wyo is my favorite state to hunt with Nev a close 2nd regardless of % I will continue to apply and hunt it
 
HA you are right I misread your post, but if you don't think the F&G have a good amount of say on how things go down you would be mistaken once again!

Oh and by the way, when I do put my "team" together I will be sure not to use you when it comes to simple math! CHAMP
 
Arent the same people who are all about regulating residents on deer, the ones who want nothing to change for nonresidents?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 07:30PM (MST)[p]Tknez---It's amazing how some like yourself pick and choose what they post in order to try and win a debate. You only looked at elk to try to prove your point and that we were wrong. As our other member stated, when you add deer and antelope into the mix you end up with around a 5-6 million dollar shortfall by cutting NRs to a 90/10 split. You might want to go onto the G&F website and look at their chart to see the huge percentage the NRs pay in fees compared to the total fees. I gave a 10X increase just as a guess and it may be that or it may only be 5X. Even at that lower amount when the residents are crying about an increase of just a few bucks per tag it's foolish to think there won't be a huge outcry for a much bigger increase. Cripes, they had a 90/10 split under consideration a year or two ago for the big animals like sheep and it didn't even get out of committee! You go right ahead and achieve your 90/10 split and I'll say good show, but I'd bet you'll find out you'll come out on the losing end due to the overall loss in the Wyoming economy it would cause.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 07:34PM (MST)[p]Another nr telling us residence what we need. Go hunt blacktail, and stick to your own state. Oh look the smartest nr of all just chimed in. Took a little bit longer than I thought but you didn't disappoint. "I don't live in wyoming but I hunted there for 20 years", means he must be an expert. Or, "I might move to wyoming one day", blah blah blah.
 
Founder is right when it comes to tag Economic implications. The idea that if you cut non-resident tags suddenly all the residents are going to shoot bigger stuff is a cute idea unless you own a hotel, gas station, restaurant, etc. along the I80 or I90 corridors. I would bet lost tag revenue would factor less than you think in a political debate about decreasing non-resident tags. Small businesses and big businesses alike​ would come out of the woodwork to fight against even the thought of losing 50% of that revenue stream pool.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 08:09PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17
>AT 07:34?PM (MST)
>
>Another nr telling us residence what
>we need. Go hunt blacktail,
>and stick to your own
>state. Oh look the smartest
>nr of all just chimed
>in. Took a little bit
>longer than I thought but
>you didn't disappoint. "I don't
>live in wyoming but I
>hunted there for 20 years",
>means he must be an
>expert. Or, "I might move
>to wyoming one day", blah
>blah blah.


Play nice gvh, as we're in the same boat here together brother and just trying to have a decent discussion! Anyway, you guys are great at putting words in others mouths. Nobody here, including myself, has said they are an expert at anything. If you'd look at NR revenues you'd also see that NRs spend over 5 million dollars a year just for preference points alone and residents is less than $75,000. If you lose half the people by going to a 90/10 split and a lot of NRs quit buying PPs because of it there is a lot more money you residents will have to make up. Add in a ton of money for the applications fees lost along with Conservation Stamp money that each person is required to buy and there is a lot more money that you are missing in your debate than you think! I'm confident enough that I'll bet you money that there is no 90/10 tag split within the next five years on antelope or deer in Wyoming. If there is, I'll buy all your Wyoming tags the following year if it happens! If there isn't, you buy my deer tag!
 
Mnbear, stick to things you know. No one is saying they will shoot a bigger animal if NR cuts are made. We are saying wyoming gives out too many nr tags that should go to residents. Again, look at most, if not all of the western states. 10% is the norm. Topgun, you may be right, however, it's coming watch and see.
 
>Mnbear, stick to things you know.
>No one is saying they
>will shoot a bigger
>animal if NR cuts are
>made. We are saying wyoming
>gives out too many nr
>tags that should go to
>residents. Again, look at most,
>if not all of the
>western states. 10% is the
>norm. Topgun, you may be
>right, however, it's coming watch
>and see.

