Senate File 69: allocation on Big Game License (change to 10% for NR)

Yep, was going to post it but you beat me to it.

Residents that want increased opportunities to hunt moose, sheep, goat, bison, and potentially grizzlies, now is the time to let your Representatives know.

This bill would give Resident hunters another 100 tags for MSGB.

This bill will put Wyoming in line with other states, who also keep 90%+ of their tags to their residents.

This bill will also increase random drawing odds for Resident youth hunters as well as those with low preference point totals.

This bill will also cycle through the Preference Point System faster and create a situation that Resident hunters draw tags at equal rate to NR's. Currently, many NR sheep hunters are getting tags with fewer points than Residents.

Light up the phones and emails...lets get this thing done.
 
Good guess , can I try too?

Neither one of us has any idea what it will cost. that won't be known until we see how many drop out of the point game because of the crumby odds.

I suspect the evil outfitters are going to bring that up.











Stay thirsty my friends
 
And it's a guess. those of us writing the checks will decide what the real number is.

Where can that be read?










Stay thirsty my friends
 
Ugh! Not good!
I have no idea how many families are like mine but the G&F can plan on about $1000.00 less each and every year... From just our little tribe.
I can't imagine there are only 170 families who are like mine.
Whining,
Zeke
 
How about introducing legislation to change moose and sheep applicants to be limited to only ONE HARVEST PER LIFETIME? I know a resident that is trying to draw his 3rd sheep tag in Wyoming while someone just turning 12 this year may never draw a single tag.

Can anyone explain why Wyoming is not once in a lifetime for moose and sheep already???
 
Yes, as I asked the same question many years ago.

At the time the 5 year wait was introduced, it was projected that if the GF limited MS to once in a lifetime, they wouldn't have enough applicants for the available permits.

That was because of a couple reasons:

1. Not that many people applied for MS.

2. The moose/sheep populations were much higher.

I agree that, at current levels, bull moose and bighorn sheep should be once-in-a-lifetime.

However, that's a separate issue, and not relevant to the 90/10 legislation.
 
How is that a separate issue? The reason for this bill is to increase odds for residents! Wouldn't making each a OiL increase the odds as well?
 
>How about introducing legislation to change
>moose and sheep applicants to
>be limited to only ONE
>HARVEST PER LIFETIME? I know
>a resident that is trying
>to draw his 3rd sheep
>tag in Wyoming while someone
>just turning 12 this year
>may never draw a single
>tag.
>
>Can anyone explain why Wyoming is
>not once in a lifetime
>for moose and sheep already???
>


I like the idea, but how about if you have never drawn a tag you get to apply with preference and if there isn't enough people that apply for tags available the tags could roll over to a secondary drawing for people that have drawn the tag before.
It would give the people that have never drawn for that species priority.
 
Wow, no reduction of NR preference point revenue? Someone might want to drop Senator's Hicks & Barlow a note that they completely missed the boat on their fiscal impact projections by their failure to include decreased NR preference point revenue as part of the fiscal note...

"FISCAL NOTE
NON-ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACT
Anticipated Revenue (decrease):
GAME & FISH FUND
Source of revenue decrease:
FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
$0 ($169,894) ($169,894)
The number of licenses available for purchase by nonresidents will be reduced as a result of this bill. Nonresident license fees are set at a higher rate than resident license fees and therefore will cause a reduction in total revenue generated. License fees for the species identified in the bill are established for residents and nonresidents respectively as follows; $112/$1,402 moose, $117/$2,252 bighorn sheep, $36/$240 ewe/lamb, $122/$2,152 mountain goat, $402/$2,502 bison any, $252/$1002 bison female, and $0.00/$0.00 grizzly bear.
Assumptions:
The Game and Fish Department is assuming that the license quotas available in 2014, (455 moose, 200 bighorn sheep, 4 ewe/lamb, 28 mountain goat, 90 bison any, 225 bison female, and 0 grizzly bear) will remain constant and that due to the high demand of these licenses 100% will be issued in line with the proposed resident/nonresident allocation."

Maybe the reduction in NR preference point revenue was purposely left out to get this quota change pushed through or perhaps they are just that naive. But I could be wrong on this myself as 1,317 NR's bought a sheep point last year for the first time most likely not realizing that it will take approximately 120 years before their point pool is in the running for a tag under the current NR tag allocation. If this bill is passed, it will take approx 388 years...

Horniac
 
In 2014 the top four moose areas required max points for a resident to draw, while NR were drawing these same areas with three to five points less!

Starting to get the idea?
 
elks96,

The topic of the thread is not, "once in a lifetime for moose and sheep"...

If you want to cry about that, start another thread. This one is about SF69.
 
Horniac you nailed it. the idea is to push this through before anyone figures out what it will cost the state.


Figures don't lie but liars can figure.















Stay thirsty my friends
 
Oh oh internet cop Buzz is on duty

8723internet_police.jpg
 
If passed, this will save us NR's a ton of money, at least for those of us with the slightest bit of math sense. The bill eliminates most, if not all, of the random draw tags. So unless you have near max points, or unless you anticipate an exceptionally long lifespan (100 years maybe) applying for Moose or Sheep as a NR will be a waste of money.

Between Moose & Sheep it currently costs a NR's 203.00 per year in non-refundable fees to apply and gain a point for each. That's each and every year, whether or not you draw a tag. For my own budget, I'll be taking that money out of Wyoming and putting it to smarter use on a raffle in another state.

And the potential loss in revenue is large. There are currently almost 8000 NR's in the points game for Sheep, and over 9000 NR's in the game for Moose. Let's say 1/2 of those drop out after this bill passes. So doing the math....each NR Moose app yields WYFGD a 75.00 PP fee....multiplied by 4500 less apps, this comes to a possible 337,000.00 loss in revenue. Then for Sheep, a NR app yields a 100.00 PP fee....multiplied by 4000, this comes to 400,000.00.

For a total potential loss of about $737,000.00. Not even counting the loss in revenue from the sale of licenses at the lower resident rate. And not counting any losses in PP fees for other species (deer, lopes, elk) from NR's who decide to throw up their hands and totally drop out of ALL draws.

Not only will the results be less money for wildlife, and that most NR will be eliminated from ever drawing a Wyoming Sheep or Moose tag. But the benefit of this bill to residents will probably be very tiny. The ressies may not even get 1% better draw odds, when averaged across all resident point classes.

Actually this bill might eventually make it HARDER for residents to draw a tag. Within a couple years I wouldn't be surprised to see the preference/random split changed from 75/25 to 50/50, once WYFGD notices that their NR PP fee cash cow has dried up. The only way to retain NR applicants would be to bring back random tags, which this bill mostly eliminates. Once that's done, the average Resident wait time for a preference tag will be dramatically longer.
 
It's always been said "Watch what you wish for". It's not always black and white. One side will always tell/argue the points of what is in their best interest and if the other side is not told or heard things may happen that back fire, due to bad or incomplete information.

I quit putting in for sheep several years ago when Wyoming up'ed the fee just to stay in the point pool ($100.00 a year)and I did the math and would not even draw until I was to old to even get out of a truck let alone hike around in sheep country.

