Interesting approach. I have read members of PETA will also by tags and sit on them, just to keep them out of the hands of honest sportsman. Well done.
Mark
Wildlife task force 90-10, etc.
- Thread starter BuzzH
- Start date
Mark
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,374
My tags are my business and absolutely none of yours...
I hunt for my reasons, you hunt for yours.
Keep your eyes on your own work...that's a full time job.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,374
Why does it matter to you one way or the other? Not your pig, not your farm...So you guys voting Cheney out, or what?!?
I'm sure your state has plenty to worry about.
I wasn’t referring to your hunting, I was referring to you buying tags for the sole reason of stopping someone else from hunting. Chances are someone who has no idea what Monster Muleys or even 90-10 is would have used those tags to actually hunt. Funny you brag about doing this on the internet then tell me to “keep my eyes on my own work”.
Mark
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,374
GeorgeE
Active Member
- Messages
- 957
My state is #ucked, why do you think I come to yours!
Looking to move there soon, so bring on the 90-10…Witty response,
Hey you just saved the lives of four defenseless antelope, you should really let PETA know I am sure you are eligible for a prize.
Mark
jm77
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,509
Maybe you can explain why an antelope area that used to have 1000 type 1 tags and 1000 doe/fawn tags only has 75 any tags this year? G&F needs to explain to me why there are any antelope tags issued there this year based on what I see in the area on a regular basis. I hope anyone who has a tag there chooses not to use it.
Now go run to PETA and tell them I said that.
treedagain
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,793
Ask Buzz, he knows everything. Our favorite Wyoming know it all.
treedagain
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,793
Here is your trophy ?
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
But the real trophy is 90/10 and it’s going to happen.
mta5672
Active Member
- Messages
- 619
Non-residents support the local communities for a month or so every year. Residents support those communities 12 months of the year. AND.....
Why in the heck would we put a non-resident on the Wyoming wildlife task force? That makes absolutely no sense at all. If you want a voice on Wyoming wildlife...Move to Wyoming and pay taxes and support the local communities like the rest of us.
Sorry I must have miss read what he was trying to accomplish.
When I saw this
“Their chit talking got me to apply the wife and I for 4 doe pronghorn tags and another 4 in the leftover draw...first time my wife has ever even put in for a doe tag. I'm also putting in for leftover buck tags too.
If they want to call residents greedy ba$stards, may as well have the tags too...”
I assumed he was trying to snatch away tags from noresidents because some folks on MM were crying. I will try and read more closely next time. Thanks for letting me know that this move was just to help the heard.
I honestly don’t know the first thing about antelope hunting in Wyoming, I would just hate to see someone’s hunting trip ruined because of an argument on here.
Mark
nripepi
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,184
The question is could this action of taken tags away from residents? In the leftover draw, I think it could and possibly in the regular draw if those tags go to leftover or if residents draw their quota....Helping the herd is one thing (kind of understand that argument), but taking tags away that either don't allow a resident to hunt or doesn't allow the state to bring in non-resident money doesn't make much sense at all.
elkantlers
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,895
I think not filling doe tags is more common than you think. I had a buck and doe tag a couple years ago. The area we hunted usually had tons of antelope. It had been a rough winter in that part of the state and we didn't see near the antelope as usual. My doe tag went uncut that year. My hope was that it produced 2 extra fawns the next spring.
@BuzzH 's 4 unused tags could be an extra 8 fawns next spring. You start looking at that exponentially and in a few years those 4 unused tags can really add up.
@BuzzH 's 4 unused tags could be an extra 8 fawns next spring. You start looking at that exponentially and in a few years those 4 unused tags can really add up.
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
Could also be 4 dead bucks or 8 dead fawns(twins), if drought and range conditions start survival issues. Those 4 does compete. Only so much nutrients to go around. Only so much water.
I mean we are playing pretend and make believe so why not.
My question is always, how does a guy get so much time off work to attend countless meetings, and hunt as much as he claims? It's almost as if he's "working from home"?
elkantlers
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,895
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Damn Buzz now people are jealous of you because of you taking time out of your life to go to these meetings? Hilarious.
You can't beat this entertainment.
Dirtydoechaser69
Member
- Messages
- 32
Did the wyoming range circus ever get addressed? I have heard quite a bit of discussion about limiting tags moving into the future. Aka G and H moving to limited for residents as well. Just curious. Wish I could have attended.
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Usually the people that want G and H to go to draw live in Utah so no one takes them seriously.
love the name btw!
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,374
DeerHunter53
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,267
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
You missed the word transferable there buddy. And where did you read I get resident tags?