See my previous post and put your money where your mouth is brother!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17 AT 08:21PM (MST)[p]Again, I'm not saying it will happen today or in 5 years, but if you read my last post it means exactly what I wrote. It's coming. Who knows you might be a resident by then and your opinion might mean something then.

And for the record the state of wyoming is not going to lose a lot of hunters because it cuts tag numbers. They will still apply, buy pp, and hunt here.
 
>Again, I'm not saying it will
>happen today or in 5
>years, but if you read
>my last post it means
>exactly what I wrote. It's
>coming. Who knows you might
>be a resident by then
>and your opinion might mean
>something then.
>
>And for the record the state
>of wyoming is not going
>to lose a lot of
>hunters because it cuts tag
>numbers. They will still apply,
>buy pp, and hunt here.
>


How in the world can you make that last statement? If you cut NRs from the present 80/20 split to a 90/10 split, that means you lose 50% of your NR deer and antelope hunters and that is not the "new math" being used, LOL! The only money the G&F would keep getting from those that don't draw would be the application fee and that won't make up for the millions of dollars lost in license fees along with the total economic loss to the state businesses that now rely on us to stay afloat.
 
>>Again, I'm not saying it will
>>happen today or in 5
>>years, but if you read
>>my last post it means
>>exactly what I wrote. It's
>>coming. Who knows you might
>>be a resident by then
>>and your opinion might mean
>>something then.
>>
>>And for the record the state
>>of wyoming is not going
>>to lose a lot of
>>hunters because it cuts tag
>>numbers. They will still apply,
>>buy pp, and hunt here.
>>
>
>
>How in the world can you
>make that last statement?
>If you cut NRs from
>the present 80/20 split to
>a 90/10 split, that means
>you lose 50% of your
>NR deer and antelope hunters
>and that is not the
>"new math" being used, LOL!
> The only money the
>G&F would keep getting from
>those that don't draw would
>be the application fee and
>that won't make up for
>the millions of dollars lost
>in license fees along with
>the total economic loss to
>the state businesses that now
>rely on us to stay
>afloat.

Mike, I don't agree with you on this because you actually haven't crunched the numbers. Remember, there is NO difference on elk at 90/10 because of 7250. NR get many leftovers on Antelope anyway. This is a weak argument until you actually get all the figures and see the outcome. GVH is right, eventually it happens.
 
topgun I will respond to what you stated about me cherry picking only elk to try and win an argument. As far as everything else you wrote no real need to as all I would be doing is writing the same thing GVH and jm77 added.

The reason I only used elk was because that took me a good bit of time and I really didn't want to spend the time to do the other 2.

The only reason I even chimed in on this in the first place was the comments that were made on the other post about us residents not knowing what was good for us and being crybabies and such. I will admit that got me a little fired up, so I did a little math (granted as jm77 said above and also you said, more things would also need to be considered), but I will bet you this. I am 100% sure if and when we go to 90-10 we as residents will NOT be paying over $500 per deer tag as you and the CHAMP stated on the other post. So here is a bet for you. If Wyoming does go that route I will bet you tags for life that residents will not pay 10X's for our tags as you stated.
 
thanks for that link. I spent a little time trying to look for something like that, but couldn't find it right away so I went about it the hard way. There is some great info in there and I really do appreciate having it so readily available.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 08:34AM (MST)[p]They could go 90/10 and increase the price of nonresident tags. Eliminate the regular draw and make everything the special price, or average the two.
 
Jm77, GVHR, and TG you are all correct. It WILL without a doubt go to 90/10 split. Whether it's this year or ten years, but I don't think it will ever be a hard 10% cap where that is all the NRs get period. If that were to happen it would mean that the wildlife in Wyoming is struggling so bad that licenses have been drastically cut and residents probably no longer have a general tag which I don't think anyone would like to see. Or god forbid the Utah model of wildlife management has crept across the state lines. In either case JM77 and GVHR you guys keep the fort down until I get moved to wy, it would be much obliged, until then I'll keep paying the higher fees and doing what I can as a NR.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 12:05PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 12:01?PM (MST)

Based off of the numbers from the link posted above, they could cut the tags in half and charge less than double, roughly what the surrounding states charge and come out about 2.5 million behind. Charge $10 per tag more for residents and the shortfall is about 1 million.

