Generosity to non-residents

[Deleted member 28227]

If that helps you cope go for it.

Would be easier to just admit that your statement about people being on the street without NR hunters might have been an exaggeration.

Prairiehunter I sincerely apologies for my hyperbolic comment.

 

[Derek44]

Prairiehunter I sincerely apologies for my hyperbolic comment.

Yeah. Really stirred the pot by pointing out that businesses rely on revenue in order to employ people. Residents aren’t going to spend more in these businesses just because us filthy, no good shooting, littering, worthless non residents aren’t allowed anymore hahaha

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Yeah. Really stirred the pot by pointing out that businesses rely on revenue in order to employ people. Residents aren’t going to spend more in these businesses just because us filthy, no good shooting, littering, worthless non residents aren’t allowed anymore hahaha

Yeah I mean the comment was "losing NR Hunters" so yes if you lost all NR hunters that would probably be 500 guide jobs, and then maybe here and there a couple other positions if people scaled slightly. Not many.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Seriously though not many folks on the forum help as many NR as @BuzzH does, I certainly haven't.

This topic comes up constantly in every state: CO wants to drop allocations, MT wants to cut NR unguided hunters. The days of the NR traveling hunter, ie Mr. Newberg and freshtracks, are waning it seems.

Honestly, I'm not sure at this point I have an answer. Why not say screw it make it 100% residents or are we just doing this because that's the ways it's been for 80 years?

If the top posters on the forum about DIY hunting don't have a good reason... I'm throwing in the towel.

 

[Kjames]

This thread kinda took a turn. However a older friend of mine made this point to me years ago. Stop a small local cafe for breakfast. At the end of your trip stop at it again for coffee a burger or whatever. It’s a longer story and a great backstory.

 

[Brittany Chukarman]

In small towns, business promotes business and goodwill. It all goes around and even though it's not obvious, all residents benefit in one way or another. Just keeping the doors open can be tough.

 

[Jerky]

Hotels, guides, sporting goods shops, coffee shops, restaurants, taxidermy, the fish and game department, tire shops, grocery stores.

If a particular business loses 10% of their sales, that doesn’t mean their profits went down by 10%. Their profits may have turned to losses because they can’t cover overhead. You have to get over your break even point.

A small restaurant can be making good money at 100 orders per day, but losing their butt at 90 orders per day. Now that waitress can’t get the new car and on down the web of the economy.

To put another point on it, the “severe” recession in 2008 shaved 4.8% off of gdp. Not 48%, just a measly 4.8%. That resulted in huge job losses.

So how big of a hit would Wyomings gdp take? I don’t know, but it’s more than zero.

 

[fowladdict]

I've seen a lot of changes in my 30 years of off an on hunting as a NR in Wyoming (western side). Prior to 2000, hotels were sold out to NR hunters and finding a hotel was damn tough if you waited too long. After 2000 those hotels were maybe a 1/4 to 1/2 full. After 2005ish through pre-2019 it was hard to get a hotel again. Not because of the NR, but because of the out of town workers. In 2019 the hotels were again maybe a 1/4 full. Having talked to an owner/manager in the past, they mentioned that they miss the days when NR hunters kept the hotels booked from Sept thru November. It wasn't just for a week.

I too, wonder why 10%. Because other states do? Why not 13, 8 or 0? Fact is, it doesn't really matter anymore (to the local businesses) unless tag number opportunities make a come back. I personally don't think I will ever drive through those towns and see the hotels full of rigs, game hanging on all of the meat poles behind the hotel and the hotel bars packed like they were. 20% (or whatever Wyoming is for NR) just isn't the same as 20% today. It might matter if it goes to 50-50.

 

[Hotelk1956]

yeah......you're just regurgitating a sentiment that out of state hunters pass around in order to give themselves value. Don't need your $.

So yesterday I was reading about how areas of Wyoming cattle ranches private land was being over run by Elk and the need to bring herds in to line with state numbers . So reading here some on this thread want to decrease NR hunters how is this going to help the over population of the Elk hearts not like there are hundreds of thousands moving to Wyoming every year. Might be best to not try and run out NR hunters who by the way do in fact bring in a lot of revenue to small towns. Maybe putting some type of charge for NR camping and Back packing a sticker purchased for each individual or vehicle could work with cost and ticket 4 times the cost of the sticker.

 

[BuzzH]

Why not all? Why give them 10%?

Because 10% is an industry standard that many States think is appropriate.

Also, Wyoming has never held NR's to even anything close to 10%, including LQ tags here.

Nobody bothers, in particular NR's with their hair on fire, to look at the actual number of licenses that NR's obtain in Wyoming. Its nowhere near 20% of deer or pronghorn, nowhere near 16% of elk either.

Plus, the deer tags are region wide, and those numbers are based on anything to do with a percentage and there are thousands of them for NR hunters.

If you want to hear some real NR crying, set strict limits on the 16% of elk and 20% of deer and pronghorn tags and not allow any more than that.

Fact is, NR's have had, and will continue to have it good even if 90-10 were to pass for all species.

There is a total misunderstanding of the generosity of WY in regard to NR hunters, its tough to find another state that gives access to tags like we do.

Show me another State that issues over half of their LQ pronghorn tags to NR's...for starters.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Because 10% is an industry standard that many States think is appropriate.

Also, Wyoming has never held NR's to even anything close to 10%, including LQ tags here.

Nobody bothers, in particular NR's with their hair on fire, to look at the actual number of licenses that NR's obtain in Wyoming. Its nowhere near 20% of deer or pronghorn, nowhere near 16% of elk either.

Plus, the deer tags are region wide, and those numbers are based on anything to do with a percentage and there are thousands of them for NR hunters.

If you want to hear some real NR crying, set strict limits on the 16% of elk and 20% of deer and pronghorn tags and not allow any more than that.