Same thing with elk. Once I draw my tag and was no longer in the max pool it was not in my best interest to throw $50.00 away year after year for a chance at a unit that is no better then a general area tag can get a hunter.

All that being said, I do love the state of Wyoming and love hunting, fishing and camping in the great state of Wyoming. Each person can only do what they can afford. Finances do dictate what a person can and cannot do or afford.

Best of luck to the great state of Wyoming and their fish and game department and their finances!!!
 
Good points Sticksender. Don't forget the millions that WY will lose from the reduced number of NR visitors that will now spend their dollars outside of WY. This impact is always understated or ignored by the politicians. Mainly because the resident hunters push these laws, while other stakeholders such as local owners of motels, grocery stores, gas stations, restaurants, and non-hunters don't even know about these proposed laws until it's too late.

And don't believe the fools that say that locals use those services as well. If a local doesn't draw a tag, he/she will likely spend that money in WY anyways. If a NR doesn't draw a WY tag, then that money will almost certainly not find its way to WY. Not too mention that non-residents spend a lot more on services than locals do.
 
Sierra, I couldn't agree with your post more! There was an up-roar in Colo several years ago from Western Colo business owners in response to Colo going from OTC to draw for elk. The small town business owners won the battle. That another reason why Colo limited tags for elk and deer in most units is 60% res and 40% nonres! If you own a business in Wyo you better think twice about the trickle down affect of this proposed change.
 
The impact to local economies is an over-played hand.

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

Nearly all the moose and sheep permits are not near any of those places. Meaning that if a Resident draws the tag, they are going to spend a lot of money, all of it in Wyoming, traveling, buying supplies, fuel, etc. here.

When my Dad drew a moose tag in Wyoming as a NR, I spent more money than he did in the "local economy". I would have spent wayyy more if it would have been my tag as I would have made 3-4 scouting trips prior to the season.

The lose in revenue via PP is also a guess. It was speculated at the time of the expensive fee increases that numbers of applicants would tank....didn't happen. I suspect there are a lot of idle threats on this one as well.

The NR's that routinely apply for tags that cost 1-2K+, are going to keep applying no matter how small the chance. A couple hundred a year for the chance to draw a sheep or moose and gain a point...I ride that pony until I cant physically fill out an application.

Also, 100 more permits going to Residents is a huge deal, in particular in the random side of the draw. Improving draw odds on the random side for Residents, in particular resident youth, will give them 2-4 times better odds here than the BEST odds as a NR in surrounding states.

Its a great deal for the lower tier Resident point holders as well as new and youth hunters.

The only fiscal note that is going to be considered is the one already provided.

This bill is gaining traction with Resident hunters...keep those emails up all you Residents. Let your elected officials know that WY Residents want more opportunity for sheep, goat, moose, bison, and grizzly bears to stay with Resident hunters.

I will provide updates and attend the committee hearings when the time comes.
 
Any resident of IDAHO, UTAH, NEW MEXICO, MONTANA, or ANY other state that gives THEIR non residents as little only 10%, 6% or even 0% cannot possibly argue against Wyoming doing the same.

Idaho residents have continually rejected giving their non residents a single guaranteed tag and will not raise the non res cap of 10%, yet some of the same folks who live in Idaho feel entitled to 20% of Wyoming's resources.

Selfish hypocrites.
 
Great read everyone!

If all you complainers each did half of what Buzz does for the benefit of wildlife and sportsman, none of us would have to worry about the future of hunting.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-15 AT 09:59PM (MST)[p]Buzz, draw odds for Wyo residents may rise a fraction of a %. I'm not exactly sure where you are getting your numbers that the change will significantly increase Wyo res draw odds? You are right that a few additional Wyo res will draw sheep, moose, and bison tags but you are wrong that it will significantly increase hunters draw odds.

I"m a Wyo nores and spent 3 weeks hunting Wyo this year. I don't know how many times I fueled up at small town gas stations, bought groceries, supplies, stayed in a couple hotels, ate in local restaraunts, etc. The same Wyo res with a tag would have spent a fraction of what me and my buddies spent in the small local towns where we hunted. I ran into several Wyo res while hunting and they drove out to hunt and returned to their house every day or 2. I doubt if any of them stopped at any of the local towns that we hunted near....my buddies and I were in the small towns just about every day suporting their local economies.

I'm not sure if you read Sierra's post but you might read this again: If a local doesn't draw a tag, he/she will likely spend that money in WY anyways. If a NR doesn't draw a WY tag, then that money will almost certainly not find its way to WY. Not too mention that non-residents spend a lot more on services than locals do.

If you own your own small private business in Wyo you may want to read a few of these interesting articles about nonres hunters being big business. If Wyo doesn't want nonres hunters business I'm sure Colo would be glad to have more nonres help support local, small town economies!

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

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/WildlifeSpecies/SpeciesOfConcern/Wolf/Impacts5-10-04.pdf

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

http://www.denverpost.com/outdoors/ci_24593944/call-colorado-hunting-boycott-misses-mark

http://www.gohunt.com/read/hunters-crucial-to-colorado-economy
 
>Great read everyone!
>
>If all you complainers each did
>half of what Buzz does
>for the benefit of wildlife
>and sportsman, none of us
>would have to worry about
>the future of hunting.

That may be true but Buzz seems to have a big smile on his face while we try our hardest to pull the knife out of our backs!
I guess we all do what we think is best for us and others be damned.
Zeke
 
>Any resident of IDAHO, UTAH, NEW
>MEXICO, MONTANA, or ANY other
>state that gives THEIR non
>residents as little only 10%,
>6% or even 0% cannot
>possibly argue against Wyoming doing
>the same.
>
>Idaho residents have continually rejected giving
>their non residents a single
>guaranteed tag and will not
>raise the non res cap
>of 10%, yet some of
>the same folks who live
>in Idaho feel entitled to
>20% of Wyoming's resources.
>
>Selfish hypocrites.
^^^′^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What he said!
 
When deciding to get into the points game of any state it is done with a specific understanding of what the NR tag allocation is going to be. As an example, I do not do Oregon because I understand the allocation and low tag numbers. I probably wouldn't have entered the Wyo game with a 10 percent allocation and not being able to DIY hunt public wilderness, but I did and now the rules might change. Any state, no matter the percentage allocation, is going to draw the condemnation of participants when the rules are changed mid-stream.

I would support the NR hunters if my state was going to change the rules on them. The greed and selfishness was not brought forward to the legislature by the NR .... The NR is in a defensive position here. Oh I get, when Wyoming selfishness/greed is responded to by NR greed/selfishness it is the NR's fault. Id be interest to see what the logic or statutory intent was when the original allocations were made. It wasn't NR who established current generous allocations nor will it be NR who change it to 10%.

I'd buy any Wyo resident hunter a beer after this is all over.
 
Juniper and Rambo,
You are invited to hunt OTC elk any year you want here in Colo...and 40% of the deer, elk, and antelope tags to boot! Please bring some cash to spend in our small towns!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-15 AT 09:20PM (MST)[p]SFW, Smokestick was in the paper saying his group supports it.