Nonresident tags sold---revenue generated---- Cost per tag
Elk: 13,173 ------- 7,307,571 ------- 554.74
Deer: 22,520 ------- 5,837,094 ------- 259.20
Antelope: 25,937 ------ 4,284,616 ------- 165.19

The tags are all lumped into one category, no special or regular, which is why it looks like the tags are cheaper than they actually are.

New scenario
Nonresident tags sold------revenue generated----Cost per tag
Elk: 6587 ------- 5269600 ---- 800
Deer: 11260 ----- 5067000 ---- 450
Antelope: 12969 ------ 4539150 ---- 350
I didnt account for lost revenue from Conservation Stamps or the money lost to local businesses.
 
Are you saying that the current license fees for NR elk are 554.74 deer 259.20 and antelope 165.19?

Just trying to clarify your above post
 
^^^^

Good post gasman. I was thinking pretty much the same type of thing.

I will through out another possibility to your new scenario. Keep all the elk GEN tags that are given out the same. There I go again just using elk as an example!:) Win win as it would allow more opportunity for non residents and also would put more tags in the hands of the residents.

That would be a gain of $1,588,800. That would more than make up for the 1 million shortfall in your new scenario above and also go a long way in making the conservation stamp losses almost nothing at all.

Something very similar could be done with deer and the Gen areas to make even more money.
 
>Are you saying that the current
>license fees for NR elk
>are 554.74 deer 259.20 and
>antelope 165.19?
>
>Just trying to clarify your above
>post


From the numbers given in the link posted above. The revenue generated divided by the tags issued = price per tag. Granted its an average,and Im no mathematician, but thats what I come up with.
 
I follow you now. I wonder if they raised the anterless permits by a substantial margin and left the others the same what the figures would come out to since licenses are taking a price jump next year anyways. I could look that up and do the math but honestly I'm to lazy on a Sunday afternoon ha!
 
Disappointed to see the direction this has gone.
No, wonder some have gotten snappy on other threads.

You are all still welcome at my camp fire res or non res.
At least untill you decide to make yourself not welcome.

Hope it can get back to civil and helpful eventually.

Good luck to all.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 02:00PM (MST)[p]Millswork, it's not resident vs NR issue. Nor does it have to do with not wanting NR to hunt Wyoming. What it comes down to is putting tags in the pockets of those who reside in this state first. When game and fish choose money over their residents it's frustrating. And for that I will not support the game and fish. I will however, continue to vote for those elected officials, Republican or Democrat, that share my views. Those who don't will not get my vote/support. I also understand we are all NR somewhere and I'm ok with others states quota, minus NM. I don't bi!%& about it, I just choose not to spend my money there. The ironic part is those NR that are opposed to wyoming wanting a 90/10 split, aren't screaming at their own state demanding more NR tags. Hypocrisy? You tell me. And 440 is right, for once in his life, it's greed. It's his own greed that makes him so upset that he won't be getting 20% of the tags if wyoming goes to 90/10 split. See how that greed thing works 440? Furthermore, as you and others know, I have no issue with NR (my father is a NR). I have, and will continue to help out NR where I can, so please don't act like us residents don't want others hunting this great state. That is not the issue!!
 
Nice post GVHNTR. It is only my opinion, but I think the majority of the complaint isn't so much the 90/10 split but that the loss of revenue will be the burden of the NR to bare through increased license fees (just see posts above). Its a double whammy for NR guys to lose tags and get slapped with license increases. Sometimes it's easy to lose track that we are all on the same side. All states need NR sales period if they want to Keep operating at their current levels and residents continue to purchase relatively cheap tags all things considered.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 02:28PM (MST)[p]I don't think a lot of you realize the economic impacts nonres have on local economies. It seems like this has been ignored in most of the posts above. Colorado hasn't ignored this and local communities have their arms open wide to welcome nonres hunters and fisherman.