Fact is, NR's have had, and will continue to have it good even if 90-10 were to pass for all species.

There is a total misunderstanding of the generosity of WY in regard to NR hunters, its tough to find another state that gives access to tags like we do.

Show me another State that issues over half of their LQ pronghorn tags to NR's...for starters.

Clearly there is some difference in stated quotas and actual tags issued……. a bit of perception vs. reality also. Not so tough to find another state, just look at Colorado. Pretty good access to tags, even NR LQ tags. Granted Colorado opportunities differ from Wyoming in many ways.

I think most NR hunters are totally OK with current tag allocations, they just don’t want to lose opportunity. Yet whenever the topic comes up anyone who speaks out for NR hunters is shouted down and informed that NR hunters provide no value and are “the problem”.

 

[TheTone]

Because 10% is an industry standard that many States think is appropriate.

Also, Wyoming has never held NR's to even anything close to 10%, including LQ tags here.

Nobody bothers, in particular NR's with their hair on fire, to look at the actual number of licenses that NR's obtain in Wyoming. Its nowhere near 20% of deer or pronghorn, nowhere near 16% of elk either.

Plus, the deer tags are region wide, and those numbers are based on anything to do with a percentage and there are thousands of them for NR hunters.

If you want to hear some real NR crying, set strict limits on the 16% of elk and 20% of deer and pronghorn tags and not allow any more than that.

Fact is, NR's have had, and will continue to have it good even if 90-10 were to pass for all species.

There is a total misunderstanding of the generosity of WY in regard to NR hunters, its tough to find another state that gives access to tags like we do.

Show me another State that issues over half of their LQ pronghorn tags to NR's...for starters.

I’ve not seen it directly answered or asked but if Wyoming does go 90-10 for pronghorn what is the proposal to issue the tags that non residents used to get? Will residents be able to just buy the leftovers? Will there be a cap on the number of tags a resident can have?

 

[Deleted member 28227]

wllm, most residents I know hunt public land. We lucked into private access for some of our hunting about 30 years ago by working for a rancher. Many residents can get access for cow elk, pronghorn and whitetails but bull elk and mule deer are hard to come by for residents too.
We put in for LQ elk every year on public land, some LQ deer licenses too on public. Our pronghorn hunting is on public lands for the most part.
These days I don't know many folks that hunt private lands exclusively unless they work for, or are related to a rancher. Long time friends can still get access, respect of the land does go a long way.

WY issues at least 70% of tags to Residents right?

Folks complain about seeing all NR plates at trailheads.

So where are the residents hunting?

 

[BuzzH]

WY issues at least 70% of tags to Residents right?

Folks complain about seeing all NR plates at trailheads.

So where are the residents hunting?

I don't complain about the number of NR hunters or license plates.

I just want Residents to have more opportunity at the better LQ tags, as in 90% of them.

Like I've said countless times, and has been ignored countless times, very little would change in total tag numbers for NR deer, elk and pronghorn. It would just be a shift in the where.

 

[wytex]

WY issues at least 70% of tags to Residents right?

Folks complain about seeing all NR plates at trailheads.

So where are the residents hunting?

Care to show me where I complained about NR at trail heads? I don't hunt from trail heads I walk in from camp or where ever I pull over.

Good try at getting resident hunting spots though.

Heck , give NRs the same quota they have now just no resident roll over from our 1st draw. Give residents a leftover draw before the NR draw. Then you get a chance at what is left from our draws. NRs will get their full 16% and possibly more of the total quota.
Not all residents have been advocating for 90/10.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Good try at getting resident hunting spots though.

Heck , give NRs the same quota they have now just no resident roll over from our 1st draw. Give residents a leftover draw before the NR draw. Then you get a chance at what is left from our draws. NRs will get their full 16% and possibly more of the total quota.
Not all residents have been advocating for 90/10.

Can you elaborate how it works now? I assume residents have multiple choices and there are units/tags they aren't designating on their primary application? I agree with the premise NR should be limited to the quota.

To that end, in CO there is a cap in limited units of 35% ( a few units 20%), but because of OTC + leftovers CPW recently reported it's as high as 70% NR in some units.

Care to show me where I complained about NR at trail heads? I don't hunt from trail heads I walk in from camp or where ever I pull over.

You did not... but it's a common refrain in every western state, fair statement?

 

[44hunter45]

Sorry but you can buy a resident hunting licenses in states you have a lifetime license even if you don't live in that state currently.

Not Idaho. The lifetime license guarantees you a NR tag, even if the cap has been met. It does not get you access to a Resident tag.

 

[hossblur]

Can I, as a Utahn demand access to NR tags in Iowa, AND be given access to 60% of the state to hunt?

It's never mentioned that the "screw job" western states put on NR, includes have of the state open to access.

What's a lease going for these days in the Midwest?

 

[Deleted member 16014]

...You did not... but it's a common refrain in every western state, fair statement?

Some places I'm sure that's true, I don't really hear it a lot here honestly; I heard and felt that way more in MT. You'll have a handful of written comments along those lines during season setting, etc. but not a lot. By far my biggest personal hassle is outfitters, which I guess is tangentially related. Though the good ones seem to have no trouble communicating like adults and working to share the space.

I think the majority of WY residents don't necessarily want less NR's due to crowding, more that when the resource is highly limited and desirable (M/S/G, LE elk, etc.) that they would like further preference. Those feel different to me, maybe the perception for NR hunters is similar in either case.

 

[elkduds]

NRs' access to quality western big game hunting can keep them invested in advocating for public lands. Without the support of voters and legislators in more populated states w less public land, western federal lands @ least will suffer politically. I'm struggling to think of a public land user group more passionate and w fewer access alternatives than elk, MSG and predator hunters.