Kinda of a surprise...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-15 AT 10:14PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-15 AT 10:12?PM (MST)

Wyoming will still issue more NR tags than any surrounding state for moose, sheep, goat, and bison even with the 10% cap.

Sebastian,

Lets be honest, Residents of Colorado got their collective asses handed to them on the 60-40...you didn't want it, and you know it. Its not my problem that Colorado hunters allow(ed), outfitters and landowners to run your state.

Ask 100 Colorado hunters that you know if they think it would be a good idea to cut NR allocation of tags there...I bet 99/100 would in a heartbeat.

Your problem is that you think of yourself first, how you can benefit personally from drawing another tag. You can put up the false front all you want with your economic impact BS, you don't spend a fraction of the money in Wyoming that the average Resident does. I spend more scouting here than you do with your tags, scouting, and hunting combined.

There is nothing wrong with what Wyoming Residents are asking for here. Its the same thing that every other surrounding State does with their moose, sheep, goat, bison, oryx, etc.

Unlike Colorado, the Resident Hunters in Wyoming, the average guys, still have control of our wildlife. Exactly why we don't have RFW, transferable LO tags, vouchers, and all the other great ideas that Colorado has. Not to mention, hunters here don't have to ask their DW to pay for access to State lands.

You sold your wildlife and public access to special interest without even a whimper, and view that as badge of honor??? You didn't even sell it, you gave it away. With guys like you arguing and standing up for wildlife and hunting there, I know why it happened.

Congratulations?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-15 AT 11:57PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-15-15 AT 11:18?PM (MST)

Buzz, I hate to break the news to you but it wasn't Colorado outfitters or landowners that had the biggest impact on the 60/40 split. It was the small business owners in Western Colorado realized the enormous financial impact nonresidents had on the economy. The small business owners actually stood up and provided the biggest support of the 60/40 split. Hopefully Wyoming small town business owners wake up and catch on to this before it is too late.

I would be the first to admit that I would support more tags for Colo residents but I'm not going out of my way to shaft small town communities in Western Colorado and nonres hunters that enjoy hunting our state each year.

I'm not quite sure how you know how much time and $ I spent in Wyo this year but I can assure you the $1,057 nonres special elk license and $512 special antelope licence I paid the WG&F this year went a lot farther than the $52 Wyo resident elk and $33 antelope tags you bought! Just to let you know....a couple small town gas stations and restaraunts got to know me pretty well this summer and fall!

I appreciate all the compliments on what I do for the average Joe hunter in Colorado....and elsewhere! You could say I've done my best to help the average Joe hunter in Wyoming as well!
 
You guys don't realize Buzz is a professional troll. He goads and prods people on this website but is so sweet on others he will give you diabetes. The plan change to tag allocations is not within his control, as much as he would like you to think it is, it is not. If it happens, it happens, change is the only certainty in life. All this stomping of feet and gnashing of teeth only encourages a professional troll like Buzz.

There is a standing rule when it comes to trolls, don't feed them and they go away. Who cares if the tag allocations change? The odds were always terrible anyway, so they get even more terrible, big deal. Buzz has no control either way.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 06:21AM (MST)[p]Marburg, I guess I take pleasure out of feeding the prof troll some of his own medicine...goading and proding others...and visualizing the steam coming out his dwarflike nose and ears! A couple reasons I'd like to see things stay the same. #1...the average Joe nonres would once again get screwed if this passes. #2...Once tags are cut for sheep, goat, moose, and bison the next item on the agenda will be elk, deer, and antelope. #3....I like to visualize steam rolling out of the trolls nose and ears!

What hasn't been mentioned is..what happens once nonres tags are cut and WG&F revenue plummets? Someone else will get flipped the bill. Wyo res better be prepared to fork out a lot more $ for tags! Wyo's boom and bust economy better be ready....especially business's in rural, small town communities!
 
Sebastian,

Wow, that's even more pathetic, if what you claim is true, that small business owners control your wildlife and hunting opportunities in Colorado???

That really says a lot about the level of involvement and influence hunters have, as well as how poorly organized your Resident hunters are in Colorado. We don't tolerate that crap here in Wyoming.

I never knew things were that bad there, outfitters. LO, bubbas tire shop, and dairy queen control your wildlife. Nice work!

Also, just as a bit of clarification...what percentage of Sheep, Moose, and Goat tags does Colorado issue to NR hunters?
 
With Yellowstone/Grand Teton Parks Wyoming has no shortage of tourism dollars. As a resident i have no problem paying more and have said so many times before.
 
While I and all other residents of Wyoming appreciate everyone's newly found concern for small businesses in the state the sooner states get away from managing wildlife for the benefit of businesses and not sound science the better.

To try and say that the model Colorado has created with elk management and elk tag distribution is supported by the majority of resident of Colorado that do not have a small business that generates revenue from NR hunters is laughable. If the residents of CO want to manage there wildlife for the benefit of businesses I support their ability to do so but stop trying to BS the rest of us about how great it is for the avg res of CO.

Additionally, any business that will either succeed or fail based on the nr sheep/moose/mtn goat tag allocation being dropped was going to fail eventually from something.

As far as the impact to the Wyo F&G, those that say we don't know the financial impact are correct. That being said even the high end of reasonable estimates amounts to about 0.5% of the total yearly budget. The success or failure of game management in Wyo will not be determined by a 0.5% budget variance.
 
>>Any resident of IDAHO, UTAH, NEW
>>MEXICO, MONTANA, or ANY other
>>state that gives THEIR non
>>residents as little only 10%,
>>6% or even 0% cannot
>>possibly argue against Wyoming doing
>>the same.
>>
>>Idaho residents have continually rejected giving
>>their non residents a single
>>guaranteed tag and will not
>>raise the non res cap
>>of 10%, yet some of
>>the same folks who live
>>in Idaho feel entitled to
>>20% of Wyoming's resources.
>>
>>Selfish hypocrites.
>^^^′^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>What he said!

Here comes the wining,i guess i'm one of the Idaho residents that don't expect 20% of the N.R. tags! And if i want to hunt Wyoming,and don't draw a limited tag, i can still get a type-6 or general tag.I can't see where in any state that has preference points, that people are jumping for joy. And here's a clue, don't expect it to happen in Idaho, our F&G repeatedly votes it down,Thank God!!!
 
I'm sure you don't mind paying more, I wouldn't if I were a WY resideint either. but why don't you tell the other WY residents the truth about what it will cost and let them decide for themselves? do you really think Buzz Gruber forgot about the obvious lost point fees ? you really think NR hunters only buy a tank of gas and a snickers bar?

This is as close to watching Obamacare get passed again as you'll ever see.







Stay thirsty my friends
 
440,

You honestly think 100 total tags is going to sink business in Wyoming?

You and Sebastian should open a cannery...

redherring.jpg
 
This bill is long overdue!!! We could stop this if Ut, Nv, NM, AZ, and ID all agreed to giving non residents 25% of their total permits. Just think how much more money your respective states would have. According to these non residents Were talking about staggering amounts of money. You all could get rid of your income taxes and pay all your highway bills.
 