I was talking to Doubedrop in reference to a lot of landowners I know that do not hunt but own a lot of land that qualifies for landowner tags. They do not take them but you bet your ass if they make them transferable they will start applying.
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
Could be. Or maybe those folks can read a clock,
Last edited:
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
This is controversial and I know has been looked at but something to consider for this new Wildlife Task Force.
Much of the guide and Outfitting business takes place on public lands in Wyoming. If Wyoming could get a CWMU type program in place it might help move some of those outfitters off public lands into a more steady stream of guiding and outfitting on private lands, a more predictable livelihood. It would sure be nice to have a lot less outfitters and guides competing on public lands if they moved their businesses to these private lands.
I just looked up Utah's CWMU program. It sounds like the program is twice as big in Utah than the Colo Ranching for Wildlife program. Utah's CWMU ranches unlock over a million acres of private land to public Utah resident hunters! There are 125 ranches in the Utah CWMU program. That's a heck of a lot of ADDITIONAL opportunity that isn't there without the program! Utah has several pitfalls and one of the major ones is they included public lands in some of their CWMUs. This would never float and would require more hands on management if ever adopted in Wyoming. Every region in Wyoming Game and Fish already has an access Yes coordinator and they could be the Czar or the empire of such a program or plan. For example take the Q-Creek ranch and say 20% of all licenses would go to public hunters. If 20 elk licenses were awarded to Q-Creek then 4 licenses would go to public hunters and 16 to private outfitted hunts. The state coordinator could hold a drawing and assign dates of say week long hunts. All of the enrolled lands would be fully accessible by any public hunters.
The advantages would be more hunting opportunity for residents. More licenses issued as each CWMU would be administered separately than the Game management area. The state would make more revenue as they could charge $200 for a resident CWMU license and $1000 for a fully guided license. Some outfitters may consider partnering up and organizing more ranches into CWMU type hunting schemes and moving off public lands. Of course the state wildlife Czar from each region would have to be active and enforce and manage the system and we would need to study Utah and Colorado’s failed practices in order to prevent abuse by landowners and Outfitters. This could be a win-win if set up and managed properly and create a lot more opportunity for hunters who might now have a chance to go hunt the Q-Creek, Overland Trail or the Wagonhound ranch. This might also make the 90/10 more palatable for the Outfitters.
Some info on Utah’s CWMU program. http://www.cwmuutahwildlife.org/map.htm
Much of the guide and Outfitting business takes place on public lands in Wyoming. If Wyoming could get a CWMU type program in place it might help move some of those outfitters off public lands into a more steady stream of guiding and outfitting on private lands, a more predictable livelihood. It would sure be nice to have a lot less outfitters and guides competing on public lands if they moved their businesses to these private lands.
I just looked up Utah's CWMU program. It sounds like the program is twice as big in Utah than the Colo Ranching for Wildlife program. Utah's CWMU ranches unlock over a million acres of private land to public Utah resident hunters! There are 125 ranches in the Utah CWMU program. That's a heck of a lot of ADDITIONAL opportunity that isn't there without the program! Utah has several pitfalls and one of the major ones is they included public lands in some of their CWMUs. This would never float and would require more hands on management if ever adopted in Wyoming. Every region in Wyoming Game and Fish already has an access Yes coordinator and they could be the Czar or the empire of such a program or plan. For example take the Q-Creek ranch and say 20% of all licenses would go to public hunters. If 20 elk licenses were awarded to Q-Creek then 4 licenses would go to public hunters and 16 to private outfitted hunts. The state coordinator could hold a drawing and assign dates of say week long hunts. All of the enrolled lands would be fully accessible by any public hunters.
The advantages would be more hunting opportunity for residents. More licenses issued as each CWMU would be administered separately than the Game management area. The state would make more revenue as they could charge $200 for a resident CWMU license and $1000 for a fully guided license. Some outfitters may consider partnering up and organizing more ranches into CWMU type hunting schemes and moving off public lands. Of course the state wildlife Czar from each region would have to be active and enforce and manage the system and we would need to study Utah and Colorado’s failed practices in order to prevent abuse by landowners and Outfitters. This could be a win-win if set up and managed properly and create a lot more opportunity for hunters who might now have a chance to go hunt the Q-Creek, Overland Trail or the Wagonhound ranch. This might also make the 90/10 more palatable for the Outfitters.
Some info on Utah’s CWMU program. http://www.cwmuutahwildlife.org/map.htm
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,871
Sorry but RFW is bullshit in Colorado. It is a sham of a system and the residents really got screwed while the wealthy landowners made a killing. It is nothing more than bs commercialization of wildlife to be benefit the landowner over everyone else.