Here's a couple links that may catch your attention....especially if you are a Wyo resident that owns a business:

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/About/Reports/08DOWEconomicImpactReport.pdf

http://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/local/2014/10/11/big-game-hunting-big-money-colorado/17116425/

http://www.denverpost.com/2013/03/2...ting-boycott-produce-fear-of-economic-losses/
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 02:50PM (MST)[p]

Man, how do those 90/10 states do it and still survive!! All that money lost they surely have to start giving out more tags to the NR or everyone will be bankrupt in no time at all. It just can't be done. Please just stick to hunting numbers, not fishing, as we sell unlimited number of license and are not starting a quota on those yet. But don't tell the game and fish as they might find a way.
 
I'd estimate that just those 200 deer tags cut in region G are worth $250k+ in money coming into the state.
But I can't fault the residents for wanting more of the tags. I want more too! I like to hunt as much as I can in the best places I can.
But I do hope non-resident tag cuts don't continue.
Nevada now has an organization that fights for the rights of non-resident hunters. Maybe one will need to be organized in Wyoming too...???

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
LIKE MonsterMuleys.com
on Facebook!
 
Every time this argument comes up it is funny how it is over looked that a non resident has to draw a general tag in wyoming. In my home state of Idaho the general tags are first come first serve with a very lenient quota. There are also several units that are a controlled hunt such as 73 that the f and g refuse to put a quota on because it will limit the amount of non residents to 10%. If you want to limit them go ahead but open the general units up and see how that goes.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17
>AT 02:50?PM (MST)
>
>
>
>Man, how do those 90/10 states
>do it and still survive!!
>All that money lost they
>surely have to start giving
>out more tags to the
>NR or everyone will be
>bankrupt in no time at
>all. It just can't be
>done. Please just stick to
>hunting numbers, not fishing, as
>we sell unlimited number of
>license and are not starting
>a quota on those yet.
>But don't tell the game
>and fish as they might
>find a way.

??? Funniest post I've seen all day!

[font face="verdana" color="green"]
Jake Swensen
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 06:57PM (MST)[p]>Man, how do those 90/10 states
>do it and still survive!!
>All that money lost they
>surely have to start giving
>out more tags to the
>NR or everyone will be
>bankrupt in no time at
>all. It just can't be
>done. Please just stick to
>hunting numbers, not fishing, as
>we sell unlimited number of
>license and are not starting
>a quota on those yet.
>But don't tell the game
>and fish as they might
>find a way.


If you would look at other states instead of just making the statement about how they are getting along with a 90/10 split you would see that they have shorter seasons and a bunch of them, like CO for instance, and that generates a ton of money even though they have a low resident/NR split compared to Wyoming. I also just made a general statement when I made that 10x and then stated even if it would drop to 5x there are a lot of other fees that enter into how Wyoming generates NR G&F money besides the tag fee itself.
 
Colorado is not 90/10. Some units are 60/40. They are in talks now of going 80/20 across the board and the nonresidents are going ballistic. I guess they also forgot about the unlimited over the counter elk tags we still offer.
 
Not sure why you guys think Wyoming is so generous compared to other states? It's probably slightly above average but not the top state for non res percentages.

Colorado Idaho Utah Arizona all have OTC tags for non res. Colorado gives out 35% of the majority of their deer and elk draw tags to non res. Other high point draw units they still give out 20%.

Last year wasn't it like 6000+ residents hunted region G? And they gave out 600 tags to non res I believe. So only 10% of the hunters in region G were non res. This year I believe there are only 400 non res tags. If the same amount of residents hunt it this year that means non res only make up 6.6% of hunters in G.

So can someone explain why Wyoming is the most generous state compared to all the other states?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 11:08PM (MST)[p]Founder I think you found your next calling. You should start that business you are speaking of. Think about it someone starts a business that his wallet and non residents benefit, in a state he does not live in. Seems that business model has already been tested somewhere else. I am sure you would be able to make a good go at it.
 
Those nonres tag reductions are going to come back to bite the residents. Anyone think residents will have to pick a region next year?