I've been sending money to WY for 17 years trying to draw a sheep tag I haven't drawn. get it? you're getting my money but I don't show up as a tag buyer. read horniacs post again.


I know you don't give a FF about what we NR hunters think, but this is the one place we have a say, with our checkbook. you need to ask us how many will drop out when the draw odds crash and include that in the economic impact of this bill.

Put the truth out there for the residents and be honest about it. don't hold my breath right?













Stay thirsty my friends
 
If the non-resident want to be pi$$ed because the system changed (bait & switch), I get that. But to say that a handful of non-resident or even resident sheep/moose/goat tags drive the small business of Wyoming, let's get real. That's a crock & we all know it. Elk, deer, lope: different argument.

Keep in mind when the current allocation of sheep/moose tags was set up, there were a lot more sheep & moose tags given out (2X?). Even back in the mid-90's when the preference point system was set up, I asked G&F about a once in a lifetime license for sheep/moose. Harry Harju, the G&F chief biologist at the time said that there were too few resident hunters for the number of sheep/moose tags & that we would run out of resident hunters. Obviously, that hasn't been the case. With a reduction of sheep/moose tags because of various reasons (pneumonia, depredation), the fewer tags are now more highly coveted (you always want what you can't easily have). Although it affects some non-residents adversely, including a few friends, it brings Wyoming in line with the surrounding states. As a resident, it has been frustrating to see non-residents drawing odds better on premium areas (e.g., Moose Area 1, Sheep Area 5) than resident odds. Maybe if the bill doesn't pass, residents should be able to apply as non-residents if they pay the extra fee?
 
You don't understand a moose and a sheep point are $200 do you? x thousands.

If oil prices stay down the state might think $20 is a lot next year. you better push this thing fast.











Stay thirsty my friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 09:40AM (MST)[p]feduptwo,

Great post...I cant agree more.

Teepee, hey! Theres a great idea! Let Residents apply for the NR allocation at NR fees.

That would raise revenue for the GF big-time, increase Resident draw odds, as well as keep local money, local.

I really like that idea...maybe next session...
 
+1 Teepee

They actually put in regulation that a resident can't apply as a nonresident in Wy. Curious...
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 10:06AM (MST)[p]IMHO the only reason the resident draw percentages for those top animals are so low is because of the cheap fees that Wyoming charges throughout it's fee structure. Thus, there are many thousands of applicants that skew the draw odds more than in the NR side of the draw. Raise those resident PP fees and tag fees to an appropriate level and you may have a 50% or higher dropout rate the first year it would go into effect. That would be the way to up the draw odds for the chance at a tag a lot more than what taking those NR tags away will do. It would also keep the significant NR money flowing into the G&F budget and the entire state. But oh, that would be too easy though because the few on this website that say they have no problem with paying higher fees must be greatly outnumbered by the cheapskates who don't even want a $5 increase to the resident license structure!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 10:14AM (MST)[p]flopgun Fife,

Where do you get your information? Comic strips? More than likely from your arse.

Wyoming Resident hunters were polled last year, several thousand of them, and there was over-whelming support of Resident Fee increases.

I guess as usual, you never let facts get in the way of your rants.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15
>AT 10:06?AM (MST)
>
>IMHO the only reason the resident
>draw percentages for those top
>animals are so low is
>because of the cheap fees
>that Wyoming charges throughout it's
>fee structure. Thus, there
>are many thousands of applicants
>that skew the draw odds
>more than in the NR
>side of the draw.
>Raise those resident PP fees
>and tag fees to an
>appropriate level and you may
>have a 50% or higher
>dropout rate the first year
>it would go into effect.
> That would be the
>way to up the draw
>odds for the chance at
>a tag a lot more
>than what taking those NR
>tags away will do.
>It would also keep the
>significant NR money flowing into
>the G&F budget and the
>entire state. But oh,
>that would be too easy
>though because the few on
>this website that say they
>have no problem with paying
>higher fees must be greatly
>outnumbered by the cheapskates who
>don't even want a $5
>increase to the resident license
>structure!

TG, That would be one way to go. Another way would be to change the allocation for NR's from 20% to 10%.

Surprise, Surprise the NR comes up with a solution that benefits him to counter the solution the Res came up with to benefit him. You NR's are almost as greedy and selfish and us Res's.
 
Can't blame residents for wanting a comparable cut to what other states offer. For the record, Colorado does not have a 60/40 split, and they only issue 10% of goat, sheep and moose licenses to non-residents (guaranteed 10%).

Is SFW the only sportsman's group that is supporting SF 69?
 
We really need to just admit that we are all our own worst enemy and not PETA! What the residents don't seem to understand is that even if this Bill to go to a tag split of 90/10 passes the chances of a person getting one of those extra tags is still infinitesimal in the overall scheme of things. The ones for this Bill act like they are going to now be assured a tag somewhere down the line before they die and in looking at the draw odds it is just flat incorrect!
 
>flopgun Fife,
>
>Where do you get your information?
>Comic strips? More than likely
>from your arse.
>
>Wyoming Resident hunters were polled last
>year, several thousand of them,
>and there was over-whelming support
>of Resident Fee increases.
>
>I guess as usual, you never
>let facts get in the
>way of your rants.


I see you're still up to your old BS tactics talking down to everyone like you're the only one that has a brain, LOL! It's very simple to have a poll and get any results you want. It's done every day on all kinds of matters. Put in an actual BIll this year to raise Wyoming resident rates up to where they should be and I'm not talking a measily $5 or $10 a tag and we'll se how many then come out cheering to have it pass like you think there are!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 11:09AM (MST)[p]ColoradoOak,

WYBHA has taken a formal "no-position" on this bill.

Our executive board thinks its best to let our individual members comment on this bill, on behalf of themselves. I also think its best that Resident hunters, as individuals, decide how they want their wildlife resources allocated.

That said, there seems to be over-whelming support via the Resident hunters (no shock there).

Floppy, having Residents hunting 100 more sheep, moose, goat, and bison tags a year is a significant increase in Resident opportunity.

Spin it...
 