I would never support either type of system in WY.
If landowners or outfitters get anything that must come solely from the NR percent of tags. Nothing guaranteed, nothing transferable, etc. WY should put all it efforts and extra resources into the Yes Access program and nothing else. Make the Yes access system very lucrative for the landowner…
never will I support a system like the RFW in Coloraod!
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
WOW.
I've never read a bigger puff piece for CWMU.
Now here's what it actually did/does in Utah.
1. Locked up thousands of acres of public ground.
2. Made asking for permission/ trespass fees nearly non existent.
3. Created a system of haves and have nots. Average dude draws tag, has a waiting period. Deep pocket applies in draws,(point creep), strikes out, then buys CWMU tag. No waiting periods, so they are in the draws next year.
4. Didn't stop outfitter competition. None of Utah premier units are CWMU. Meaning none of Utah famous outfitters guide there.
5. Wyoming already has an issue with corporate hunting. Now add the land owners linking up with the guides, and average Joe stops existing.
6. CWMU, get 3month seasons. They become a funnel for animals during open seasons.
I'm sure there more, if I think.
CWMU in Utah, is a scam created to supply outfitters with guaranteed yearly buisness.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
I can’t speak directly about Colorado but I know they have issues and would require much study to avoid pitfalls and problems.
The problem with Access Yes and the whole PLPW Private lands, Public wildlife are the payouts are so small. I don’t have the numbers available and probably Buzz or JM77 knows but the maximum payout is something like $1200 per enrolled land. They could never attract these large ranches as the payout by Access Yes is just far too small on these big ranches. The Wagonhound alone probably generates 400-500 hundred thousand just in one year. Wyoming only paid out something like $900,000 for the entire state. https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Public Access/2020-Access-Yes-Annual-Report-FINAL.pdf
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
More reasons we in Wyoming would never agree to tying up public lands and falling for many of those pitfalls. All we need to do is study Utah and Colorado to do things differently to avoid making the same mistakes. I don’t like Outfitter welfare either but the chance of more hunting opportunity on large ranches like the Q-Creek, Wagonhound or Overland Trail, more revenue for Wyoming and less competition on public lands could be a win-win if managed properly. Avoid Utah’s mistakes and we might have a winning program opening up millions of acres and hunting opportunities for the Joe public DIY hunter.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Is this because of all the pitfalls and inclusion of public lands in Utah CWMU programs? Would you support a plan like the Wagonhound ranch receiving 30 licenses of which 20% would go to the Joe Public resident DIY hunter so 6 hunters could now hunt the Wagonhound? The Wagonhound would be separate from the area 7 elk license so no hunters in area 7 would be affected. Obviously we would only agree in Wyoming to private lands and inaccessible public lands in such a program. If managed properly this could be a win-win program. What are your objections to such a program?
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
CWMU started out ok. Big ranches like Deseret letting access in return for relaxed regs.
But then, like always money and politics get involved.
So we went from big ranches with both summer and winter ground that house animals, birth animals, etc. To CWMU that sit on Nevada border and shoot elk that feed on hay in Nevada, then cross to Utah to sleep. We also got "collusion" on encircling public, making it inaccessible. Which then became not landowners looking for a revenue source, it became guides chasing landowners.
Not to mention, many of the owners run livestock on public, feeding it off, while saving their own, further drawing in critters off public to private. So the public guys get hit there as well
Once you let that camel in, your screwed.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
So you do agree it started out good and was a decent program and some CWMU operators like Deseret ranch are good examples. You help confirm my point is all we need to do is study what is screwed up with Utah and Colorado and fix those issues with no public accessible lands being included in a CWMU as paramount. This could be a good program and a win-win for hunters and landowners if managed and set up and continuously evaluated and oversight by a state Access Yes Czar/official.
If Wyo doesn't want to deal with headaches with CWMU, RFW, or landowner tag issues they could offer private land only tags available in the draw to everyone. I really haven't heard any complaints in Colo in regard to PLO tags and they usually take a lot fewer pref pts to draw. It may not open up private ranches that are currently closed to public hunters though but there is always the opportunity to knock on doors and get permission and usually have great draw odds.
The worst case scenario in Wyo is New Mexico's current system of guide draw and set aside and transferable landowner tags that are taken directly from both resident and nonres DIY hunters. At least with private land only tags the tags are available to everyone in a drawing. Hunters have the opportunity to decide if they want to go guided or unguided.
