SF003 amended to 80 tags...

[BuzzH]

Just wanted to keep everyone in the loop on what happened today in the house TRW committee meeting.

First of all, your emails made a huge impact, there was a lot of discussion regarding the fairness, constitutionality, and reasons for set asides.

Representative MacGuire, who is 100% spot on with this bill, gave some of, if not the best public testimony on hunting I have heard probably ever. He is 100% about keeping hunting available to all, young, old, rich, poor, man, women, black, white, he doesn't care hunting should be equal to all. He's a perfect fit on the TRW committee.

He offered an amendment to keep the bill as is, with the current tag allotment set at 80, split evenly between the Lander one shot hunt and the women's hunt. I want to be perfectly clear that the Women's hunt is the real deal, they do great work and we all need to actively work on getting more women in the field. But, this bill is not about the integrity of the Women's hunt, its about keeping Access to tags on a level playing field.

So, the next step, and I almost hate to ask again, but I think its important enough, the entire House side needs to hear that splitting the 80 existing tags between the 2 hunts, that the MacGuire amendment recommends, is the only path forward, if not, the bill needs to go away. This thing is going to get punted around on the floor here soon, and we need to keep the amendment alive keeping the allotment at 80 tags, or ask that the legislation not move forward.

Please, be polite and to the point...you guys that sent emails made a tremendous difference, no question...thank you.

Here's the list: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/LegislatorSummary/LegislatorList.aspx?strHouse=H&strStatus=N

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

 

[jm77]

Great post Buzz, their is no doubt you have made a difference for both resident and NR hunters here. Those who could, would divide our wildlife resource, in the name of money, and jeopardize the great hunting heritage we live for.

Send those emails!!

 

[mulecreek]

Buzz,

What was the appetite amongst the committee members for MacGuires amendment? Received well, not so well, hell no?

I struggle a bit with not being ok with 160 set aside tags but fine with 80 set aside tags. I suppose the first 80 are already a done deal and I understand the art of compromise but I don't want to undercut my argument by supporting a deal that has no hope of moving forward.

 

[TOPGUN]

Done and thanks again BuzzH for keeping us abreast of these things! I put in my email that there is a groundswell among resident and nonresident hunters to do away with the existing 80 licenses in the future, but for the present time to either accept the 80 tag Amendment offered up by Rep. MacGuire today or completely kill the Bill.

 

[jm77]

>Buzz,
>
>What was the appetite amongst the
>committee members for MacGuires amendment?
> Received well, not so
>well, hell no?
>
>I struggle a bit with not
>being ok with 160 set
>aside tags but fine with
>80 set aside tags.
>I suppose the first 80
>are already a done deal
>and I understand the art
>of compromise but I don't
>want to undercut my argument
>by supporting a deal that
>has no hope of moving
>forward.

The vote was 5-4 for the amendment. Trying to eliminate a set aside that's been around since 1979 would be a huge lift Steve. As you know by now, neither Buzz or myself agree with any set asides, especially these for private exclusive organizations.

If we can get this passed as amended, we will still get a chance to comment to the G&F Commissioners on how these tags will be allotted. We need a bunch of emails for 80 tags or kill the bill.

The One Shot got punched in the eye big time today from one committee member. Their exclusion of women and bad practices is coming home to roost!

 

[BuzzH]

The amendment passed the house TRW by a 5-4 vote, the bill moved out of committee with the amendment 8-1.

I don't like the set asides either, but compromise usually involves nobody getting everything they want. If one side gets everything, the other side gets nothing, that's not compromise...that's called winning and losing.

This issue is a longggg way from being over and I think this one may get as far as litigation.

I think the best approach at this point is to ask to keep Macguires amendment and split the existing 80 between the 2 hunts. Second best is to kill it altogether and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[wytex]

So I had an interesting and very surprising phone call this afternoon, Governor Matt Meade called in response to an email contact about a gate closure on the Boswell Rd through his ranch.
We talked about the closed gate and got it sorted out and so I had a chance to tell him my opposition to the set asides, both men's and women's.
He listened but I could tell was not expecting that on his call.
Very cordial and I did get my say in although I realize he has little chance to change the set aside hunts.

Can he veto those tags ?

I hope the reduction is a way to get them phased out eventually.
Seems the backlash over the monies being spent out of state and the very nature of the One Shot is making a difference.

 

[jm77]

>So I had an interesting and
>very surprising phone call this
>afternoon, Governor Matt Meade called
>in response to an email
>contact about a gate closure
>on the Boswell Rd through
>his ranch.
>We talked about the closed gate
>and got it sorted out
>and so I had a
>chance to tell him
>my opposition to the set
>asides, both men's and women's.
>
>He listened but I could tell
>was not expecting that on
>his call.
>Very cordial and I did get
>my say in although I
>realize he has little chance
>to change the set aside
>hunts.
>
>Can he veto those tags ?
>
>
>I hope the reduction is a
>way to get them phased
>out eventually.
>Seems the backlash over the monies
>being spent out of state
>and the very nature of
>the One Shot is making
>a difference.