Buzz,
It's about a 5-6% better chance for the resident applicant if this passes.
That's significant if you're in the 5% pool. I'll have to admit that.
It's over 50% reduction for the NR hunter and those of us who are close on points, and in the "older=set" have the very most to lose. Those NR's who are not close don't really have any skin in the game anyways.
No doubt we all want what's best for us but this issue isn't a wildlife management issue like some are saying. The animals really cannot tell the difference if they're shot by a res or non-res.
Have a great app season. We all have some good stuff on the burner.
Zeke
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 12:31PM (MST)[p]>Buzz,
>It's about a 5-6% better chance
>for the resident applicant if
>this passes.
>That's significant if you're in the
>5% pool. I'll have to
>admit that.
>It's over 50% reduction for the
>NR hunter and those of
>us who are close on
>points, and in the "older=set"
>have the very most to
>lose. Those NR's who are
>not close don't really have
>any skin in the game
>anyways.
>No doubt we all want what's
>best for us but this
>issue isn't a wildlife management
>issue like some are saying.
>The animals really cannot tell
>the difference if they're shot
>by a res or non-res.
>
>Have a great app season. We
>all have some good stuff
>on the burner.
>Zeke


It may not even be close to that % Zeke and I'm not going to take the time to figure it out! However, BuzzH told me to spin it so I'll give him a couple numbers. He says 100 more tags a year is great for the resident hunter and it will be for the few who draw those tags. Now I'll spin it our way and ask how about the 3 to 4 thousand first choice resident applicants alone in the sheep and moose draws that don't have a chance in their lifetime to draw either of those tags let alone the other 4 or 5 thousand in the lower PP pools. It's the same old ##### that if you aren't in the top couple PP pools or get damn lucky at those few random tags that are issued that 100 extra tags won't mean squat to most residents.
 
floppy,

Project it out 10 years...1,000 Residents that wouldn't have otherwise had the opportunity to hunt moose, sheep, goat and bison will have. By 2026, there will be a lot of happy Resident hunters.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 01:34PM (MST)[p]>floppy,
>
>Project it out 10 years...1,000 Residents
>that wouldn't have otherwise had
>the opportunity to hunt moose,
>sheep, goat and bison will
>have. By 2026, there will
>be a lot of happy
>Resident hunters.


LOL! Yea, maybe 1000 happy ones while 10,000 or more are unhappy campers because it will still work out that 90+% won't draw in their lifetime no matter how you crunch your numbers! In fact, you don't even know if any of us will be alive next year or if there will be any sheep or moose available ten years down the road! Why not project it out to 50 years and you can come up with some real hum dinger numbers so everyone will like that Bill, LOL!
 
"Maybe the reduction in NR preference point revenue was purposely left out to get this quota change pushed through or perhaps they are just that naive. But I could be wrong on this myself as 1,317 NR's bought a sheep point last year for the first time most likely not realizing that it will take approximately 120 years before their point pool is in the running for a tag under the current NR tag allocation. If this bill is passed, it will take approx 388 years...
Horniac"

The numbers of years is the problem. Waiting 120 years or 388 years is the same because a guy will be dead long before a tag is drawn. All the guys claiming skin in the game with lots of points have little more skin in the game than a guy with 10 points. Both started buying expensive points at the same time. Wyoming should convert preference points to bonus points and give the tags out by chance if they are going to reduce the allocation so drastically.
 
2_point,

You're exactly correct, 120 years or 388 years, it means the same thing.

I also agree with you, the only NR's throwing a fit are those with max or near max points. They don't show any consideration for those in the lower point pools. Its about them, and pi$$ on everyone else.

I also agree with you that to level things for NR's for the msgb, we need to do away with preference points all-together.
 
>2_point,
>
>You're exactly correct, 120 years or
>388 years, it means the
>same thing.
>
>I also agree with you, the
>only NR's throwing a fit
>are those with max or
>near max points. They don't
>show any consideration for those
>in the lower point pools.
>Its about them, and pi$$
>on everyone else.
>
>I also agree with you that
>to level things for NR's
>for the msgb, we need
>to do away with preference
>points all-together.

LOL again! Just maybe the top PP pool guys are the ones raising cain because the ones below them are too stupid to realize the only thing they are in is a legalized Ponzi screwing scheme!
 
Topgun how many moose/sheep points do you have? Not sure why you come on here expressing your opinion when you have no dog in the fight. Like I said before go post on the Michigan forum.
 
How do you figure that Buzz Gruber? I'm going to get my sheep tag no matter what you do it just might take another year or two. so I am saying it's a hose job for the guy with only 10 points into this thing that's my point, stop pretending like you give a FF about him.


It's not just landowners and outfitters you demonize now it's the higher point holders? I love it.

You really don't want to talk about the lost point revenue do you? at least make up some stupid guess to show you acknowledge the problem. use my house for an example, 2 moose and 1 sheep point fees gone , $305 right here. won't add up ?

This all about money, forget everything else it all rides on the money. period. you can ignore me but you better be working on your shuck and jive routine because you know who you can't ignore.








Stay thirsty my friends
 
Sounds like to me that after all of the nonresidents drop out of the PP pool. The odds of drawing a tag will go through the roof for the new guys getting in. Damn the nonres. come out ahead again.
 
So, all the non residents will pull out of the Wyoming moose/sheep/goat draw because it only gives out 10% to non residents....and then apply for moose/sheep/goat in other states.......that have 10% (or less) tags given to NRs.....Got it. :)
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 03:38PM (MST)[p]I've said this before, I really don't like the idea of screwing a bunch of folks in the point race.

But just like Colorado passing gun control bills and everyone saying they should boycott the state hunt. No one did and they still made their money.

If a bunch of non-residents don't buy points and lose their points, there will always be more to start the cycle all over again. There are thousands of young guys out there that will take over for those that drop out.

All that has to happen is for the NR chance of getting a MSGB to go up and there will be a flood of applicants. It will be like getting in on the ground floor again. Say I'm wrong but I'm willing to bet it happens.

Not saying it is fair, right, or financially sound, but it is more than likely going to happen weather the NR want it or not.

py
 
I think everyone has a valid idea......from his perspective. I really do understand all the angles.
With that said, I wish I had a couple more points and I'd draw this year and get the hell out of the way for the lower points guys. But I don't have quite enough. There's the rub. I'm ALMOST there but now (if this passes) I'll be 12-20 years away instead of 8-10 years. At my age I don't have that many years to hunt sheep.
Bummer for anyone with less than 16 points. They need to know that they only have a 1 in 150 chance....soon to be 1 in 300 and they'll need to wait 30-50 years for this to get any better. It will make no sense to stay in the game. Yes, wyoming will always issue all the tags, I realize that.
Whining again, sorry.
Zeke
 
Zeke,

Those odds will be about the same odds I face every year I apply for sheep in other states as a NR.

Reality of chasing hard to draw tags.
 
Not all NR hunters will drop out , your guess is as good as mine how many will. but it will be quite a few we're optimists but we're not stupid.

The idea new people will jump in is flawed because unless you're in grade school you'll never draw a tag before you die. we're failing our kids education if they're to dumb to do the math on this one.

The game started with a number of tags which has already dropped due to natural causes. now cut another 60% out and the stats go all to hell and with it the money.

Gruber knows we're right that's why he won't talk about it. only question is will it be made clear by the opposition before it's voted on and how budget worried will they be. I guess we'll see.

So, are you going to go to work on the same plan for deer,elk and pronghorn right away or lay low until this gets through?






Stay thirsty my friends
 
440
There's no chance 90/10 on elk, deer & antelope will happen. This incremental thing is a desperate attempt at defeating this bill. You know it and so does WYOGA.
 
Here's a simple fact:

Since point systems were instituted for Western big game tags, EVERY single state has changed the game at some point. (Including Wyoming's changes to Moose & Sheep, twice).
 