The worst case scenario in Wyo is New Mexico's current system of guide draw and set aside and transferable landowner tags that are taken directly from both resident and nonres DIY hunters. At least with private land only tags the tags are available to everyone in a drawing. Hunters have the opportunity to decide if they want to go guided or unguided.
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
We have CWMU oversight. It's continuously evaluated. But like all things, who is in oversight? It won't be guys against such a program. It will be someone WYOGA wants.
General rule of thumb, don't follow Utah's lead. We are not the direction you want to go, be that CWMU, $fw, "conservation tags", etc
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Do those tags allow hunting on any type of public land? Do the tags come out of the area totals available or are they separate and additional quantity of tags available for hunters?
Hunters with PLO tags can only hunt on private land only. Some units are mostly private so it forces those that draw tags to only hunt on private land. That obviously relieves hunting pressure on public land and harvests animals that reside on private.
It's up to the CPW to determine if PLO are in addition to limited tags.
PLO tags were partially put in place to slow the booming elk population in Colo. A lot of cow elk tend to hang out on private land all season long so these tags help relieve hunting pressure on public and possibly allow more hunters to harvest cow elk.
Obviously PLO tags are also available for bucks and bulls but it's up to the tag holder to gain permission to private land. PLO tags are available for everyone to apply for and usually have better draw odds than regular limited tags.
It's up to the CPW to determine if PLO are in addition to limited tags.
PLO tags were partially put in place to slow the booming elk population in Colo. A lot of cow elk tend to hang out on private land all season long so these tags help relieve hunting pressure on public and possibly allow more hunters to harvest cow elk.
Obviously PLO tags are also available for bucks and bulls but it's up to the tag holder to gain permission to private land. PLO tags are available for everyone to apply for and usually have better draw odds than regular limited tags.
Last edited:
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
We certainly wouldn’t follow Utah pitfalls but it is good to learn what NOT to do. You still agree some of these CWMU hunts are good hunts like Deseret or the Alton Ranch. We would definitely want to fix the problems associated with preventing public lands to get tied up in private CWMU hunts. Wyoming already has Governor and Commissioner tags which seem to be ever expanding. I get it, you don’t like some of the CWMU practices in Utah’s program but it does seem like it could be managed and controlled by govt. officials/Czar monitors to evaluate and fix the issues with Sportsmen voicing concerns to the Game and Fish Commission having ultimate oversight.
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Who is this “we” you start off with? Google?
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
mta5672
Active Member
- Messages
- 619
I think the statement that the majority of guided hunts are on public land may not be true. The area i live in is mostly private and there are hundreds if not thousands of guided hunters in this area every year. I know one large land owner that wouldnt be in favor of this....
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Humor is lost on you.Ohhhh?????? So you do like Buffer Zones. I agree the large private ranches and limited quota areas make Great Buffer Zones. I wish we could get a small Buffet Zone in the Wyoming Range like area 144 and area 143. Thanks for finally admitting the efficacy of Buffer Zones.
Here we go again, what is this the 543rd thread based on WY residents laughing about how they want to hose the NR hunter. it's getting pretty old.
I paid my dues and drew my moose and sheep tags so you can GFYS you're not hurting my feelings. but the NR's who've been funding your G&F based on the 80/20 split truly do have a legitimate gripe .
raising the price for a lottery ticket is one thing , cutting the pot by half after the tickets were sold is quite another. the fair thing to do, not that you care , would be to hold those with points today at the 80/20 level and any newcomers would be subject to the 90/10.
One thing is for sure NR hunters, you only have one friend in WY looking out for your quota and that's the outfitters. sure they're as self serving as the clowns on here laughing at how they want to hose you. but they're the only ones who want to see any NR get a tag and that's as good as it gets. believe me now or believe me later.
I paid my dues and drew my moose and sheep tags so you can GFYS you're not hurting my feelings. but the NR's who've been funding your G&F based on the 80/20 split truly do have a legitimate gripe .
raising the price for a lottery ticket is one thing , cutting the pot by half after the tickets were sold is quite another. the fair thing to do, not that you care , would be to hold those with points today at the 80/20 level and any newcomers would be subject to the 90/10.
One thing is for sure NR hunters, you only have one friend in WY looking out for your quota and that's the outfitters. sure they're as self serving as the clowns on here laughing at how they want to hose you. but they're the only ones who want to see any NR get a tag and that's as good as it gets. believe me now or believe me later.
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
We have that too. Wildlife board. Appointed by Governor. Who has consistently appointed $fw members. $fw, the lobby for the deep pockets who buy CWMU tags.