Thank you very much Pam, for bringing that up with the Governor! He will not veto this bill if the Woman's hunt stands to gain any tags. I do believe, given the circumstances, the 40/40 split is an acceptable comprise. Hopefully it is not amended back to 160.

 

[wytex]

I just couldn't pass up the opportunity.
Thanks for all the work Buzz and JM.
Now let's keep some pressure on those lawmakers, no set asides if possible.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-01-18 AT 04:01PM (MST)[p]I just got an email back from Chuck Gray thanking me for my concerns and telling me he was for the Amendment, but that it failed today!

 

[SMOKESTICK]

For those that have been following this bill (SF003 - Antelope hunt licenses), Thursday morning the Committee of the Whole rejected the MacGuire amendment thus removing it.

Today, Friday, March 2, 2018 the Committee of the Whole rejected an amendment offered up by Representative Clem, but it was defeated. His amendment was a bit complicated but it would have done away with the special Legislation and made it more of a general bill.

The bill will be read its third and final time on Monday morning. I have said in testimony and I will say it on here; it appears as though the fix is in. This has been a highly politicized bill.

Thanks to all of those who took the time to email in your comments, etc. Buzz is correct, you are helping ensure that our voices are heard.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-02-18 AT 08:30PM (MST)[p]I think you're probably correct on how this is going to end up and this is a great example of why politics and the Legislature should not be making decisions like this. It appears that it's one of those deals that if the "guys" can have 80 tags, then the "gals" should have another 80 tags to make them equal. I have only received that one email back even though I sent emails to every person on that list, so I sort of figured this was not going well for us up there. If the Bill goes through now as written, I guess we'll have to start n the Commission members to not issue all of them since they appear to have that latitude to issue all or none.

 

[TOPGUN]

It's making the headlines and probably passed today:

http://trib.com/lifestyles/recreati...cial&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=user-share

 

[jm77]

It passed with the whole 160 licenses intact. Another blow for sportsman.

 

[TOPGUN]

>It passed with the whole 160
>licenses intact. Another blow for
>sportsman.

Yep! That's what happens damn near every time when politics isn't kept separate from who should be handling conservation related issues.

 

[GeorgeE]

Interesting...


'Ike'

Bowhunter...

 

[nripepi]

I can't believe they allow this sort of thing.

Is it true that they get to hunt the One Shot Sh-t Show before the unit opens for rifle? What units are in the Sh-t Show? Do you have to go to that unit or can you go to whatever units are open?

It sure looks like it. I read Unit 65 is one of the units open and last year rifle opened on Sept. 16th and the Sh-t Show opened on Sept. 14th.

1st Scenario: You could be crawling around on your belly stalking a nice buck antelope with your bow and the guv'nah could roll up and blast it right in your face, hopefully not blasting you at the same time.

2nd Scenario: you scouted your nice antelope buck all summer, have him patterned and plan for dark thirty on the opener, you are sitting there watching him on Sept. 14th, 2 days before the opener and you watch the guv'nah roll up and blast him.

When does archery in Unit 65 officially close? Based on the regulations and not knowing about the Sh-t Show one would assume it ended on Sept. 15th, but if you knew about the Sh-t Show, would it close on the 13th or is the Sh-it Show not a real hunt.

Here are the reg on archery.

Section 3. Special Archery Seasons. Hunt areas listed in this section shall have special
archery hunting seasons starting on the dates as specified in this Section. Special archery
seasons close when the earliest any antelope season for the hunt area opens as listed in Section 2
of this Chapter. Archers shall possess a limited quota antelope license in addition to an archery
license in order to hunt antelope during any special archery season.

 

[nripepi]

Previous Winners

Here are the previous winners from the Sh-t Show:

https://oneshotantelopehunt.com/history/past-winners/

Looks like two German Counts and a Prince took it one year, a Plantation group or owner got it another, Craig Boddington, Remington, Gerber...glad to see the Astronauts take one in the 70s and awesome to see Wounded Warriors get one recently! Donald Trump Jr. got to the play the game one year, but couldn't get the Win!

 

[nripepi]

Maybe I am wrong and it opens on the 1st day of rifle. At least that is what it says on their website:
The hunt is always held on the opening day of antelope season in the vicinity of Lander, with all the team members gathering on the day before the hunt.

https://oneshotantelopehunt.com/history/one-shot-antelope-hunt/

Also of interest for the woman who want to attend, here is what you get to do:
The women who accompany the team shooters to Lander are also kept busy during the day. The Hunt Club?s Board of Director?s wives, and/or members of the Hunt Club, treat the ladies to lunches and brunches and escort them on scenic and historical tours in the Lander area.