Dirty, season length is one huge advantage! Plus the fact that you can archery hunt on the type 1.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 07:00PM (MST)[p]>Colorado is not 90/10. Some units
>are 60/40. They are in
>talks now of going 80/20
>across the board and the
>nonresidents are going ballistic. I
>guess they also forgot about
>the unlimited over the counter
>elk tags we still offer.
>

I did not mean to infer that your state of CO was a 90/10 split across the board, but is definitely one that has a number of seasons that are very short. NM is another state that has mostly 5 day seasons and that's one reason besides the low number of NR tags given out that I won't apply there.
 
>Those nonres tag reductions are going
>to come back to bite
>the residents. Anyone think residents
>will have to pick a
>region next year?
>
>Dirty, season length is one huge
>advantage! Plus the fact that
>you can archery hunt on
>the type 1.


NO to the question about residents picking a Region next year. Yes, the longer seasons and fact that buying an archery stamp gives another month or so to hunt with a bow in Wyoming puts in above most states along with pretty generous resident/NR splits, especially the 75/25 on several of the species like sheep and goats.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 07:15PM (MST)[p]>Not sure why you guys think
>Wyoming is so generous compared
>to other states? It's probably
>slightly above average but not
>the top state for non
>res percentages.
>
>Colorado Idaho Utah Arizona all have
>OTC tags for non res.
>Colorado gives out 35% of
>the majority of their deer
>and elk draw tags to
>non res. Other high point
>draw units they still give
>out 20%.
>
>Last year wasn't it like 6000+
>residents hunted region G? And
>they gave out 600 tags
>to non res I believe.
>So only 10% of the
>hunters in region G were
>non res. This year I
>believe there are only 400
>non res tags. If the
>same amount of residents hunt
>it this year that means
>non res only make up
>6.6% of hunters in G.
>
>
>So can someone explain why Wyoming
>is the most generous state
>compared to all the other
>states?

Ya 400 tags to one of our best areas for mule deer and looking at numbers in Utahs limited areas most are single digits to nonres. I say give nonres 20% of the heneries and pauns!!! And pretty sure none of utah is OTC to nonres maybe be general units but still have to draw!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 07:19PM (MST)[p]Dirty, keep up we are talking about LQ. Now whats the split looking like? Jr. I think we will be ok the sky isn't going to fall. Hey founder, if you are so worried about NR why don't you organize a group in your home state of Utah, instead of comparing a state you are not a resident of. What do you say? More nr tags in your state and take them out of the resident pool?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 07:21PM (MST)[p]Wyoming currently gives 25% of its tags for bighorn sheep and mountain goats, and 20 percent of its tags for moose to nonresident hunters.

This number needs to be changed to 90/10... What organizations in Wyoming support this change and how do I join?

[font face="verdana" color="green"]
Jake Swensen
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 07:37PM (MST)[p]Jakeswensen that one is the one thing that needs to happen for sure!! Agree grosventreh!!!
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17
>AT 07:21?PM (MST)
>
>Wyoming currently gives 25% of its
>tags for bighorn sheep and
>mountain goats, and 20 percent
>of its tags for moose
>to nonresident hunters.
>
>This number needs to be changed
>to 90/10... What organizations in
>Wyoming support this change and
>how do I join?
>
>[font face="verdana" color="green"]
>Jake Swensen


That exact request was put in a Bill to the Legislature a couple years ago and it got axed before it even got out of Committee! Between the Outfitting industry that had a lot to lose if that went through, along with a lot of NR input by calls and emails to the Wyoming Reps.and Senators it didn't have a chance to get on the floor for discussion and a vote.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 08:56PM (MST)[p]Now I know why they say "pure Michigan". I think it's because topgun is talking "pure bull$@!&" when he claims NR input changed the minds of the Wyoming Senators. Wyoming outfitters association yes. I'm sure Mr. Whoff was involved (sfw) too.