Youre just not listening. It's Pandora's box
mta5672
Active Member
- Messages
- 619
So when ever you try to help yourself get ahead you are automatically screwing somebody? Typical logic from you. Your only argument is entitlement...Nonresidents arent entitled to any tags. Move here and vote and pay taxes if you feel that strongly about it.
Buzz,
I was wondering if you cared to elaborate on your statement above?
I am dying to know how exactly you have made all the right decisions in life and the rest of us have not.
I thought you were a Forest Service employee, but maybe I am mistaken.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
More reasons to NOT follow Utah’s system and restructure it. SFW and other interest based groups guarding then hen house won’t float in Wyoming. Keep giving us more reasons of what we should NOT do as so far it’s just blatant poor management. There are good examples of good CWMU operators you even admit.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
Money talks, bullshit walks. That's just a fact. Money will dictate a beneficial system at the expense of the public.
Of course there are good operators, look at how lopsided and beneficial it is for THEM.
That doesn't change the facts behind how bad CWMU is for the public.
We did have tresspass fees before CWMU. The rancher could sell access(united sportsmen).
Why does outfitters need to be involved?
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Prices and rules constantly change and the point system Never made any guarantees. In fact it was always understood the herd numbers fluctuate greatly per year just based upon the weather. If it would make you feel better to have had a legal disclaimer signed when you purchase a preference point then perhaps it could read something like this.
“No Guarantees or Warranties. Except as expressly provided in the Agreement, neither Customer nor Wyoming Game and Fish makes any guarantees or warranties of any kind, expressed or implied. The state of Wyoming specifically disclaims all implied warranties of any kind or nature, including any implied warranty of license allocation or harvest.”
Did Idaho, Montana, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and any other states which cut back their Non-Resident licenses to 90/10 offer any Implied warranty for changing the quotas? I think we already know the answer to that one.
Most hunters know full well nothing is guaranteed or implied in hunting or obtaining a license in an ever changing system the license numbers, prices, seasons and conditions can change and will vary from season to season. To think otherwise is just wishful thinking.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
More reasons Utah system really sucks. One major reason for a CWMU is to try and get Outfitters to partner up with large landowners and move to large private ranches. If properly managed as you admit it could be a win-win system. Utah has done very poorly. Their pitfalls are classic ideas of what NOT to do. Poor management and blatant misuse of public lands is just that misuse. Trespass fees are almost non-existent in Wyoming anymore either. We as the public cannot hunt there but Utah residents can hunt much more private than Wyoming residents can with the CWMU program. Wyoming has massive Outfitter camps on public lands all over Wyoming. Imagine 10 large tent Outfitter camps just along the Wasatch front.
Last edited:
Take a look at outfitter economic impacts. Wyo res better quit worrying about 90/10 and figure out a strategy to battle outfitters and landowners that have strong voice in the Task Force! I hate to tell you Wyo cowboys that "I told you so" if this sneaks up and bites you in the butt!
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Jealously runs deep with you. It’s ok. I would be like you if I lived in commie CA ????
Dirtydoechaser69
Member
- Messages
- 32
I smell something fishy coming from WYOGA headquarters.
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Cool story bro
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
Ever been on the Pauns, bolder, Henries, San Juan, oak creek? It's no different. The CWMU has guides. All the LE does too. Complete with paid spotters, bait piles, thousands of cams.
CWMU didn't lessen corporate hunters, it expanded it
Another cut-and-paste from HFF! This dude never gets tired. I am beginning to think he is a bot.
Now, HFF, let’s see some emojis! Make SS! jealous and send 11 my way, I can take it!!
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Another Gormless post from a Hershey trail hiker. Your posts never have anything valid to offer, must be all those twinks you hang out with up on Brokeback Mt.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
It also Expanded the amount of public DIY hunters getting a chance at an Alton Ranch buck or a Deseret Ranch bull. We don’t get or have that opportunity. Have you ever been in the Wyoming Range and seen the dozens of massive Outfitter tent camps or been up the Southfork of the Shoshone at any trailhead the day before elk season opens. CWMUs offer a much steadier stream of income for Outfitters as the clients just purchase a license vs. Waiting a decade or longer to draw one. I’ve never seen HUGE Outfitter Tent camps along every canyon in the Wasatch. We have that here in many parts of Wyoming.