 

[nripepi]

In 1979, the Wyoming legislature granted the One Shot Antelope Hunt Club a percentage of antelope licenses from the Wyoming Game & Fish to be used in the areas around Lander. Licenses not needed by the One Shot Antelope Hunt Team Members are made available to Past Shooters and their guests.

What is this percentage they speak of?

 

[TOPGUN]

>In 1979, the Wyoming legislature granted
>the One Shot Antelope Hunt
>Club a percentage of antelope
>licenses from the Wyoming Game
>& Fish to be used
>in the areas around Lander.
>Licenses not needed by the
>One Shot Antelope Hunt Team
>Members are made available to
>Past Shooters and their guests.
>
>
>What is this percentage they speak
>of?

That's the 80 maximum tags the G&F can issue them each year that now the women will also get when the Governor signs it into law since it passed in the Legislature yesterday.

 

[jm77]

The One Shot hunt starts on opening day as listed in Regs. They have 8 three man teams to total 24 men in the competition. The remaining 56 licences, for areas 64, 65, 67, 68 & 106 are given out to past shooters as determined by the One Shot. If a past shooter chooses to give his license to a lady, she must go to the local G&F office to get her tag, because the license issuance event is stag and women aren't allowed.

The 1979 statute allows the G&F Commission to issue up to 80 tags at their discretion, not a percentage. The revised statute reads "up to 160" for "two antelope hunts". Again, leaving all this to the discretion of the Commissioners.

This 56 tag give away will be discussed at Commission meetings I am sure. While the One Shot has received it's 80 tags every year, the percent to draw for everyone else in those areas has dropped considerably.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos_2018/28977fullsizer001002.jpeg

 

[TOPGUN]

Thanks for putting that up Jeff and that should be shown to all the Commissioners so they can see how many residents and NRs aren't getting a tag that could if those 56 tags were in the draws. Maybe we can push them to not issue any of those and just the 24 for the actual contest since it's up to them to even issue any for any given year. However, since the total has now increased to 160 and it's expected that the women will ask for 80 I wonder if the men will raise their team numbers up to account for the entire 80 they get now. This whole thing sucks and I hope we don't have more Bills presented in the future to try and up the total even more like WYOGA set asides for instance.

 

[pymulies]

Years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

64 Tags 175 155 76 77 75 74
Draw odds 36 29 20 19 20 21

65 Tags 96 33 36 32 29 91
Draw odds 34 16 16 14 13 39

68 Tags 273 232 189 189 230 229
Draw odds 49 39 33 36 38 39

106 Tags 211 91 78 31 51 71
Draw odds 72 31 33 13 25 35

Here are the draw odds for 2012-2017. Sorry I don't look at 67.

It doesn't transfer very easily from exel, but if you look you can see:
Hunt Unit, Tag Numbers for each year
Draw odds for those years

If you notice there was a large decrease in total tags allotted in the units. Also, 64 is not included in the One Shot available hunt units. Makes the argument that even the non-One Shot units are harder to draw during the time period.


Not saying I agree with it, but wanted a clear picture for everyone to look at.

py

 

[jm77]

>Years 2012
> 2013
> 2014
>2015 2016
> 2017
>
>64 Tags 175 155
>76 77 75 74
>Draw odds 36 29 20 19
>20 21
>
>65 Tags 96
>33 36 32 29 91
>
>Draw odds 34 16 16 14
>13 39
>
>68 Tags 273
>232 189 189 230 229
>
>Draw odds 49 39 33
> 36 38
> 39
>
>106 Tags 211 91
>78 31 51 71
>Draw odds 72 31 33 13
>25 35
>
>Here are the draw odds for
>2012-2017. Sorry I don't look
>at 67.
>
>It doesn't transfer very easily from
>exel, but if you look
>you can see:
>Hunt Unit, Tag Numbers for each
>year
>Draw odds for those years
>
>If you notice there was a
>large decrease in total tags
>allotted in the units. Also,
>64 is not included in
>the One Shot available hunt
>units. Makes the argument that
>even the non-One Shot units
>are harder to draw during
>the time period.
>
>
>Not saying I agree with it,
>but wanted a clear picture
>for everyone to look at.
>
>
>py

What is the area not included in chart I posted if 64 is wrong? Very sure G&F said they hunted five areas, but could have misheard one.

 

[pymulies]

I believe they are:
65, 66, 67, 68, 106

 

[jm77]

>I believe they are:
>65, 66, 67, 68, 106
>

The fact that other Non-One Shot areas have seen decreases in odds is not relevant. The areas effected by One Shot tags have seen decreases in opportunity and the same 80 tags are still allowed every year. The statute as it will read now, requires that resource management be taken into account. We'll see how that plays out in regulation.