I'm well aware of the long odds to draw sheep. I've been playing "sheep" all over the west since about 1972. I received horrible information from the Game and Fish, when points came to be, or I'd have been out of the game already in Wyoming. Currently Wyoming is the bright spot for non-res applicants but it seems that change is inevitable...eventually, but I hope change won't come for a few years for my selfish reasons.
Oh well, it is what it is, but I don't have to be happy....as if anyone cares!
At least there's plenty of passion to go around and that's a good thing for wildlife.
Zeke
 
>Here's a simple fact:
>
>Since point systems were instituted for
>Western big game tags, EVERY
>single state has changed the
>game at some point. (Including
>Wyoming's changes to Moose &
>Sheep, twice).


True Dwalton but it really sucks when a guy is "oh so close" and it's slipping away and I'm not getting any younger!
Selfish: of course
whining again: most certainly lol
Zeke
 
At this point if it passes they might as well just square the points and give everyone a chance in the draw to draw. Bet the top resident point holders would be bitchin about that...might just start writing the Congressmen. That would be the only next fair step...
 
Are NR applying in Montana or Colorado? Of course, so why do some think NR will stop applying in Wyoming. All you have to do is look at those two states to find NR will keep on buying points/applying in Wyoming. Pretty weak argument.
 
I'm back Buzz! Here's a few eye openers for Wyo res.

Wyo residents currently pay $112 for moose, $122 for goat, and $117 for sheep tags. Colo residents pay $254 each for the same tags. Utah res pay $413 for moose, $413 for goat, and $513 for sheep. Get your pocket books out Wyo res if this deal passes! Wyo res have been spoiled for a long time! If this deal passes you can bet res will be digging deeper into their pockets.

I looked up Wyo sheep tag numbers. In 2014 there were 213 total sheep tags issued in Wyo. Of those 213 tags there were 158 that went to Wyo res and 55 to nonres. If Wyo converts to 10% to res and the same number of tags are issued there would be 192 res tags and 21 nonres tags. There would be a grand total of 34 tags lost by nonres that are picked up by Wyo res.

There were 30 random and 128 random sheep tags issued to Wyo res in 2014. With 90% of tags going to Wyo res this would change to 36 random and 156 pref pt tags.

Here's another number you all have been waiting for. There were 4844 Wyo residents that applied for sheep tags in 2014. In 2014 the overall odds for a Wyo res to draw a sheep tag was 2.6%. With 90% of the tags going to res it would increase to 3.2% draw odds. That's an increase of 1.4%.

A 1.4% increase in draw odds definitely isn't much to get excited about! Buzz is right that more Wyo res will draw tags but the chance of a Wyo res ever drawing a sheep tag in the random draw is dismal!

In case Wyo nonres would like to know there were 6 random and 49 pref pt tags issued to nonres in 2014. With the 10% change the number of nonres tags will be roughly cut in 1/2. There would be 3 random and 18 pref pt tags issued.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 09:34PM (MST)[p]This is like Deja Vu!

I have a lot of opinions on this. It is fine if this is what the great state of Wyoming and it's residents wants in order to improve their odds, but I would like all of the money I spent in points given back to me. I will definitely be requesting it:)

I am currently sitting at 14 non-resident Bighorn Sheep and 14 Moose Points, that means I have spent a grand total of $1645 on points for MS. Yes, my moose points may still be worth something and I may draw a moose tag soon, but my Bighorn Sheep points would be pretty much worthless. A person with 14 points would have no advantage over a person with 1 point. I will be requesting a $935 refund from the state of Wyoming for the money I spent on sheep points before they decided to change the game.

I think the only fair option for someone in the mid-level points game is to change it from preference to bonus points with the option of squaring the bonus points. That or flip the 75/25 split to 25/75. These are the only ways there will not be a significant loss of revenue to the state of Wyoming from those dropping out who have points.

My estimate is that the Wy G&F will lose approximately 900K per year and the state of Wy will lose approximately $1.6 million per year on money spent by non-resident hunters. One could definitely argue that it is worth losing that much money to the state of WY in order to increase resident tags. Okay by me, but I want the money I spent on sheep points back!

Yes, I have dreamed since I was a small kid of going on a sheep hunt, I read all of Jack Connor's books, I looked at every picture of my Dad's two sheep hunts in Wy almost daily (he didn't shoot a ram on his first hunt) and I calculated that I would draw a sheep tag in my 40s, 50s at worst and I have spent the past 10 years sure of that (even with reduced tag numbers) up until talk of a 90/10 split recently came about. Now I wish I would have spent that money on sheep points on other opportunities.

Based on the current split and number of tags alloted, I likely would have drawn a sheep tag in 2030 (with 29 points and at age 53). With a 60% reduction, that pushes my likely sheep hunting age when I would draw from 53 to 78. I hope I am alive at 78...probably won't be too worried about chasing those sheep around then!

Currently 8325 non-residents have sheep points and 9773 have moose points. If you assume that the reduction in 60% of the available tags cause 25% with moose points to drop out (isn't that reasonable?), that is over $180,000 per year from moose points. I don't see how anyone can argue (or not put in a bill) that there will not be a large loss in non-resident revenue from a reduction in those buying expensive points.

I don't see any reason for a person with 14 sheep points or less to put in for points at $100 per point when they won't have much of chance to draw a tag for 50 years or more. Those with 14 points or less make up 90% of those non-residents holding points! If they can do basic math, they all should get out, that's $750,000 per year in revenue that really has no business at all applying for Sheep. Let's assume, that 25% of those with 14 points or less, don't have a brain or are applying in the randomn draw, continue to apply each year, then the loss of revenue is only 560K per year for those dropping out of sheep points.

Those with 15 points, you have a chance, those with 16 and above should definitely stay in if they have decent health. The only people who should actually get in this game are those in their teens, just try to outlive everyone else and your time will come...unless the rules change in the future!

I was just on a moose hunt in Wyoming (thank you Wyoming!) with one non-resident tag that my Dad drew with 13 points, my brother and I picked up cow elk tags and a doe antelope tag. FYI, we just left 10K in Wyoming for that hunt. If you assume that each moose and sheep hunter averages 7.5K spent in Wyoming per hunt, then loss to the economy is another 750K.

My estimate is:

170K in license fee
750 K in preference points per year
750 K in money spent by non-resident MS hunters each year in the state

Total of 920K to Wy G&F and $1.67 million coming into the state per year will likely be lost.

Not a huge deal I guess (1.25% of the WY G&F budget), but is it worth a small percentage change for resident hunters is really the question. Y'all decide! I am sure if I was a resident, I would want a bigger portion of the tags, but I would hope I was smart enough to realize there was a cost to that (definitely jobs lost for WY G&F employees, probably 5-10 jobs or so?) and that it wouldn't be fair for a non-resident who played the game for 14 years. Oh well, life goes on. I will go photograph some sheep!
 
>The difference is Montana doesn't charge
>$100 for a sheep point!