Last edited:
grizzly
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 5,722
I've been clear about my distaste for WYOGA, but that table could be pretty persuasive to a lot of people.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Yes this table surely persuaded me. I now fully agree, all Non-resident hunters should be fully guided so they spend more money in Wyoming. No more DIY unguided hunts allowed as they don’t spend enough here in Wyoming. Please bring this to the attention of WYOGA and the Task Force so they can mandate all licenses in Wyoming for NR only be issued to NR who use the services of an Outfitter. Just think of all the extra money we will now have for businesses and the G&F
Do you have any idea how hard it is to get my Subaru with the tent topper all the way up broke back mountain? We would be happy to jump on your horse with you to make it the last couple thousand feet to camp. You are welcome to join us if you want, bring tour belly shirt and glow sticks!Another Gormless post from a Hershey trail hiker. Your posts never have anything valid to offer, must be all those twinks you hang out with up on Brokeback Mt.
hossblur
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,388
Since you mention income.
CWMU pushes prices up. When the CWMU doesn't have to compete for buisness from guys WHO DREW TAGS to pay tresspass, because they have guaranteed yearly buisness due to no waiting periods, it means the price goes up a ton
The thing you miss, is that it is not profitable for these ranches to do a CWMU withing the season structures we all have. Not enough billable days. So right off the bat, they get 3months. Then they need repeat buisness, so waiting periods get removed.
So there you sit, in Utah. You deal with point creep, as the same deep pocket guys play too. You both go Unsuccessful. He buys a tag, hunts CWMU, and is in the draws again next year. Your buddy who DREW a tag, is out for 5. Why? Because $$$ talks.
Then, pretty soon the requirements change. No longer does a ranch have to meet acreage requirements. A guide can just link up a bunch of smaller ranches, and combine them. Why? Cuz $$$ talks.
Now. Deer are hurting. State comes in and calls for big reductions in tags. EXCEPT not in the CWMU. Forget that it's the same deer(deer don't recognize boundaries). Forget it's the same deer that are struggling. You sit home tagless. Deep pocket buys one, killing the same buck that you were denied. Why? Cuz $$$ talks.
Now, you find that pretty unfair. You go to the RAC seeking change. They let you talk, then do what they want. $$$$ talks
So you take the day off work to attend the WB meeting, seeking a change in the balance. Only to see who sitting in the board? $fw. Lead by Bateman, whose son and grandson guide on CWMU. $$$$$ talks.
That's how this works. And before you say ......G&F blah, blah, blah.
The director of UDWR gets taken bear hunting by Utah's most infamous guide, WLH. Do you? And wonder how the system is set up, and why it takes care of corporate interests?
And you want to take that cancer to Wyoming?
Are you insane? Or do you think you can get something for nothing? Because that's how the world works
mta5672
Active Member
- Messages
- 619
Figures dont lie but figurers do...What exactly goes into this spreadsheet, and for waht time period? I wish I only had to spend about $1000 or so while I am in Wyoming....This is a weak argument as far as I am concerned.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Utah does have some internal management pitfalls for sure. If you cancelled the whole CWMU program though it seems hunting would get even more difficult to draw a tag. Now the 5000+ hunters who hunt on a CWMU would just get thrust back into the General license allocation system. I doubt trespass fees would drop any and you’d get a Once in a lifetime premium deer tag and probably never draw a limited elk license in your lifetime as too many hunters in the system with fewer tags with all the CWMUs gone. Big Ranches with great hunting spots have always been rich men’s playgrounds but at least it decreased the amount of hunters trying to get tags from the General and limited quota areas by about 5000+ tags per year on CWMUs. I also see this as a pathway to get Outfitters off public lands and down onto these big private ranches where they belong. Many of them have said they dislike the unpredictable income stream they have on public hunting areas, especially difficult limited quota areas on public and big private ranches on easy to draw units are a goldmines for Landowners and Outfitters. There is no perfect system but getting rid of all CWMUs seems like the last thing Utah should do.
LIK2HNT
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,197
I know states can do what they please, but just because you can do something does not make it right.
Let me get this straight. You want to take away 50% of the premium tags (which they now only get 20% of total tags) from a group that contributes 70% of your states wildlife revenue. In return you are going to allow them to have a lot more doe antelope tags that residents do not want for 74% more than residents pay for a premium antelope buck tag. Thanks a lot
Please do not piss on the NR and tell us it’s raining.
Bill
Let me get this straight. You want to take away 50% of the premium tags (which they now only get 20% of total tags) from a group that contributes 70% of your states wildlife revenue. In return you are going to allow them to have a lot more doe antelope tags that residents do not want for 74% more than residents pay for a premium antelope buck tag. Thanks a lot
Please do not piss on the NR and tell us it’s raining.
Bill
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Bill,
How is moving to 90/10 not right? You're being disrespectful to the residents of WY. Why? Because they are limited to around 10% (or less) of the same species in other states. Please tell me how it is fair for them to have to have those allocations in other states and not expect the same in their home state for non residents?