It may not of made it this year but the discussion is being had. It may take a few years but each year we will see it grow. Sit back and watch "pure bs".
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 09:01PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 09:00?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 08:59?PM (MST)

>Now I know why they say
>"pure Michigan". I think it's
>because topgun is talking "pure
>bull$@!&" when he claims NR
>input changed the minds of
>the Wyoming Senators. Wyoming outfitters
>association yes. I'm sure Mr.
>Whoff was involved (sfw) too.
>

You'd argue that the sun is the moon, LOL! Look it up and you'll see that many comments were made in the Committee hearing where they axed the 90/10 split that they had a ton of emails and phone calls by NRs against it just like I stated. It was all recorded and the public comment against it by NRs was in the thousands! When it comes to money losses the Legislature listens to NRs on stuff like that. I sent email to all the Committee members against it and was ready to do the same to all the Legislators if it had gone to the floor for a vote.

PS: Why are you so nasty in most of your responses? Maybe you should try acting like an adult if you want to be treated as one Bro! Yes, Bob Wharff was also involved representing SFW.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-17 AT 09:17PM (MST)[p]We all know how much of an adult you are top. There are many on here who have received your adult PM's. Weren't you in trouble a few times because of them Mr. Adult/bro? Now back to the lies. So are you telling me the deciding factor it never reached the floor was because of you and your emails? At 90 years of age and you are calling people bro. Come on....bro haha.
 
>We all know how much of
>an adult you are top.
>There are many on here
>who have received your adult
>PM's. Weren't you in trouble
>a few times because of
>them Mr. Adult/bro? Now back
>to the lies. So are
>you telling me the deciding
>factor it never reached the
>floor was because of you
>and your emails? At 90
>years of age and you
>are calling people bro. Come
>on....bro haha.

BS, as you are now just trolling trying to start trouble and no I was not in trouble or I wouldn't be here now! I didn't say it was because of me, as your reading comprehension must not be too good. I said it was because of thousands of NRs like myself that get involved when something comes up, rather than just bitching on the internet like a lot do. I'm also not quite 70, but I'm acting like an adult, which you certainly aren't with most of your responses to me and the others on these two threads. Grow up for cripes sake and treat others like you'd like to be treated!
 
I was there Mike, what happened to 90/10 was not in the least way influenced by emails and comments from nonresidents.

Jake Swenson we need to talk sometime.
 
It was.....$$$$$$$ and Wyoga. Getting funded was the only choice G&F had! Nevermind trying to defeat wyoga! All with hardly any resident support!
What's it been two years? Not funded yet? Residents not using the tags available? What's the hold up?
 
>I was there Mike, what happened
>to 90/10 was not in
>the least way influenced by
>emails and comments from nonresidents.
>
>
>Jake Swenson we need to talk
>sometime.

Then why did I read those comments right out on the net about what was said by some of the Legislators at the hearings Jim. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I remember all the posts on hunting websites asking people to do what I mentioned and I definitely remember that offshoot started by Sy for the Outfitters to fight it and it also said we were having a great effect in stopping it. I don't think I'm dreaming and it wasn't that long ago that the 90/10 split was introduced. I even remember getting some emails back from some of the Legislators saying they were against it and thanking me for my email to them regarding the Bill. I'm going to start looking to see what I can come up with in my spare time if I get any and I apologize if I'm wrong.
 
JM77 I am interested in getting involved, you can pm on mm. I also added you on Facebook.
[font face="verdana" color="green"]
Jake Swensen
 
Wyoming is my favorite state to hunt. If they want to go 90/10 I'm okay with it. Hell even up the non res fee to cover the lost revenue. I'll still apply.
 
>Wyoming is my favorite state to
>hunt. If they
>want to go 90/10 I'm
>okay with it.
>Hell even up the non
>res fee to cover the
>lost revenue. I'll still
>apply.

I can't argue a thing you posted there Briant and I'll ask you for a loan if the latter happens, since you're Mr. Money Bags, LOL!
 