Montana keeps $70, not far off, with way worse odds.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15 AT 10:33PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-15
>AT 09:34?PM (MST)
>
>This is like Deja Vu!
>
>I have a lot of opinions
>on this. It is
>fine if this is what
>the great state of Wyoming
>and it's residents wants in
>order to improve their odds,
>but I would like all
>of the money I spent
>in points given back to
>me. I will definitely
>be requesting it:)
>
>I am currently sitting at 14
>non-resident Bighorn Sheep and 14
>Moose Points, that means
>I have spent a grand
>total of $1645 on points
>for MS. Yes, my
>moose points may still be
>worth something and I may
>draw a moose tag soon,
>but my Bighorn Sheep points
>would be pretty much worthless.
> A person with 14
>points would have no advantage
>over a person with 1
>point. I will be requesting
>a $935 refund from the
>state of Wyoming for the
>money I spent on sheep
>points before they decided to
>change the game.
>
>I think the only fair option
>for someone in the mid-level
>points game is to change
>it from preference to bonus
>points with the option of
>squaring the bonus points.
>That or flip the 75/25
>split to 25/75. These are
>the only ways there will
>not be a significant loss
>of revenue to the state
>of Wyoming from those dropping
>out who have points.
>
>My estimate is that the Wy
>G&F will lose approximately 900K
>per year and the state
>of Wy will lose approximately
>$1.6 million per year on
>money spent by non-resident hunters.
> One could definitely argue
>that it is worth losing
>that much money to the
>state of WY in order
>to increase resident tags.
>Okay by me, but I
>want the money I spent
>on sheep points back!
>
>Yes, I have dreamed since I
>was a small kid of
>going on a sheep hunt,
>I read all of Jack
>Connor's books, I looked at
>every picture of my Dad's
>two sheep hunts in Wy
>almost daily (he didn't shoot
>a ram on his first
>hunt) and I calculated that
>I would draw a sheep
>tag in my 40s, 50s
>at worst and I have
>spent the past 10 years
>sure of that (even with
>reduced tag numbers) up until
>talk of a 90/10 split
>recently came about. Now
>I wish I would have
>spent that money on sheep
>points on other opportunities.
>
>Based on the current split and
>number of tags alloted, I
>likely would have drawn a
>sheep tag in 2030 (with
>29 points and at age
>53). With a 60%
>reduction, that pushes my likely
>sheep hunting age when I
>would draw from 53 to
>78. I hope I
>am alive at 78...probably won't
>be too worried about chasing
>those sheep around then!
>
>Currently 8325 non-residents have sheep points
>and 9773 have moose points.
> If you assume that
>the reduction in 60% of
>the available tags cause 25%
>with moose points to drop
>out (isn't that reasonable?), that
>is over $180,000 per year
>from moose points. I
>don't see how anyone can
>argue (or not put in
>a bill) that there will
>not be a large loss
>in non-resident revenue from a
>reduction in those buying expensive
>points.
>
>I don't see any reason for
>a person with 14 sheep
>points or less to put
>in for points at $100
>per point when they won't
>have much of chance to
>draw a tag for 50
>years or more. Those
>with 14 points or less
>make up 90% of those
>non-residents holding points! If
>they can do basic math,
>they all should get out,
>that's $750,000 per year in
>revenue that really has no
>business at all applying for
>Sheep. Let's assume, that
>25% of those with 14
>points or less, don't have
>a brain or are applying
>in the randomn draw, continue
>to apply each year, then
>the loss of revenue is
>only 560K per year for
>those dropping out of sheep
>points.
>
>Those with 15 points, you have
>a chance, those with 16
>and above should definitely stay
>in if they have decent
>health. The only people
>who should actually get in
>this game are those in
>their teens, just try to
>outlive everyone else and your
>time will come...unless the rules
>change in the future!
>
>I was just on a moose
>hunt in Wyoming (thank you
>Wyoming!) with one non-resident tag
>that my Dad drew with
>13 points, my brother and
>I picked up cow elk
>tags and a doe antelope
>tag. FYI, we just
>left 10K in Wyoming for
>that hunt. If you
>assume that each moose and
>sheep hunter averages 7.5K spent
>in Wyoming per hunt, then
>loss to the economy is
>another 750K.
>
>My estimate is:
>
>170K in license fee
>750 K in preference points per
>year
>750 K in money spent by
>non-resident MS hunters each year
>in the state
>
>Total of 920K to Wy G&F
>and $1.67 million coming into
>the state per year will
>likely be lost.
>
>Not a huge deal I guess
>(1.25% of the WY G&F
>budget), but is it worth
>a small percentage change for
>resident hunters is really the
>question. Y'all decide!
>I am sure if I
>was a resident, I would
>want a bigger portion of
>the tags, but I would
>hope I was smart enough
>to realize there was a
>cost to that (definitely jobs
>lost for WY G&F employees,
>probably 5-10 jobs or so?)
>and that it wouldn't be
>fair for a non-resident who
>played the game for 14
>years. Oh well, life
>goes on. I will go
>photograph some sheep!

Three NR with 14 pts drew sheep tags in 2014 in the PP drawing.
 
Yes, you are correct that 3 drew with 14 points last year, 1 in Unit 6 and 2 in Unit 8. That definitely gives me some hope, but the issue is that last year I only had 13 points. Sure that doesn't sound like it will take 50 years to draw a tag, but there are 419 people with 14 points and another 463 with 15 points.

At 3 tags per year for those with 14 points last year (15 this year), it would take 139 years to clear that group.

I said that I think if you have 15 now (14 for last year's draw) I think you should stay in and have a decent chance at a tag. Anything below that and you probably should get out. There was a big group of people that have 15 points because that was the year $7 points started. I missed that start of cheap points by 1 year and have paid pretty much the same amount of money (-$7) as that group, but I will never draw a tag because I was 24 years old and 1 year late to the party!
 
>>The difference is Montana doesn't charge
>>$100 for a sheep point!
>
>
>
>Montana keeps $70, not far off,
>with way worse odds.


Montana raised the NR point fee to $70 for the first time last year. It was $20 total for a moose, sheep, and goat point ($6.67 per species point) for 11 straight years prior to that...

The 2014 drawing stats aren't available yet on-line to see what effect this change had on the number of NR applicants. Stay tuned...

Horniac
 
I would encourage all Wyoming residents to contact their local representatives to oppose this legalization. Wyoming is a destination application state for non resident applicants. The current preference point system is an advantage to the local economies. Not only the dollars these non residents spend on tags preference points, etc, but everything else entailing to visiting the state in the hopes of harvesting a trophy. We as residents with the preference point system and a limited hunting population, are afforded ample opportunity to draw these tags. Quite possibly more than once. I may be biased, making a living guiding hunters both resident and non resident , on these limited opportunity hunts. Wyoming regardless is a destination for those who dream of one day taking that: ram, bull, billy, or buck. I for one am willing to keep it that way.
 
I strongly encourage WY residents to contact their representative is favor of this legislation.

It will put WY resident tag allocations in line with surrounding states.

It will also increase draw odds for those Residents in lower point pools and also youth hunters.

It will allow 100 more residents per year to hunt sheep, moose, bison, and goats.