And do you really care about the WYGFD budget? If so would you be willing to pay more for your moose or sheep tag if you do draw? I mean you seem all concern now. I suppose once it goes to 90/10 the additional revenue loss could be made up by just raising the non resident tag prices again? ALL of you keep mentioning the revenue loss. Its obvious you want to help so there you go! I would bet that with a tag increase more people will drop out so that should help offset point creep with the loss of the tags from 90/10 Its a win win.
Non residents caring about WYGFD is the "pissing and raining" thats going on.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
I would settle for a reciprocal agreement with your state. Whatever state you are from is what we would offer. Fair enough? After all we are the Equality state.
No, that is not what I want to do. First off Wyo doesn't have anything called a Premium Tag. What I want to do is give 60% less sheep tags to NR's, 60% less Mnt Goat tags to NR's, 50% less moose tags to NR's, 50% less Limited Quota Deer and Antelope tags to NR's, and 37.5% less Limited Quota Elk tags all in the first draw.
There is no "in return for". If NR's end up with more doe antelope tags than they have in the past, then so be it. If they don't then so be it.
I don't expect NR's to like my views on this and I don't expect them to lay down without a fight. But please don't say I am not being 100% clear and transparent about what my views are. No one has a gun to anyone's head in regards to license applications. If the calculus results in you no longer applying in Wyo then so be it. No shortage of people ready to take your place.
treedagain
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,793
There are states back east that do that.
jm77
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,509
Here it is just for you jimmy:
60% less sheep tags,
60% less Mnt Goat tags,
50% less moose tags,
50% less bison tags
50% less Limited Quota Deer and Antelope tags,
37.5% less Limited Quota Elk tags
all in the first draw.
What ever JM, I keep hearing “neighboring states” and Colo is a neighboring state that hands out way more nonres tags than without the 90/10 cuts! If you want to add Nebraska to the east of Wyo it offers otc deer and other tags. That’s 1/2 of Wyo’s “neighboring states” that offer more tags than Wyo without any 90/10 cuts!
jm77
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,509
What's the Colo allocation for moose, sheep, and mtn goat? What's Nebraska's allocation for elk, bighorn sheep and draw deer areas.
I'll stand by...
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
How about Utah, Idaho, Montana and South Dakota? What percentage of Sheep, Mt. Goat and Moose tags do they offer? How many Bison and potential Grizzly bear tags does Colorado offer? Colorado will also soon adopt a similar 90/10 program as Drought, CWD and the wolves get a stranglehold on game animals. You can kiss that General OTC elk hunting goodbye soon. I give Colorado 3 years before they adopt similar practices as most surrounding states.
lostinOregon
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,185
My dad can beat up your dad!!!!!
Rich
Rich
I thought increasing the resource population was an option too, but I guess that is off the table since this 90/10 BS is easier.
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
Not the full truth.
Current Colorado tag allocation:
- Nonresidents are limited to up to 35% of the total number of tags per hunt code for deer and elk, unless that hunt code has taken six or more preference points to draw
- If a hunt code has taken more than six preference points to draw, then the nonresident allocation will be limited to 20% of the total number of tags
- Nonresidents are limited to 10% of the total number of sheep, moose and mountain goat tags
Colorado bill to cap nonresident draw tag allocation at one-third
Bill introduced and already "postponed indefinitely"
www.gohunt.com
LIK2HNT
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,197
Not really, it’s more like thanks for the boat now get out.
So if Wyo goes to 90/10 the chance that Colo follows suit with fewer nonres tags is even greater. I live in Colo and still believe it's sad if Colo cuts nonres opportunity. I may stand a slightly better chance of drawing a tag as a Colo res if nonres tags are cut in half but is it really worth it?
I guess I'm unselfish and believe nonres should have the greatest opportunity to hunt Western as possible. I also have quite a few friends and family that enjoy hunting Colo as nonres. It's a real bummer if they would have to wait twice as long to draw limited tags here in Colo.
Wyo nonres already are offered a small percentage of tags and increasing tags slightly for residents isn't really going to significantly increase res draw odds. Many nonres hunters have been paying high pref pt fees for up to 26 years in Colo and Wyo with the understanding they will some day draw a tag. I would hate to be the nonres in Wyo that is just 1 pt shy of having pts to draw a sheep tag or a nonres in Colo that has 25 years invested into draw a NW Colo elk tag! After 25 years of applying for limited tags and paying high pref pt fees it's a shame that tags will suddenly be cut in 1/2 and take twice as long to draw! Where does the silliness end?