>>Wyoming is my favorite state to
>>hunt. If they
>>want to go 90/10 I'm
>>okay with it.
>>Hell even up the non
>>res fee to cover the
>>lost revenue. I'll still
>>apply.
>
>I can't argue a thing you
>posted there Briant and I'll
>ask you for a loan
>if the latter happens, since
>you're Mr. Money Bags, LOL!
>


I will trade you bank accounts right now! No questions asked. Deal? :)
 
>>>Wyoming is my favorite state to
>>>hunt. If they
>>>want to go 90/10 I'm
>>>okay with it.
>>>Hell even up the non
>>>res fee to cover the
>>>lost revenue. I'll still
>>>apply.
>>
>>I can't argue a thing you
>>posted there Briant and I'll
>>ask you for a loan
>>if the latter happens, since
>>you're Mr. Money Bags, LOL!
>>
>
>
>I will trade you bank accounts
>right now! No questions
>asked. Deal?
>:)

No way Jose, LOL!
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-24-17
>AT 08:21?PM (MST)
>
>Again, I'm not saying it will
>happen today or in 5
>years, but if you read
>my last post it means
>exactly what I wrote. It's
>coming. Who knows you might
>be a resident by then
>and your opinion might mean
>something then.
>
>And for the record the state
>of wyoming is not going
>to lose a lot of
>hunters because it cuts tag
>numbers. They will still apply,
>buy pp, and hunt here.
>

I wouldn't be so sure about that. One of the main reasons that we have spent as much time in Wyoming over the last several years is due to our interest in big game hunting. We travel the state during the off season because we like it, but hunting and exploring new areas is the primary reason we are there. Take away our opportunity to hunt and other states begin to look just fine as a way to spend our time and money.

Explain that to the business owners of your state.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-17 AT 05:41PM (MST)[p]Hate to break the news to ya but there will be others who will fill the void. You just made their odds a little better. May I ask what state you are from? South Dakota? What have you done in your own state to get more NR tags?
 
so lets get this straight. Federal land, state animals, cattleman pay to graze the federal land, should the state have to pay the feds and private landowners for grazing fee's for deer/elk/antelope/sheep/moose/bighorns/chukars/sage grouse/blue grouse/mountain goats/pheasants/Hungarian partridge/rabbits etc.???
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-17 AT 07:54PM (MST)[p]Treed,What does any of that have to do with 90/10 split some are wanting? We are talking about putting more tags in the pockets of residents. Honest question.... Are you fighting for more NR tags in your state?

SD,Likewise, you are free to come over to wyoming and hunt. As some on here will tell you, I would even help you if you drew a tag in an area I'm familiar with. I currently have 2 points in your state but they aren't as generous as wy. Heck NR can't even hunt certain areas in SD, but I'm sure you are writing your congressman begging to help NR. Doesn't SD even limit the amount of NR waterfowl hunters too? And while we are on the topic of spending money in certain states, I think I should be offered more tags since I just bought a new 4 wheeler there 3 months ago. Oh ya, I also go to deadwood often. Does that translate to more NR tags for me?
 
So after all is said what is to be accomplished ? I know one thing I will be buying points and maybe a slim chance at drawing a random draw tag from here on out.I say do away with points have a random draw 50/50 res and non res and a thousand dollars a tag charge for everyone.
 
Treed,What does any of that have to do with 90/10 split some are wanting? We are talking about putting more tags in the pockets of residents. Honest question.... Are you fighting for more NR tags in your state?

why don't you drop the "Are you fighting for more NR tags in your state?" it is getting old and really reflects badly on you as an adult. I assume your an adult? or you just acting like a child? why would anybody want to give up tag's?

read back and see if I have ever said Wyoming should not look at the % to residents. you have tunnel vision or just like to lash out at everyone

my last post was in regards to a post on how all game animals are the property of the state they live in, pure and simple analogy of the situation. your states game animals eating my grass on national forest/BLM without fair compensation.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-17
>AT 07:54?PM (MST)
>
>Treed,What does any of that have
>to do with 90/10 split
>some are wanting? We are
>talking about putting more tags
>in the pockets of residents.
>Honest question.... Are you fighting
>for more NR tags in
>your state?
>
>SD,Likewise, you are free to come
>over to wyoming and hunt.
>As some on here will
>tell you, I would even
>help you if you drew
>a tag in an area
>I'm familiar with. I currently
>have 2 points in your
>state but they aren't
>as generous as wy. Heck
>NR can't even hunt certain
>areas in SD, but I'm
>sure you are writing your
>congressman begging to help NR.
>Doesn't SD even limit the
>amount of NR waterfowl hunters
>too? And while we are
>on the topic of spending
>money in certain states, I
>think I should be offered
>more tags since I just
>bought a new 4 wheeler
>there 3 months ago. Oh
>ya, I also go to
>deadwood often. Does that translate
>to more NR tags for
>me?