Finally, there is no guarantee in business, and MY PUBLIC wildlife should not be used as a tool to ensure business to any industry in this state.
 
Buzz, Sounds like you missed this:

There were 4844 Wyo residents that applied for sheep tags in 2014. In 2014 the overall odds for a Wyo res to draw a sheep tag was 2.6%. With 90% of the tags going to res it would increase to 3.2% draw odds. That's an increase of 1.4%.

A 1.4% increase in draw odds definitely isn't much to get excited about! Buzz is right that more Wyo res will draw tags but the chance of a Wyo res ever drawing a sheep tag in their lifetime is around 2% unless they have close to max pref pts!
 
Sebastian,

I'll take the 1.4% increased odds for Resident sheep hunters...all day long. The INCREASE in draw odds is higher than the over-all draw odds for many sheep tags in places like CO, NM, AZ, NV, MT, etc.

With more tags in the Random draw, odds for those with lower point totals will be much higher as well.

It will also give more WY hunters a chance at bison and goat tags, where Preference points are not issued.

This legislation is about more than sheep tags and the odds for sheep, you're leaving out 3 other species that more WY hunters will get to pursue.

There is no reason to issue more than 10% of the msgb tags to NR hunters...none.
 
I'll give the newbie outfitter credit for admitting his bias.

Last night on an open facebook page put up by the outfitters(WYOGA), after it was apparrent that the majority was clearly in favor of SF69, The outfitters removed EVERY person off the page that didn't agree with them in civil conversation. A former guide and son of a landowner sent me this:

"Ya a lot of outfitters are crooks anyways a couple on that page are really bad and one I think you mentioned last night he leases the family ranch went in and killed every deer and antelope on it completely ruined the hunting on it it's taken 15 plus years of management hunting to bring the big deer it had on it back there just after the money now and screw the younger generation"

I doubt that surprises anyone. wyoelkslayer?
 
>I'll give the newbie outfitter credit
>for admitting his bias.
>
>Last night on an open facebook
>page put up by the
>outfitters(WYOGA), after it was apparrent
>that the majority was clearly
>in favor of SF69, The
>outfitters removed EVERY person off
>the page that didn't agree
>with them in civil conversation.
>A former guide and son
>of a landowner sent me
>this:
>
>"Ya a lot of outfitters are
>crooks anyways a couple on
>that page are really bad
>and one I think you
>mentioned last night he leases
>the family ranch went in
>and killed every deer and
>antelope on it completely
>ruined the hunting on it
>it's taken 15 plus years
>of management hunting to bring
>the big deer it had
>on it back there just
>after the money now and
>screw the younger generation"
>
>I doubt that surprises anyone. wyoelkslayer?
>

So now EVERY guide and outfitter in the state of Wyoming is a crook because they are going to fight to keep their livelihood going that this 50% cut in tags may present? I'm sure there are a certain percentage of bad apples out there just like there are in any segment of our society, but to try and say there is more than a small percentage with no basis to back yourself up is ludicrous. They are obviously looking out for their welfare just like the residents and NRs that are making posts on this thread that have a vested interest. Sure, NRs and even some residents don't like the fact that they got that wilderness rule enacted, but right now they are about the only dog in this fight that NRs have to help them bite back against this change. Nobody knows exactly how much money the G&F and state of Wyoming will lose if this Bill passes, but you can bet your boots that it will be many times more than the little bitty amount that Hicks and his backers say it will involve!
 
>>I'll give the newbie outfitter credit
>>for admitting his bias.
>>
>>Last night on an open facebook
>>page put up by the
>>outfitters(WYOGA), after it was apparrent
>>that the majority was clearly
>>in favor of SF69, The
>>outfitters removed EVERY person off
>>the page that didn't agree
>>with them in civil conversation.
>>A former guide and son
>>of a landowner sent me
>>this:
>>
>>"Ya a lot of outfitters are
>>crooks anyways a couple on
>>that page are really bad
>>and one I think you
>>mentioned last night he leases
>>the family ranch went in
>>and killed every deer and
>>antelope on it completely
>>ruined the hunting on it
>>it's taken 15 plus years
>>of management hunting to bring
>>the big deer it had
>>on it back there just
>>after the money now and
>>screw the younger generation"
>>
>>I doubt that surprises anyone. wyoelkslayer?
>>

>So now EVERY guide and outfitter
>in the state of Wyoming
>is a crook because they
>are going to fight to
>keep their livelihood going that
>this 50% cut in tags
>may present?

Do you make it up as you go Mike? Where did you read that? Maybe you should clean the steam off your glasses. But I will tell you this, he was talking about your old buddy!
 
What do you think a Wyoming resident with children hunters would write to his legislators and say?
 
Jims,
you are correct in saying that the chance of drawing a sheep tag without having close max points are slim. Except for the random part of the draw. Also, there is only about 100 people with max points left. The point system has almost rolled completely. So with more tags going to residents it will roll even quicker.
Tags were issued to as few as 12 PP in preference point drawing in 2014. So making it sound like residents may never draw a tag in their life time is a lot of BS.
 
jm77,

Give credit where its due, Mikey did get this right:

They are obviously looking out for their welfare

The outfitting industry relies on welfare...plain and simple. The entire industry provides exactly ZERO funding to the GF Department.

Many are operated by out-of-state interests and owners, who spend very little, if anything, in the State of Wyoming. Many, that provide lodging and meals to their clients, don't even support the local restaurants and hotels.

They passed legislation that prohibits NR from entering wilderness areas.

They passed legislation that created a tiered license fee structure for NR's. A fee structure that assured their clients would draw more tags. They are in favor of, and trying to pass legislation to "flip" the percentage of higher priced special tag allocations to 60% from 40%.

Its odd to me that an industry that provides ZERO revenue to the GF for Management of a public resource, is upset because Resident hunters are sick of their taking with both hands and giving nothing back.

If it were up to outfitters, and they thought they could get away with it, the would push legislation to shut down all DIY hunters and require all of us to hire them.

That's just a fact.

Finally, I've listened to the BS outfitters push for wayyy too long. They scream about "fair markets" all the time, then in hypocritical fashion, push legislation that creates a subsidized welfare system to benefit their industry. About as far from a fair market as a government cheese line.

A welfare system that discriminates against DIY NR and R hunters alike.

I'm taking back what rightfully belongs to the States Citizens and favoring those that have done all the heavy lifting and have entirely funded the GF...that being the Resident and NR DIY hunters.

If passing SF69 means Resident fee increases, that's fine with me, a majority of Residents are in favor of increases anyway.
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Huge Muley
10298157_1378840809068797_2554026159499895120_o.jpg
20180923_155317.jpg
IMG-2877.jpg
image0000.jpeg
Couple Monster Muleys
Screenshot_20230122_165334_Gallery.jpg
6E80CEC4-C3D3-42EB-A7F0-CEB563391DF3.jpeg
IMG_1323.jpeg
IMG_1812.jpeg
C7C1EF98-6E84-46E1-9C32-DD5AB0F2EB94.png
3DEFA42C-0F64-443D-BBE9-83191F9F9192.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