Wyo res hunters currently have it very good. They can buy general deer and elk tags each year and have excellent draw odds for prime deer, elk, and antelope units. The example of how many big game tags Buzz draws and buys each year is a great example of Wyo res opportunity! Draw odds for the best antelope units for res in Wyo is excellent compared to nonres. If a Wyo res doesn't draw tags they are either applying for the toughest draw tags in the state or super unlucky. The number of trophy antelope and other big game photos that Buzz shares on this website each year illustrates that Wyo res aren't lacking in the tag department! If limited tags aren't drawn by Wyo res they are either applying for the toughest units in Wyo are super unlucky!
The financial benefits nonres bring through license sales to manage wildlife and the economic revenue to small town communities are 2 significant reasons to leave tag quotas as they are. Colo has capitalized on both of these and offers the most opportunity for nonres in the Western US. I would hate to see this change. If Wyo goes to 90/10 I bet Colo won't be far behind. That will be a sad day for nonres that enjoy DIY hunting both states!
I guess I'm unselfish and believe nonres should have the greatest opportunity to hunt Western as possible. I also have quite a few friends and family that enjoy hunting Colo as nonres. It's a real bummer if they would have to wait twice as long to draw limited tags here in Colo.
Wyo nonres already are offered a small percentage of tags and increasing tags slightly for residents isn't really going to significantly increase res draw odds. Many nonres hunters have been paying high pref pt fees for up to 26 years in Colo and Wyo with the understanding they will some day draw a tag. I would hate to be the nonres in Wyo that is just 1 pt shy of having pts to draw a sheep tag or a nonres in Colo that has 25 years invested into draw a NW Colo elk tag! After 25 years of applying for limited tags and paying high pref pt fees it's a shame that tags will suddenly be cut in 1/2 and take twice as long to draw! Where does the silliness end?
Wyo res hunters currently have it very good. They can buy general deer and elk tags each year and have excellent draw odds for prime deer, elk, and antelope units. The example of how many big game tags Buzz draws and buys each year is a great example of Wyo res opportunity! Draw odds for the best antelope units for res in Wyo is excellent compared to nonres. If a Wyo res doesn't draw tags they are either applying for the toughest draw tags in the state or super unlucky. The number of trophy antelope and other big game photos that Buzz shares on this website each year illustrates that Wyo res aren't lacking in the tag department! If limited tags aren't drawn by Wyo res they are either applying for the toughest units in Wyo are super unlucky!
The financial benefits nonres bring through license sales to manage wildlife and the economic revenue to small town communities are 2 significant reasons to leave tag quotas as they are. Colo has capitalized on both of these and offers the most opportunity for nonres in the Western US. I would hate to see this change. If Wyo goes to 90/10 I bet Colo won't be far behind. That will be a sad day for nonres that enjoy DIY hunting both states!
Last edited:
Here's an interesting segment of an article I found that mentions revenues nonres provide to New Mexico for big game conservation. I never really considered these nonres contributions until I read this article.
"Non-residents also contribute to wildlife conservation through their membership support of organizations like the Wild Sheep Foundation, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International, Mule Deer Foundation, and Wild Turkey Federation. Over the years these organizations have donated over $50 million to the state of New Mexico for the purpose of maintaining our abundant wild game. Non-residents are the financial backbone of the New Mexico hunting industry."
"Non-residents also contribute to wildlife conservation through their membership support of organizations like the Wild Sheep Foundation, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International, Mule Deer Foundation, and Wild Turkey Federation. Over the years these organizations have donated over $50 million to the state of New Mexico for the purpose of maintaining our abundant wild game. Non-residents are the financial backbone of the New Mexico hunting industry."
grosventrehunter
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,941
Wow, I go out of town and come back to hear great news. This is a huge start, however, deer, antelope, and elk are the ultimate goal.
DoubleDropMuley
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,820
Gonna be in the Rock Tuesday if anyone is interested !!
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
Guess you gotta use the holiday inn pool since your fundraiser has only sold 60 tickets. #courseythecommonman
highfastflyer
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,553
It was mentioned earlier. Anybody interested in having a resident preference point system for antelope only? Seems like it might help with getting a decent tag once or twice in your lifetime vs. almost impossible odds on many of those top end areas. We already have General elk and deer so I don’t think I would support those but antelope seems like it would be helpful.
SS!
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 9,111
At least you’re doing something! Can you make an Alberta voodoo doll for a friend of mine? He’s going to need it. I’ll pay shipping to CA…I got my voodoo SB 103 doll and stuck it multiple times
Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters
Urge 2 Hunt
We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.