I would welcome you to come to South Dakota and archery hunt deer with an over the counter tag on any of our public lands.
 
WY residents are tired of putting in for the same tags year after year and getting the same results. Mostly, number of tags for the area dropping and amount of NR tags going up. Some of the top areas in the state are landlocked by private land, but has the best draw odds, which causes another issue. Again, if we draw that area which is landlocked by private property, we still can't hunt the area we drew and the numbers of herds just continue to grow and go unmanaged. It's a lose-lose situation all around for residents; can't draw any tags and can't hunt good areas due to landlock.
 
>WY residents are tired of putting
>in for the same tags
>year after year and getting
>the same results. Mostly, number
>of tags for the area
>dropping and amount of NR
>tags going up. Some of
>the top areas in the
>state are landlocked by private
>land, but has the best
>draw odds, which causes another
>issue. Again, if we
>draw that area which is
>landlocked by private property, we
>still can't hunt the area
>we drew and the numbers
>of herds just continue to
>grow and go unmanaged. It's
>a lose-lose situation all around
>for residents; can't draw any
>tags and can't hunt good
>areas due to landlock.

That is a completely different issue and one which frustrates non-resident hunters as well. To see huge amounts of "public" land given over to outfitters while the state agencies do very little to change it is maddening. That is our land too.

I realize Wyoming Game and Fish are not mandated to provide access, but it sure seems somebody at the state level should be working on that. Anytime it comes up a very, "That's just how it is." attitude prevails. That sucks. When property that would provide access is sold it seems to me that it would be an opportunity to purchase access, but we all know that's not how it works.

We love Wyoming. That said, if we can't get tags to hunt we won't be there. The whole conversation that started this thread had to do with someone crying because they couldn't get the leftover tag they wanted. Ok. But correct me if I'm wrong, residents are guaranteed elk, deer, and antelope tags? Every year? Seems like a pretty fair deal.

I listen to this same conversation here over walleye. WTF, you would think Minnesota anglers we're the devil according to quite a few boat ramp conversations I have overheard.
 
Sense you asked to be corrected if you were wrong, I will do just that. Wyoming residents are not guaranteed antelope tags. Deer and elk yes we have gen tags that can be bought over the counter but antelope is 100 percent limited quota.
 
>"WY residents are tired of putting
>in for the same tags
>year after year and getting
>the same results. Mostly, number
>of tags for the area
>dropping and amount of NR
>tags going up..."


the NR draw in Feb sometimes does not capture increases in tag #'s so they lose tags as well as new hunts created after the committee meeting.....it goes both ways. the elk draw needs to me moved to be with the rest of the draws to capture the changes

How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait
 

Similar threads

punchy
Unit 15 3rd rifle
Replies
4
Views
397
Founder
Founder
nfh
Father/son success
Replies
20
Views
927
bucktags
bucktags
woodruffhunter
Unit 100 Elk Hunt Report
Replies
52
Views
3k
Longun
Longun

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_0939.jpg
D0FEF781-9A32-4E62-800E-C95BDCBBC3C0.jpeg
IMG_2861.jpeg
518080AD-A7B9-47C0-9247-93CFAD6A6C68.jpeg
IMG_7326.JPG
30445581-028E-47E0-8B35-B45DA97F2CB2.jpeg
2022 buck.jpg
IMG_5090.jpeg
DSC02968.jpg
IMG_7056.jpeg
BF97A94B-E3C6-47A7-A030-5C252FE11724.jpeg
VideoCapture_20240712-072632.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